As per Microsoft web site, you cannot upgrade XP Home Servicepack 1 to XP Pro without a service pack. But there is a workaround to install a fresh copy of XP Pro, upgrade it to Servicepack 1 and install all the Sony drivers and Applications. I am compiling a document with the installation steps and the web links to download the necessary drivers for VAIO notebooks. I will post it as soon as it is ready
----- Scott M. wrote: ----
If the person you recommend to clean install cannot use all the function
they expected and the functions cannot even be accessed for install fro th
supplied OEM media, I would consider the system they purchased crippled
Yes, the system they "purchased" is gone. That's the point! The point o
putting a new OS in place is to change that system
A system is not just the OS, it is the combination all hardware an softwar
working in unison. If you clean install and lose functionality you woul
have if you choose to upgrade, you have crippled your system
You need to look up the definition of "cripple" as well as "operatin
system". You are wrong. The operating system does not consist of softwar
that supplied additional functionality. MS Office is not part of m
operating system and my system is NOT crippled without it
If I can't use the OEM supplied "Music Jukebox MP3 Player" accessor
software because it requires I put Win ME back on the computer, you kno
what? I won't put it back on my system and I'll go download the newes
version from the manufacturer
OEM's do not typically put critical software on the OS restore CD. They pu
"accessory" software that is a dime a dozen (or actually, usually free t
download anyway). This software not being present in no way diminishes m
ability to use the system. As I said before, software that is "purchased
(like MS Office or Lotus Suite, etc.) will be provided on separate CD's tha
do not require an OS install
A functional software application can work and provide basic functions bu
not have the full capability unless certain requirements are met
I'm not sure what you are getting at here. It sounds like more about no
having the OEM crap that I didn't need in the first place. Once again, th
"purchased" OEM supplied software (not the bundled stuff you can get fo
free anyway) will be on its own installation CD, not the OS reinstall disc
I can't dispute the fact a clean install will create a smaller footprin and wil
not carryover any settings, data, information, or installed programs i yo
elect to do a clean install. I am saying it is not always "better" or eve
desirable to do so when upgrading a current system to XP
To each his own. As I stated, there is nothing you could say that woul
convince me to upgrade rather than do a clean install. I can't think of on
benefit from an upgrade
t
retrieve the information, unless that software was available th informatio
would be useless
We're getting nowhere fast. Text files can be opened by any text editor
audio & video files can be opened by a multitude of feely availabl
software. Sure, there are proprietary file formats and they fall into 1 o
2 categories
1. Software that is garbage and can be freely gotten again somewhere else
2. Software that was purchased and is supplied on a separate installatio
CD and wouldn't require the OS be reinstalled to put it back in place
I haven't noticed many OEM's doing more than supplying a system stat
restore and see this as the norm for most systems. This is why I tak
exception to the "it is ALWAYS best to clean install" recommendation. I
would much rather suggest the person do all the preparation as if they were
going to do a clean install, but do the upgrade if they have the choice.
Then you haven't bought or talked with someone who has bought a Dell in the
last several years. I think that years ago, it was the norm to get the
system restore discs (with ALL software on it) that you speak of. In the
last few years, it has become the norm not to do this anymore precisely
because of what you are saying, people getting pissed off that they can't
just install what they want.
These unnecessary bits I reference are just that, they are just wasted space
that does not affect the working of the system. They are literally bits of
hard drive space unrelated to the performance or stability of the system. If
you have a system that hard drive space is of concern, then the system is
marginal for running XP in the first place. A troublesome Win 98 system will
most likely not be any better if upgraded OR clean installed to XP.
Not true. These bits are taking up space that might otherwise be free (just
because I have a GB hard drive doesn't mean I want to have files that I have
no need for on my system), fragmenting my drive that might otherwise not be
fragmented and potentially going to cause version conflicts where none would
exist normally. Your statement about a troublesome Win 98 box not being a
good candidate for an XP upgrade really makes my point: It would be a VERY
POOR candidate for an upgrade, but it could very well become a much better
than before system by performing a clean install of XP (or even a clean 98
install).
I agree that is the difference, and if the system cannot handle the larger
footprint, perhaps the cost effective option would be to purchase an entry
level XP system. A cheap system purchased today with XP preinstalled with
bundled XP compatible software is much more cost effective than upgrading a
Win98/Me system along with the subsequent software and hardware upgrades.
You keep talking in terms of what the system can handle. Just because I
have space for uneccessary files doesn't mean it's good to have them. A
larger footprint for the sake of a larger footprint is a waste. There's no
reason to have it. It's not a matter of cost or capabilities, upgrades are
just not as efficient as clean installs are, that's why they are called
"clean".
