Colin Barnhorst

Exactly.

I think what is confusing things is that the basic assumption still has to
be that none of this is done on a production or primary home computer. The
problems pouring into here resulting from fouled up upgrades really has more
to do with folks ignoring that instruction than anything to do with a beta
upgrade process.

The dominant theme isn't "What's wrong with the upgrade process?" but "How
do I get XP back on my primary home computer?"

We need to advise them to only upgrade a test installation of XP at this
time.


"MICHAEL" <u158627_emr@dslr.net> wrote in message
news:OnbvFvasGHA.1976@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> "I think the rules we have been playing by have changed a lot."
> -Sage Colin
>
> I think you may be right, Colin.
>
> If I have time this weekend, I might test upgrading
> on a different machine. I will definitely be trying the
> upgrade install for RC1. Even though, our past
> experiences almost force us to advise others against
> the upgrade install, I think it is important that we understand
> Vista is different. It is also important for beta users to
> do this so that we can find bugs in the upgrade procedure.
>
>
> -Michael
>
> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:uthMzjasGHA.3952@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Mark, an upgrade with Vista is a different animal than an upgrade with
>> previous versions of Windows. It is a new kind of clean installation of
>> Windows, but with preservation of programs, files, and settings. I know
>> it soundd oxymoronic, but as I read more about this I am coming to the
>> conclusion that the old common wisdom about upgrades just does not apply
>> to Vista.
>>
>> The Vista installer lays down a preconfigured image of Windows, but not a
>> Ghost image. Setup then completes the device driver installations,
>> registers programs, and so on. I have little understanding of just what
>> that means, but I do understand that the process does not leave the bits
>> and pieces of the previous version of Windows that tend to mess things up
>> for the new version.
>>
>> I think what is going wrong with these posters is that they have not run
>> the Upgrade Advisor and removed the incompatible programs recommended by
>> the UA for removal. I think the rules we have been playing by have
>> changed a lot.
>>
>> It may be that the advice we need to be giving is not whether or not to
>> upgrade, but how to do it properly.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> "Mark D. VandenBeg" <mvan103@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:e8vkcLasGHA.4956@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>> "JohnnyPerko" <JohnnyPerko@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>> news:39886231-E460-4E91-9E2A-287AC499FA95@microsoft.com...
>>>> Any clue how to get back to my desktop?
>>>
>>> Is it possible for you to provide some details, such as system
>>> configuration, Vista build number, whether it is x86 or x64, why you are
>>> upgrading instead of doing a clean install as has been recommended with
>>> everything but death threats, etc...
>>>
>>
>>
>