"tricking" Vista ultimate upgrade to install on clean HDD?

Conor wrote:

> When 20% or 144,000,000
> Windows installs are bogus, you can't blame a company for tightening
> things up.

Do you have a source for this figure of 20% or did you just pluck the
figure from the air?

--
Paul-B

In article <528v68F1nk0rkU1@mid.individual.net>, Paul-B says...
> Conor wrote:
>
> > When 20% or 144,000,000
> > Windows installs are bogus, you can't blame a company for tightening
> > things up.
>
> Do you have a source for this figure of 20% or did you just pluck the
> figure from the air?
>
Was in all the IT news a last week. Microsoft released figures from
it's WGA program. The figures take account of "false positives".

Google "one in five windows installs pirate" and you'll get a load of
hits from the IT news sites.

"Since WGA launched in July 2005, over 512 million users have attempted
to validate their copy of Windows, Microsoft said. Of those, the non-
genuine rate was 22.3 percent.

While high, that number is less than the average software piracy rate
around the world, according to the Business Software Alliance. The BSA
reports that 35 percent of the world's software is pirated (22 percent
in North America specifically), and a Yankee Group study noted that 55
percent of organizations report instances of counterfeit or pirated
software."

--
Conor

Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright
until you hear them speak.........

Twista, I didn't know you posed for the picture. Good going. Nice job!

Thank you


"Twista" <Twista@msnews.grp> wrote in message
news:uH1kFFARHHA.4744@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
> http://www.microscum.com/carey/
>
> - Twista
>
> "Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message
> news:0E485E07-F6E3-4105-8A1E-78A80CBD87E6@microsoft.com...
> : The "trick" is to purchase a "Full License" version of Windows Vista.
> : Do you not understand the meaning of the word "upgrade"?
> : If you wish to use an upgrade version of Vista to completely
> : reinstall Vista, then you'll have to install and activate Windows XP and
> : then use the Windows Vista "upgrade" DVD to "upgrade" to Vista.
> :
> : --
> : Carey Frisch
> : Microsoft MVP
> : Windows Shell/User
> :
> : --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> :
> : "Ninjak on FW" wrote:
> :
> : Like a billion other people, I own Windows XP but I'd like to do a
> : clean install of Vista Ultimate using only the upgrade version. Is it
> : possible to trick the installer into thinking you have XP installed,
> : perhaps by copying the entire XP disc to your hard drive? I reinstall
> : my OS frequently and it will suck if I have to install XP AND Vista
> : every time.
> :
>
>

Actually, you can do a clean install option in the upgrade version as well.

The upgrade path doesn't always work, so I tried it the other way and it
worked fine (booting from the CD). PITA to have to reload programs, but at
least it worked and didn't wait until 2 hours had been spent on the upgrade
path before it failed.

"Henry Jones" <henry@TheCheckIsInTheMail.com> wrote in message
news:uV66xQIRHHA.4832@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Twista, I didn't know you posed for the picture. Good going. Nice job!
>
> Thank you
>
>
> "Twista" <Twista@msnews.grp> wrote in message
> news:uH1kFFARHHA.4744@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>
>> http://www.microscum.com/carey/
>>
>> - Twista
>>
>> "Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:0E485E07-F6E3-4105-8A1E-78A80CBD87E6@microsoft.com...
>> : The "trick" is to purchase a "Full License" version of Windows Vista.
>> : Do you not understand the meaning of the word "upgrade"?
>> : If you wish to use an upgrade version of Vista to completely
>> : reinstall Vista, then you'll have to install and activate Windows XP
>> and
>> : then use the Windows Vista "upgrade" DVD to "upgrade" to Vista.
>> :
>> : --
>> : Carey Frisch
>> : Microsoft MVP
>> : Windows Shell/User
>> :
>> : --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> :
>> : "Ninjak on FW" wrote:
>> :
>> : Like a billion other people, I own Windows XP but I'd like to do a
>> : clean install of Vista Ultimate using only the upgrade version. Is it
>> : possible to trick the installer into thinking you have XP installed,
>> : perhaps by copying the entire XP disc to your hard drive? I reinstall
>> : my OS frequently and it will suck if I have to install XP AND Vista
>> : every time.
>> :
>>
>>
>
>

I noted this comment:

>>Upgrade versions of Windows Vista Home Basic, Premium, and Starter Edition
will not install on any PC unless Windows XP or Windows 2000 is already on
the machine in question. In years previous, upgrade versions of Windows
could be installed on any PC. If a PC did not have an older version of
Windows installed, users could provide an older installation CD of Windows
for verification. After dropping a qualifying CD in the CD-ROM drive, the
installation routine would verify the disc and you'd be on your way. With
this approach, one could use an "upgrade" copy of Windows to lay a new
Windows install on a computer. <<<

Does this mean that if you have WinXP Pro and buy the Ultimate Upgrade
version you can do a clean install or in all cases do you need a full version
to do a clean install?

Thank you...



"Chad Harris" wrote:

> Yes it sure has.
>
> You will not have access to the major tools that Vista provides to repair it
> and I'm detailing this below for you.
>
> Let me give you a compelling reason to get a full DVD:
>
> If you do not have a full DVD, or you have an upgrade DVD you are *NOT
> going to have the major tools you'll need to fix Vista. You of course will
> have System Restore via its new Volume Shadow Copy format adapted from the
> Windows Server environment.
>
> Anytime I ever spend $1000-$4000 for a new PC, (I order from an online site
> because I like to choose my features and many stores don't have that choice)
> I insist on them giving me the Windows OS DVD of the moment, and I have
> heard that one is Vista. So either insist on it or buy the full DVD is my
> advice.
>
> You of course may have Backup depending on your edition. I applaud them for
> doing this, but like a lot of users here, I prefer using an imaging system
> like GHOST or ACRONIS or another type that works best for the user.
>
> I am going to include some recent information and questions that are
> additional posed on upgrade DVDs this morning and one of the guys who posed
> the question writes one of the most comprehensive books on Vista that is
> hitting stores this week (Ed Bott author of Windows Vista Inside Out MSFT
> Press). I also point out below the major repair modalities in Vista that
> you will not access unless you have a full Vista version DVD. You won't be
> accessing them via that upgrade DVD.
>
> The Upgrade scenario that MSFT has posed failed to take into consideration
> what happens if the person has to format and cannot repair and also failed
> to take into consideration that those customers should have full access to
> the full panoply of Vista repair tools.
>
> They do not: Read Below please and you'll become a more informed buyer:
>
> MSFT has blocked your ability to repair Vista in two major ways it turns
> out:
>
> 1) If you do not get a Vista DVD (Dell says you will from them) when you pay
> $1000-2000 for your new Vista preloaded computer today, tonight or in the
> future you cannot access the repair modalities I describe below from Win RE
> on the Vista DVD or the Windows Repair Environment.
>
> 2) If you buy an Upgrade DVD.
>
> See below:
>
> And with all the excellent upgrade posts here, including Colin Barnhorst's I
> haven't seen this little issue raised. Suppose that you cannot use Win RE's
> major components to repair Vista which would be Startup Repair, System
> Restore *from Win RE which I find superior to SR using the Volume Shadow
> system adapted from the Windows Server environment, restoring the boot
> sector using the bootsect /nt52 SYS from the Windows Recovery Environment
> discussed in the MSKB directly below
>
> How to troubleshoot scenarios in which the rollback phase was unsuccessful
> after you upgrade from Windows XP to Windows Vista
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/927523/en-us
>
> and something that has not been mentioned that I can tell to date on this
> group or much in the TBT groups:
>
> How to use the Bootrec.exe tool in the Windows Recovery Environment to
> troubleshoot and repair startup issues in Windows Vista
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/927392/en-us
>
> Startup Repair can also be used when there is not a problem booting into
> Windows Vista and when it works which is not all the time (you should repeat
> 2-3 times if it does not) fix major broken Vista components:
>
> A Stop error occurs, or the computer stops responding when you try to start
> Windows Vista
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/925810/en-us
>
> So suppose all these repair modalities used correctly and I emphasize there
> are a minority of times when Startup Repair may need to be tried, i.e.
> repeated 2-3 times until it works, and you have this scnario mentioned by
> George Ou on his ZDNET blog this morning (January 29, 2007) in my time zone:
>
> (I would think you could avoid a lot of "Geek Squad" money by the way by
> simply searching this group, the setup group and the other MSFT Vista public
> groups using View>Find):
>
> From George Ou and a point that has not been raised that I can tell on this
> group or the setup group and certainly has not been touched by Jill Zoeller
> or Darrel Gorter who occasionally particpate here from MSFT:
>
> From:
> January 29th, 2007
> Vista Upgrade Edition is lame by design
>
> by George Ou
>
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=414&tag=nl.e589
>
>
> "These new Vista Upgrade DVDs which I'm assuming have already been stamped
> out will lack the ability to install on a system unless Windows XP or 2000
> was present. This means anyone looking to do a fresh install for any reason
> will not be able to. Someone who is doing disaster recovery after a hard
> drive failure or a virus infection won't be able to wipe their hard drive
> and install Vista, they'll have to install XP first and then install Vista
> on top of XP. That could easily mean nearly an hour wasted. If you're
> paying someone to rebuild your computer, this will mean an extra hour of
> labor that will be billed to you for the installation of Windows XP. Will
> Microsoft pick up the extra hour tab from Geek Squad for everyone?"
>
>
> MSFT's current MSKB covering Upgrades and leaving much out:
>
> How to install Windows Vista (See upgrade section of this MSKB)
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/918884/en-us
>
> MSFT's Current Upgrade to Vista Page:
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...radepaths.mspx
>
> Extreme Tech's article on Vista Upgrades:
>
> Upgrade From Windows XP to Vista
>
> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2082979,00.asp
>
> What's the real story with Vista upgrades?
>
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=189
>
> Vista Upgrade Edition is lame by design
>
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=414&tag=nl.e589
>
> __________________________________________
>
> MSFT's curreng MSKB covering Upgrades and leaving much out:
>
> How to install Windows Vista (See upgrade section of this MSKB)
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/918884/en-us
>
> MSFT's Current Upgrade to Vista Page:
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...radepaths.mspx
>
> Extreme Tech's article on Vista Upgrades:
>
> Upgrade From Windows XP to Vista
>
> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2082979,00.asp
>
> What's the real story with Vista upgrades?
>
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=189
>
> Vista Upgrade Edition is lame by design
>
> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=414&tag=nl.e589
>
> What's the Real Story With Vista Upgrades?
> Ed Bott
> January 29th, 2007
>
> "A story by Ken Fisher on Ars Technica this morning is raising alarm flags.
> Fisher points to Microsoft Knowledge Base article 930985, which documents a
> change in the setup process for upgrade versions of Windows Vista. The
> article's title reads: "You cannot use an upgrade key to perform a clean
> installation of Windows Vista."
>
> Fisher concludes, "[Once] again, Microsoft appears to have made licensing
> decisions without considering how people actually use their products."
>
> George Ou calls it "another one of those 'what were you thinking' moments
> for Microsoft management."
>
> I'm not certain what's actually going on here. The KB article itself is
> ambiguous. In Microsoft's world, a clean install requires booting from
> optical media (CD or DVD). Here's Microsoft's definition of a clean
> installation, as contained in an earlier KB article:
>
> A clean installation refers to removing all data from your hard disk by
> repartitioning and reformatting your hard disk and reinstalling the
> operating system and programs to an empty (clean) hard disk.
>
> So how is the upgrade media going to work? It sounds like it won't be
> bootable, which means that you won't be able to start your PC using the
> upgrade DVD. Will it include the disk management tools included on a retail
> Vista DVD? Will you be able to install Vista without a product key, as you
> can with a retail DVD? Will you be able to install Vista to its own
> directory or to an existing disk partition without migrating current
> settings - what most people outside Redmond consider a "clean install"?
>
> The answer to all those questions, at this point, is "Nobody knows." At
> least, nobody outside of Redmond. So far, the only copies of Windows Vista
> that have been distributed to the public and the press have been full retail
> copies. I have yet to hear from a single source that has actually seen one
> of these upgrade disks and documented the experience. Everything written so
> far is just speculation until those disks are in customers' hands tomorrow.
> This may turn out to be a headache, as predicted. Or it may turn out to be
> much ado about nothing.
>
> Stay tuned."
>
>
> Vista Upgrade Edition is lame by design
> George Ou
> January 29, 2007
>
> Arstechnica is reporting that Windows Vista Upgrade edition will not permit
> "clean" installs like all previous versions of Windows Upgrade editions.
> Will Microsoft pick up the extra hour tab from Geek Squad?This is another
> one of those "what were you thinking" moments for Microsoft management
> similar to their bone headed decision to lock the retail version of Vista to
> one hardware migration. Microsoft backed out of their ridiculous license
> change after Ed Bott sounded the alarm and others picked up on the story.
> So Vista Upgrade Edition should really be called Vista "Not Clean" "time
> waster" Edition. [Update 4:10AM - A reader clarifies that you can
> technically do a clean install by telling Vista to wipe the hard drive
> before installing after it confirms a full copy of Windows XP is installed.
> This however is still lame because you can't just install Vista on a freshly
> formatted hard drive and it will still be a huge time waster.]
>
> In the past, Microsoft has always respected their customer's time and
> allowed upgrade versions of Windows to install on a fresh machine so long as
> the customer could provide proof of possession of the old software. These
> new Vista Upgrade DVDs which I'm assuming have already been stamped out will
> lack the ability to install on a system unless Windows XP or 2000 was
> present. This means anyone looking to do a fresh install for any reason
> will not be able to. Someone who is doing disaster recovery after a hard
> drive failure or a virus infection won't be able to wipe their hard drive
> and install Vista, they'll have to install XP first and then install Vista
> on top of XP. That could easily mean nearly an hour wasted. If you're
> paying someone to rebuild your computer, this will mean an extra hour of
> labor that will be billed to you for the installation of Windows XP. Will
> Microsoft pick up the extra hour tab from Geek Squad for everyone?
>
> Some might just say tough; you don't have to buy Windows Vista Upgrade
> Edition if you don't like the terms of the agreement. But the problem is
> that there are probably already millions of people who bought in to the
> promise of Vista upgrade coupons during this last holiday shopping season
> with their new computers or their copy of Windows XP and they weren't told
> that the upgrade terms have been changed. The Vista Upgrade coupons were
> used to lure people in to buying brand new computers for the holiday 2006
> shopping season when many people would have probably opted to wait until
> after Vista launches at the end of January had they known about these new
> restrictions. Now these people are going to be in for a big shock after
> they wipe their computers and find out that their copy of Vista won't
> install without XP on the computer.
>
> So why is Microsoft making a bone headed decision like this? One
> possibility is that Microsoft is afraid that people might try to keep
> running XP or Media Center on their existing machines and use Vista on a new
> computer. This would mean that Microsoft would be giving away two copies of
> Windows for the price of one. While I realize that a company has to make
> money off of a commercial Operating System, surely Microsoft could have
> worked out a better arrangement. Why not ask people to turn in their old
> Windows XP serial number when they get their Full Vista DVD and then
> blacklist that serial number from Windows Genuine Advantage. This would be
> a fair free trade-up from Windows XP to Windows Vista and no one should
> expect to get two versions of Windows for the price of one.
>
> But it could be too late for Microsoft to avoid a backlash because Vista is
> launching at the end of today and all those copies of Vista Upgrade with no
> way to do clean installs have probably already been manufactured. If
> Microsoft wants to set things right for people who want to do clean installs
> of Windows Vista especially those who bought in to the promise of Vista
> coupons during this last holiday season, Microsoft should allow these people
> to opt for a trade-up to the full version of Vista where the old XP serial
> number is blacklisted on WGA 30 days after the Vista is shipped to them.
> That would seem to be the least they can do.
>
>
>
> Sould Microsoft allow a full trade-up to Vista?"
>
> From Ken Fischer (Ars Technica)
> http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070128-8717.html
>
> Vista "upgrade" drops compliance checking, requires old OS to install
> 1/28/2007 3:11:14 PM, by Ken Fisher
>
> "Microsoft's quest to closely control the way Windows Vista can be used on
> PCs has taken a turn for the worse as new information indicates that the
> company is breaking tradition when it comes to Windows Vista upgrades. With
> Windows Vista, users will not be able to use upgrade keys to initiate
> completely new installations. It is a change that will affect few users, but
> enthusiasts will certainly be amongst those pinched.
>
> Upgrade versions of Windows Vista Home Basic, Premium, and Starter Edition
> will not install on any PC unless Windows XP or Windows 2000 is already on
> the machine in question. In years previous, upgrade versions of Windows
> could be installed on any PC. If a PC did not have an older version of
> Windows installed, users could provide an older installation CD of Windows
> for verification. After dropping a qualifying CD in the CD-ROM drive, the
> installation routine would verify the disc and you'd be on your way. With
> this approach, one could use an "upgrade" copy of Windows to lay a new
> Windows install on a computer.
>
> One again, Microsoft appears to have made licensing decisions without
> considering how people actually use their products. Last fall the company
> trotted out changes to its retail licensing that would have punished users
> who frequently upgrade their PC hardware had the company not relented. Now
> Microsoft seeks to complicate our ability to start a crisp, new install with

I noted this comment:

>>Upgrade versions of Windows Vista Home Basic, Premium, and Starter Edition
will not install on any PC unless Windows XP or Windows 2000 is already on
the machine in question. In years previous, upgrade versions of Windows
could be installed on any PC. If a PC did not have an older version of
Windows installed, users could provide an older installation CD of Windows
for verification. After dropping a qualifying CD in the CD-ROM drive, the
installation routine would verify the disc and you'd be on your way. With
this approach, one could use an "upgrade" copy of Windows to lay a new
Windows install on a computer. <<<

Does this mean that if you have WinXP Pro and buy the Ultimate Upgrade
version you can do a clean install or in all cases do you need a full version
to do a clean install?

Thank you...

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" wrote:

> The "trick" is to purchase a "Full License" version of Windows Vista.
> Do you not understand the meaning of the word "upgrade"?
> If you wish to use an upgrade version of Vista to completely
> reinstall Vista, then you'll have to install and activate Windows XP and
> then use the Windows Vista "upgrade" DVD to "upgrade" to Vista.
>
> --
> Carey Frisch
> Microsoft MVP
> Windows Shell/User
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "Ninjak on FW" wrote:
>
> Like a billion other people, I own Windows XP but I'd like to do a
> clean install of Vista Ultimate using only the upgrade version. Is it
> possible to trick the installer into thinking you have XP installed,
> perhaps by copying the entire XP disc to your hard drive? I reinstall
> my OS frequently and it will suck if I have to install XP AND Vista
> every time.
>

"Robert Moir" <robspamtrap@gmail.com> wrote in
news:ec8DbI#QHHA.4000@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl:

> Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:
>> The "trick" is to purchase a "Full License" version of Windows Vista.
>> Do you not understand the meaning of the word "upgrade"?
>> If you wish to use an upgrade version of Vista to completely
>> reinstall Vista, then you'll have to install and activate Windows XP
>> and then use the Windows Vista "upgrade" DVD to "upgrade" to Vista.
>
> Are you this rude to everyone or just people asking for help with what
> is a recent change to the way Windows upgrades work?

One has to wonder how he stays in the MVP program. The only thing I can
think of is he has evangelized the use of product activation long before
Windows Vista. After reading his postings, you would think product
activation was the solution for world peace.

Adam

I've been using Complete PC Backup to image my system partition to
DVD(s) on a regular basis and have had to restore about five times now
after doing something dumb (usually involving applications or drivers
not yet ready for Vista), and it has worked flawlessly (and very fast)
for me every time. AFAIC, Vista Premium users are gonna be missing a
good thing in Complete PC Backup, unless they're already using, and
pretty handy with, a third-party app like Acronis.

Colin Barnhorst wrote:
> You have got it nailed!
>
> "Daze N. Knights" <Daze@microchip.com> wrote in message
> news:u56u1aDRHHA.3412@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> If I'm not mistaken, in this situation one could use Ultimate's
>> "Complete PC Backup" instead of Acronis to image the setup to a DVD,
>> then when one wishes to reinstall Vista, one could just boot from the
>> Vista Upgrade DVD, go to the Repair options, and choose to do a
>> restore from the DVD backups.
>>
>>
>> jim wrote:
>>> I am talking about having a Vista upgrade.. let me make it simpler
>>> for you
>>>
>>> 1) install xp once
>>> 2) install vista upgrade once on top of xp
>>> 3) use acronis or similar to make an "image" of that installation and
>>> save to dvd
>>> 4) Instead of going through steps 1 and 2 next time you need to format,
>>> you only reload the acronis image from the dvd onto your formated
>>> HDD, this needs only 10 mins.
>>> 5) When you boot up again after step 4 you will have vista freshly
>>> installed..
>>> go to windows update and download the updates.
>>>
>>> PS. this has nothing to do with functionality built into vista....
>>>
>>>
>>> "Troy McClure" <k@k.com> wrote in message
>>> news:E6544621-B20C-40E5-8021-4EDBE0C76C84@microsoft.com...
>>>> you dont need silly imaging software. its builtin to vista. seems
>>>> you should know that being you tested it for so long.
>>>> karma karma karma... i bet youre ugly too
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "jim" <1@1.1> wrote in message
>>>> news:OSO6HL%23QHHA.496@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Hello... do what I will do, WHEN I get vista... (NOT YET!!!!)
>>>>>
>>>>> Install once then get an imaging software like acronis true image,
>>>>>
>>>>> make an "image" of your installation, then boot with the acronis cd
>>>>> and recover that installation instead of going through the install
>>>>> process...
>>>>>
>>>>> time needed? 10 mins.....
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Ninjak on FW" <shawnn@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:1170099761.701327.47530@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>> Like a billion other people, I own Windows XP but I'd like to do a
>>>>>> clean install of Vista Ultimate using only the upgrade version. Is it
>>>>>> possible to trick the installer into thinking you have XP installed,
>>>>>> perhaps by copying the entire XP disc to your hard drive? I reinstall
>>>>>> my OS frequently and it will suck if I have to install XP AND Vista
>>>>>> every time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>

Hi, this is my first post here. I came to try to figure out whether to upgrade to Vista now, or wait a while. I do photography, and have expensive printers, scanners, and really expensive Photoshop plugins.

Since I can't afford to do without them until they became compatible with Vista, I had pretty much decided I would be safer buying the full version in case everything didn't work, and dual booting with XP until I saw the thread about dual booting. Now I think I will investigate those problems further before deciding.

Something I have been thinking about but haven't seen addressed yet, is if we have to do the full install of XP before installing a Vista upgrade whenever we need to start over, what will happen with future versions of Windows?

I know that nobody but a Microsoft person can answer that, but this issue could have serious ramifications down the road if each new version of Windows upgrades requires a previous installation. Will we first have to install XP, then install Vista, then install the next version of Windows, and on and on? Will new computers even support an XP installation after a few years?

This probably wouldn't affect the off the shelf computer user, as those machines already have the latest Windows versions on them, but it would affect those of us who rebuild our computers every few years.

It also bothers me that Microsoft doesn't allow you to keep using your old operating system until you get all the bugs worked out. With Photoshop for example, you can keep an older and a newer version installed until you get everything working together as long as you don't use both versions at the same time. To me, that would seem much fairer, since new operating systems always seem to have certain programs or hardware that doesn't work with them at the beginning. I hardly think that Microsoft would have any worries about people using two licences once they get everything working, after all, the space taken up by XP really would make a big dent in your hard drive space, and reason number two is, who would want to go back to an older operating system after they get used to Vista? I certainly wouldn't go back to Windows 98 after using XP even though it meant I had to buy a new graphics tablet. At least we should have the option of upgrading everything a little more slowly if we could use both operating systems for the first few months.

I know this is sort of a rant, and this is my first post here, but those are really big concerns of mine. I felt that I had to air them in case others have the same concerns. Those are probably some things the guys at Microsoft never thought about, and if we talk about our concerns, maybe Microsoft will think about our concerns in the future.

kathi

Adam Leinss wrote:
>
> One has to wonder how he stays in the MVP program. The only thing I
> can think of is he has evangelized the use of product activation long
> before Windows Vista. After reading his postings, you would think
> product activation was the solution for world peace.

You mean it isn't?