Home | Blog | Software | Reviews and Features | Forum | Help | Donate | About us
topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • December 07, 2016, 06:26:57 AM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Author Topic: Windows vista upgrade path  (Read 2924 times)

Josh

  • Charter Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Points: -5
  • Posts: 3,395
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Windows vista upgrade path
« on: July 31, 2006, 07:03:51 PM »
Betanews has an article posted detailing microsoft's upgrade strategies for Windows vista. Ironically, Windows 2000 users will NOT be able to upgrade to this OS and will require a fresh install to get vista working.

Quote
With Windows Vista nearing its first release candidate in preparation for a final launch early next year, Microsoft is providing more details about possible upgrade paths. Of note: Windows 2000 cannot be upgraded to Vista.

While Windows 2000 Professional customers may purchase a cheaper "upgrade" copy of Microsoft next-generation operating system, Windows Vista must be "clean installed," which means users will need to back up their files and data manually and then copy everything into place. Applications will also need to be re-installed.

http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft_Details_Vista_Upgrade_Paths/1154373523

JavaJones

  • Review 2.0 Designer
  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,717
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows vista upgrade path
« Reply #1 on: July 31, 2006, 08:36:30 PM »
Frankly I wouldn't mind if there was no upgrade path whatsoever. Upgraded OS's always feel a little flakey to me. Clean install is usually the best bet. And hey if doing a clean install forces someone to buy or learn how to use a backup program and backup all their data, *all the better*! I'm sure MS's reasons are selfish here, but I for one don't mind the consequences one bit.

- Oshyan

Josh

  • Charter Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Points: -5
  • Posts: 3,395
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows vista upgrade path
« Reply #2 on: July 31, 2006, 09:32:13 PM »
Well, I think the reason they are axing windows 2000 on this one is the fact that there is probably a significant change from the code bases and providing upgrade capability to windows 2000 would probably prove to be a bigger burden than its benefits would merit. Yes, its still a widely used OS, but after testing, I stand by my last statement in that there are SIGNIFICANT changes to windows vista that could merit such a decision.

JavaJones

  • Review 2.0 Designer
  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,717
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows vista upgrade path
« Reply #3 on: July 31, 2006, 09:43:16 PM »
Except that Windows 2000 is almost universally compatible with XP. Any program that is "XP-only" is usually by choice. XP was *heavily* based on 2000 and even drivers are essentially the same in most cases. So I don't buy that.

- Oshyan

Josh

  • Charter Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Points: -5
  • Posts: 3,395
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows vista upgrade path
« Reply #4 on: July 31, 2006, 09:58:09 PM »
Well, compare windows xp sp2 to windows 2000. The code base has been changed quite a bit to allow for additional security features which were never back ported to windows 2000 to include stuff like DEP.

JavaJones

  • Review 2.0 Designer
  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,717
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Windows vista upgrade path
« Reply #5 on: July 31, 2006, 10:11:10 PM »
SP2 largely consists of patches, many of which have been issued separately for 2000, and the upgraded security center, which is little more than a system-integrated security app which could be 3rd party as much as 1st party in terms of its integration (generally speaking). In other words Security Center, with its current level of integration, could just as easily have been made by a 3rd party (see: Norton Control panels and firewall integration). So there's nothing proprietary and deeply integrated there IMO. The rest is upgrades to IE and I don't think there's much good reason that couldn't be applied to 2k if they wanted it to be. As for DEP, the fact that it could even *be* applied as a patch pretty much guarantees it's not *that* deeply entrenched and influential on the core of the OS.

If you can upgrade from Windows 98 to Windows 2000 (and you could), then I see no reason the same can't be done from 2k to Vista. I really don't think this has much to do with technical reasons.

- Oshyan