Does anyone know why the in place upgrade from XP Pro to Vista Home Premium
isn't allowed? I don't understand why this upgrade path would not be
considered a normal and common upgrade for most people and I can't figure out
a technical reason for not doing it since they are both 32 bit and support
NTFS.

Anyway, I did the "Clean" install last night on my XP Pro and it worked
fine. It was a pain setting back up all the applications but whatever. I
would think at the very least the folks at MSFT would have provided a way to
migrate settings from my "windows.old" folder to the new installation after
the installation was totally done but I couldn't even find a way to do that.

On the bright side, I love the new interface and once I got my applications
re-installed it works great. Only thing I need to learn to do is turn off
the millions of warnings that keep popping up when I move "folders", install
applications, etc.. A little too much if you ask me.

P

Not sure about the upgrade question, but those windows that pop up all the
time will start to disappear once the initial permissions are set.
Check out the search function, I didn't start using it till recently. It's
pretty **** cool. Instead of telling people click this and click that to get
to remote assistance for example, you just click the start button and type in
remote assistance. Works great with contacts in outlook and just about
anything. Awesome.
jf



"seahawks_in_07" wrote:

> Does anyone know why the in place upgrade from XP Pro to Vista Home Premium
> isn't allowed? I don't understand why this upgrade path would not be
> considered a normal and common upgrade for most people and I can't figure out
> a technical reason for not doing it since they are both 32 bit and support
> NTFS.
>
> Anyway, I did the "Clean" install last night on my XP Pro and it worked
> fine. It was a pain setting back up all the applications but whatever. I
> would think at the very least the folks at MSFT would have provided a way to
> migrate settings from my "windows.old" folder to the new installation after
> the installation was totally done but I couldn't even find a way to do that.
>
> On the bright side, I love the new interface and once I got my applications
> re-installed it works great. Only thing I need to learn to do is turn off
> the millions of warnings that keep popping up when I move "folders", install
> applications, etc.. A little too much if you ask me.
>
> P

seahawks_in_07 wrote:
> Does anyone know why the in place upgrade from XP Pro to Vista Home
> Premium isn't allowed? I don't understand why this upgrade path would
> not be considered a normal and common upgrade for most people and I can't
> figure out a technical reason for not doing it since they are both 32 bit
> and support NTFS.

There are features in XP Pro that are not in Vista Home Premium. Things
such as support for two processors, EFS and others that prevent a clean way
to do an in place upgrade from XP Pro to Vista Home Premium.

> Anyway, I did the "Clean" install last night on my XP Pro and it worked
> fine. It was a pain setting back up all the applications but whatever. I
> would think at the very least the folks at MSFT would have provided a way
> to migrate settings from my "windows.old" folder to the new installation
> after the installation was totally done but I couldn't even find a way to
> do that.

You could have used Windows Easy Transfer prior to doing the install to help
with some of this.

> On the bright side, I love the new interface and once I got my
> applications re-installed it works great. Only thing I need to learn to
> do is turn off the millions of warnings that keep popping up when I move
> "folders", install applications, etc.. A little too much if you ask me.

Once you get a feel for how security works in Vista and what is protected I
think you'll find those to be less annoying, or at least figure out how to
get the same things done without triggering them. App install and much of
the more advanced system configuration require you to go through a prompt,
but you'll soon have most of your apps installed and the system configured
so won't see those so much anymore.
--
Tom Porterfield

"seahawks_in_07" wrote

> Does anyone know why the in place upgrade from XP Pro to Vista Home
> Premium
> isn't allowed? I don't understand why this upgrade path would not be
> considered a normal and common upgrade for most people and I can't figure
> out
> a technical reason for not doing it since they are both 32 bit and support
> NTFS.

Same reason you couldn't do a in place upgrade from Windows 2000 to XP Home.
The feature sets are significantly different. Items that are supported in
the qualifying OS are not supported in the upgrade OS.

> Anyway, I did the "Clean" install last night on my XP Pro and it worked
> fine. It was a pain setting back up all the applications but whatever. I
> would think at the very least the folks at MSFT would have provided a way
> to
> migrate settings from my "windows.old" folder to the new installation
> after
> the installation was totally done but I couldn't even find a way to do
> that.

You could have / should have used the Windows Easy Transfer (WET) to run on
the computer with XP before doing the upgrade. It is a very nice utility
and will migrate data and settings. It is very customizable. Run WET on
Vista after the upgrade to complete the migration.

You can move some of the data manually. It takes a lot of work, though,
compared to WET.

> On the bright side, I love the new interface and once I got my
> applications
> re-installed it works great. Only thing I need to learn to do is turn off
> the millions of warnings that keep popping up when I move "folders",
> install
> applications, etc.. A little too much if you ask me.

This will become less intrusive after you get things set up. I get very few
UAC prompts now. I recommend you run in an account as a standard user.



--
Rock [MVP - User/Shell]

The multiprocessor hal.dll is probably the root cause.

"Tom Porterfield" <tpporter@mvps.org> wrote in message
news:uNndJEXRHHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> There are features in XP Pro that are not in Vista Home Premium. Things
> such as support for two processors, EFS and others that prevent a clean
> way to do an in place upgrade from XP Pro to Vista Home Premium.
>

"Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst@msn.com> wrote in message
news:DACE54AA-6765-4ECE-AC20-770A77BC3C01@microsoft.com...
> The multiprocessor hal.dll is probably the root cause.


That would certainly be a major one. But lack of EFS support would be very
troublesome as well. How would it handle the install on a drive where files
had been encrypted? It would have to be smart enough to check for that and
if found, decrypt the files before doing the upgrade, assuming the key was
available.
--
Tom Porterfield

Hi,
Pardon me, but reading this thread does this mean I can't get Vista Home Premium if I use multi processors?
What do I have to buy Vista Ultimate?

On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 14:50:17 -0500, "Tom Porterfield" <tpporter@mvps.org> wrote:

>seahawks_in_07 wrote:
>> Does anyone know why the in place upgrade from XP Pro to Vista Home
>> Premium isn't allowed? I don't understand why this upgrade path would
>> not be considered a normal and common upgrade for most people and I can't
>> figure out a technical reason for not doing it since they are both 32 bit
>> and support NTFS.
>
>There are features in XP Pro that are not in Vista Home Premium. Things
>such as support for two processors, EFS and others that prevent a clean way
>to do an in place upgrade from XP Pro to Vista Home Premium.
>
>> Anyway, I did the "Clean" install last night on my XP Pro and it worked
>> fine. It was a pain setting back up all the applications but whatever. I
>> would think at the very least the folks at MSFT would have provided a way
>> to migrate settings from my "windows.old" folder to the new installation
>> after the installation was totally done but I couldn't even find a way to
>> do that.
>
>You could have used Windows Easy Transfer prior to doing the install to help
>with some of this.
>
>> On the bright side, I love the new interface and once I got my
>> applications re-installed it works great. Only thing I need to learn to
>> do is turn off the millions of warnings that keep popping up when I move
>> "folders", install applications, etc.. A little too much if you ask me.
>
>Once you get a feel for how security works in Vista and what is protected I
>think you'll find those to be less annoying, or at least figure out how to
>get the same things done without triggering them. App install and much of
>the more advanced system configuration require you to go through a prompt,
>but you'll soon have most of your apps installed and the system configured
>so won't see those so much anymore.

Have a good day,
RScotti

remove "nospam" in order to email me.

PS,
Right now I just have a Intel 820 duo core processor but I am planning to go the Intel E6600 multi-processor later on.
I don't want to buy Home Premium If I can't get this support.

On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 14:50:17 -0500, "Tom Porterfield" <tpporter@mvps.org> wrote:

>seahawks_in_07 wrote:
>> Does anyone know why the in place upgrade from XP Pro to Vista Home
>> Premium isn't allowed? I don't understand why this upgrade path would
>> not be considered a normal and common upgrade for most people and I can't
>> figure out a technical reason for not doing it since they are both 32 bit
>> and support NTFS.
>
>There are features in XP Pro that are not in Vista Home Premium. Things
>such as support for two processors, EFS and others that prevent a clean way
>to do an in place upgrade from XP Pro to Vista Home Premium.
>
>> Anyway, I did the "Clean" install last night on my XP Pro and it worked
>> fine. It was a pain setting back up all the applications but whatever. I
>> would think at the very least the folks at MSFT would have provided a way
>> to migrate settings from my "windows.old" folder to the new installation
>> after the installation was totally done but I couldn't even find a way to
>> do that.
>
>You could have used Windows Easy Transfer prior to doing the install to help
>with some of this.
>
>> On the bright side, I love the new interface and once I got my
>> applications re-installed it works great. Only thing I need to learn to
>> do is turn off the millions of warnings that keep popping up when I move
>> "folders", install applications, etc.. A little too much if you ask me.
>
>Once you get a feel for how security works in Vista and what is protected I
>think you'll find those to be less annoying, or at least figure out how to
>get the same things done without triggering them. App install and much of
>the more advanced system configuration require you to go through a prompt,
>but you'll soon have most of your apps installed and the system configured
>so won't see those so much anymore.

Have a good day,
RScotti

remove "nospam" in order to email me.

"RScotti" wrote

> Hi,
> Pardon me, but reading this thread does this mean I can't get Vista Home
> Premium if I use multi processors?
> What do I have to buy Vista Ultimate?

First I think you're misreading the thread. And second I think you mean
dual core not multi processors? All the Vista versions can handle a
multiple core CPU as long as it's a single socket which is what dual core
and quad core are. The Home versions can't handle multiple processors -
meaning more than one processor each in a different socket. Business,
Enterprise and Ultimate can.
--
Rock [MVP - User/Shell]

Hi Rock,
Please excuse my ignorance but Is the Intel E6600/E6700 Core 2 Duo a dual core AND multi-processor?
I thought it was both (2 processors in two sockets with duo cores on each)
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 23:35:55 -0800, "Rock" <rock@nospam.net> wrote:

>"RScotti" wrote
>
>> Hi,
>> Pardon me, but reading this thread does this mean I can't get Vista Home
>> Premium if I use multi processors?
>> What do I have to buy Vista Ultimate?
>
>First I think you're misreading the thread. And second I think you mean
>dual core not multi processors? All the Vista versions can handle a
>multiple core CPU as long as it's a single socket which is what dual core
>and quad core are. The Home versions can't handle multiple processors -
>meaning more than one processor each in a different socket. Business,
>Enterprise and Ultimate can.

Have a good day,
RScotti

remove "nospam" in order to email me.

It is a single socket processor.

--
Jane, not plain ;) 64 bit enabled :-)
Batteries not included. Braincell on vacation ;-)
"RScotti" <rscotti1@nospam.verizon.net> wrote in message
news:hh63s2h91hbti2jutjjguufo8ol2pre34r@4ax.com...
> Hi Rock,
> Please excuse my ignorance but Is the Intel E6600/E6700 Core 2 Duo a dual
> core AND multi-processor?
> I thought it was both (2 processors in two sockets with duo cores on each)
> On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 23:35:55 -0800, "Rock" <rock@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>>"RScotti" wrote
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> Pardon me, but reading this thread does this mean I can't get Vista Home
>>> Premium if I use multi processors?
>>> What do I have to buy Vista Ultimate?
>>
>>First I think you're misreading the thread. And second I think you mean
>>dual core not multi processors? All the Vista versions can handle a
>>multiple core CPU as long as it's a single socket which is what dual core
>>and quad core are. The Home versions can't handle multiple processors -
>>meaning more than one processor each in a different socket. Business,
>>Enterprise and Ultimate can.
>
> Have a good day,
> RScotti
>
> remove "nospam" in order to email me.
>

Thanks for your help Jane in clearing this up for me,
I guess I can still buy the Home Premium version. I really didn't want to spend $400.
On Thu, 1 Feb.. 2007 19:05:31 +1100, "Jane C" <jellybean@NOSPAMxjgarage.org> wrote:

>It is a single socket processor.

Have a good day,
RScotti

remove "nospam" in order to email me.

"RScotti" wrote

> Hi Rock,
> Please excuse my ignorance but Is the Intel E6600/E6700 Core 2 Duo a dual
> core AND multi-processor?
> I thought it was both (2 processors in two sockets with duo cores on each)

> "Rock" wrote:
>
>>"RScotti" wrote
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> Pardon me, but reading this thread does this mean I can't get Vista Home
>>> Premium if I use multi processors?
>>> What do I have to buy Vista Ultimate?
>>
>>First I think you're misreading the thread. And second I think you mean
>>dual core not multi processors? All the Vista versions can handle a
>>multiple core CPU as long as it's a single socket which is what dual core
>>and quad core are. The Home versions can't handle multiple processors -
>>meaning more than one processor each in a different socket. Business,
>>Enterprise and Ultimate can.


It's a single socket dual core processor.

--
Rock [MVP - User/Shell]

RScotti wrote:
> PS,
> Right now I just have a Intel 820 duo core processor but I am planning to
> go the Intel E6600 multi-processor later on. I don't want to buy Home
> Premium If I can't get this support.

The E6600 is a multi-core processor, but still uses a single socket so will
be supported by Home Premium just fine. If you get two E6600 dual core
processors, putting one in each socket on your MB, then you would need a
higher level of Vista in order to use the processor in the second socket.
--
Tom Porterfield

Thanks Tom,
I appreciate your help,on this.
On Thu, 1 Feb 2007 10:15:36 -0500, "Tom Porterfield" <tpporter@mvps.org> wrote:

>RScotti wrote:
>> PS,
>> Right now I just have a Intel 820 duo core processor but I am planning to
>> go the Intel E6600 multi-processor later on. I don't want to buy Home
>> Premium If I can't get this support.
>
>The E6600 is a multi-core processor, but still uses a single socket so will
>be supported by Home Premium just fine. If you get two E6600 dual core
>processors, putting one in each socket on your MB, then you would need a
>higher level of Vista in order to use the processor in the second socket.

Have a good day,
RScotti

remove "nospam" in order to email me.