With more and more information regarding the various upgrade paths to Windows 7 becoming available, Ars Technica compiled a handy guide detailing the upgrade paths Microsoft offers to its customers. Are you wondering if you can buy a cheaper upgrade version of Windows 7 once it's released? Read on.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2008-07-15
Member since:
2005-10-11
You also cannot do an upgrade from 32bit to 64bit; that will require a clean install
Slightly off topic.
With Vista Ultimate OEM. Am I allowed to use the same key with 64-bit OEM install media?
Am I allowed to go 64-bit legally?
I have never been able to find anything conclusive on this matter.
64-bit WIN7 beta works beautifully on my system and I think that is the upgrade path I wish to take.
Member since:2006-10-01
Member since:2006-12-06
Member since:
2005-11-13
The article reads like doing a clean install of Windows is a bad thing. Take it from me, an experienced Windows user for over 15 years....
Never install a new version of Windows over an old one. EVER!!!!!!! There are NO exceptions to this rule.
If you purchase (or otherwise obtain) a new version of Windows. ALWAYS format your hard drive and install the new version CLEAN.
And while we're on the subject of upgrading tips, NEVER install ANYTHING from Symantec on your computer. Anything from McAfee is also highly discouraged.
Edited 2009-02-13 01:13 UTC
Member since:2005-07-06
yeah. Upgrading is a horrible idea. Usually results in a massive unstable system, from my personal experience.
A lot of people didn't know this, but you could clean installs using upgrade cds for windows xp (and probably 2k, never tried). All you had to do was boot the disc, it'd ask for a legit previous OS CD (my burned copy of windows 2k worked like a champ 
) and then it would proceed with the install.
I can't tell you how many systems I've had to fix that came in with a windows 98 sticker or something and were running XP. The machines usually had been upgraded and they had opted to not upgrade the FS from FAT32 to NTFS! D:
Edited 2009-02-13 01:39 UTC
Member since:2005-11-13
Yeah, and you could install the XP Professional upgrade with a Windows 95 setup CD, even though I don't think you were supposed to be able to
Yeah, and they probably never uninstalled their old version of Norton either.
Edited 2009-02-13 03:16 UTC
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2006-12-06
Member since:
2006-07-16
Personally, I think anyone currently holding a Vista license should receive a credit voucher from Microsoft for the Windows 7 upgrade of the same version (i.e., Home Premium, Ultimate, etc.) Anything less would be a crime in my book. Microsoft foisted a horrifically sluggish, buggy bloated OS onto millions of users world wide (their Guinea pigs) and now expect these poor wary folks to actually pay to upgrade to the "fixed" (we'll assume) Windows 7? I think not.
Member since:2006-01-03
Member since:2006-12-06
Vista is a great OS the only ones who complained about it are the ones trying to install on old hardware,fanboi's of other OS's, Administrators who thought they knew it all about Windows XP and were to lazy to learn a new OS or trying to use really old software that did not follow Microsoft's software development guidelines that they were stressing since Windows 2000,
(Its not Microsoft's Fault if someone bought some software from ass clown developers who took shortcuts)
also there were driver issues which Microsoft is only responsible for their hardware if you remember going from Windows 98 to Windows 2000 after launch you should know that the Vista driver situation wasnt that bad the only reason you heard about if more was the rise of blogs which gave any person a equal voice including 12 y/o who are not even qualified to install a USB mouse
Most of those people who now switched to OSx (Not all the people switched because of that but you get what I mean apple intel does play a role)
I could see Microsoft making up for the loss of Ultimate extra other than that no
I missed one area so I had to edit the "Vista Capable" so joe blow who bought a xp laptop or someone who bought a vista basic not knowing about what it was That was Microsoft's fault for allowing hardware venders to sell a pc with 512 mb of ram
Those people should get copies also (If they were not part of the lawsuits and already recieved a payment)
Edited 2009-02-13 21:06 UTC
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2006-12-06
As on my edit Microsoft letting the PC Manufactures (Acer and HP were big ones in this) sell a laptop or desktop with Vista and only 512 MB of memory and then limit the Bios to 2GB to hit a price point at Walmart thats when standard users have problems
since Vista uses 512 just to start up and then add apps running on that and people are using a good 2gb of Virtual memory with harddrives thrashing away or sell a vista basic laptop that doesnt support aero which puts even more stress on a system by using a already low powered cpu to do graphics instead of offloading it to the gpu
Microsoft should not have caved in to Hardware Manufactures or Retailers and made Vista Home Basic as this would have forced hardware venders not to use yesterdays trash on new low cost pc's
It that decision that caused this whole Vista stigma and Microsoft was very wrong to make it
Member since:2006-07-04
I find Vista SP1 to be quite usable and pleasant. Maybe Vista RTM did suck (I wouldn't know), but if it did, then Vista SP1 was indeed free to Vista RTM users, which is the policy you're talking about.
I'd agree with making Windows 7 free if either of the following were true: 1. Vista SP1 were horrible; 2. Windows 7 were simply an SP type release. I don't find either of these to be true, so I don't agree that Windows 7 should be free (not for the reasons your saying, anyway).
I'm also a long time Mac user, and OSX 10.x+1 upgrades aren't free to OSX 10.x users, with the exception of OSX 1.1, which made sense because OSX 10.0 was pretty bad and 10.1 was really an SP release.
Member since:
2006-02-20
