Vista Upgrades Require Presence of Old OS 561
kapaopango writes "Ars Technica is reporting that upgrade versions of Windows Vista Home Basic, Premium, and Starter Edition cannot be installed on a PC unless Windows XP or Windows 2000 is already installed. This is a change from previous versions of Windows, which only required a valid license key. This change has the potential to make disaster recovery very tedious. The article says: 'For its part, Microsoft seems to be confident that the Vista repair process should be sufficient to solve any problems with the OS, since otherwise the only option for disaster recovery in the absence of backups would be to wipe a machine, install XP, and then upgrade to Vista. This will certainly make disaster recovery a more irritating experience.'"
Are you surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)
How long? (Score:5, Insightful)
Another reason to keep backups current. (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think we'll find a very large corporate install base of "upgrade" versions of Vista. This will affect home users the most.
I'm more concerned with the "'per device' obsession" TFA mentions. I'm in no hurry to swap out XP/2k workstations at my shop for Vista -- and this just re-enforces that. I doubt I'm the only IT professional who feels that way.
Good. (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd really like it if Microsoft could deny OS updates to anyone running an unlicensed Windows, too. Does anyone know if Vista does that?
Disaster recovery (Score:2, Insightful)
Just Plugging Holes (Score:3, Insightful)
Well... (Score:4, Insightful)
Media companies: Heh heh, if you like 520p.
Regular companies: 2000 is good enough for them.
Small businesses: Whatever looks good to pirate (not vista).
Gamers: PS3 and Wii, and XP (no game co's will make for one OS only)
Media users: 2000 or Linux. Both play things good enough.
"I just bought a Dell": Vista.
Well... I think that sums it up.
Re:How long? (Score:2, Insightful)
I used to think "no one would put up with" insecurities in Windows...
Nor I know better. With the marketshare Microsoft has they can require people to sacrifice their first born (which I'll do before Vista gets on MY systems) and they'll STILL manage to get enough copies out for it to become standard.
Sounds Annoying (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Are you surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)
I am sure a good many of them do not consider this an upgrade, but rather final delivery of the OS they were promised when they purchased their hardware.
Re:Disaster recovery (Score:4, Insightful)
Trouble is, as windows gets more 'advanced' it gets more 'stuff' that makes an upgrade go 100% smoothly. Hell, even upgrading between version updates from any linux distro you see many people have problems, just look on the forums (especially the ubuntu 5 to 6 update, gentoo during the major portage change,etc.)
Like the forums always say, it is better to install a clean version of the newest OS instead of upgrading from old, if you can that is =)
Are you kidding me? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't believe it + security? (Score:3, Insightful)
Secondly, what does repair do to security? In my experience, after a repair, the system does not require all the security patches to be re-installed, yet the repair must have overwritten some files that had been patched for security fixes. In other words, some of the security patches have been rolled back, yet the system does not apparently detect this.
What is an "upgrade" about? (Score:4, Insightful)
In my opinion, an "upgrade" version, says NOTHING about how you actually install it. It's just the same thing but cheaper because you bought the old one.
I see a bunch of people suggesting that it only applies if you're "upgrading" your machine. That seems like a complete non-sequitur, given the usual rationale (as above). Are we seriously to believe that an upgrade edition is only an "install once and that's it" version? Completely ridiculous.
Re:Are you surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you want to think I am "way the hell out there" then the author of the article is way the hell out there too. You expect that Microsoft will personally visit each persons home and ensure they return their XP disk as well as format the drive?
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Disasters vs Pirates (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:thank u bill (Score:4, Insightful)
it's a good thing (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, it's a good thing the only real reasons for a reinstall nowadays is a massive virus or spyware infection.
Oh, wait... vista is windows right?
Re:How long? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:And the problem is? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Are you kidding me? (Score:3, Insightful)
At this very moment, I have a Gateway with no recovery partition or disks, virus damaged, and the need to do a fresh install. Shall I call MS and explain that I don't have their oem cd or ask the customer if they'd like to never (Ubuntu) worry about this kind of problem again? This dilemma with Vista tips the scales toward the latter since calling MS isn't even an option...it'll just take more time every time.
Re:Are you kidding me? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Are you surprised? (Score:3, Insightful)
You are a prime example of what I hate about Ubuntu. Ubuntu users see their personal OS as being the best, most userfriendly solution to any trouble with Windows. They fail to recognise that what Ubuntu does can be done to any other Linux system under the sun and there are still downsides to Ubuntu - Ubuntu is not special. It is quite well configured for your average 1-computer owning user, that I'll grant you, but it is not the solution to the problem you recognised, nor is it the best way to advocate Linux use.
One of the prime motivations for the creation of GNU/Linux was personal freedom - In this case freedom of choice. You should not be saying Ubuntu is the solution to every Windows problem, you should be suggesting that the User picks up ANY Linux distribution that takes their fancy and tries it.
I personally puke every time I see the shit-stained colour scheme of Ubuntu, so I try not to use it. Some of my supportees do and I don't have a problem with that, just as I don't have a problem with them using Fedora Core or something more esoteric like PC-BSD, whatever floats their boat.
Any to call me narrow minded is a bit rich. I am pretty much OS agnostic, supporting as I do BSD, Solaris and Linux systems numbering in the thousands on a day-to-day basis, plus I have some uses for Windows (shock! horror!). I use Fedora on my workstation, OSX at home and plenty of other OSes in between. I haven't fixated on one distribution as the answer to everyone's problems.
Tosser.
Re:Are you kidding me? (Score:4, Insightful)
Your company must not use Windows as its OS. I have learned a lot about how Microsoft's gift to the world works by troubleshooting the various fatal errors it can throw. I am glad my company pays me for my time and not results. I can say after 5 years in the business that in many cases more time is saved by doing a fresh install than attempting to figure out and neutralize the cause. It is fun to do the latter, but generally wildly inefficient when it comes to Windows. Other operating systems behave better in this regard.
Fuck that! (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Buy an upgrade version that requires a previous OS version to already be installed.
2) Buy the full version to install however the hell you want.
3) Use an alternate OS other than MS.
4) Download a cracked version and install it instead.
Bill Gates can go attempt asexual reproduction if he thinks I'm going to run through two installs just to get one O/S working.
Re:Are you surprised? (Score:3, Insightful)
"It is quite well configured for your average 1-computer owning user, that I'll grant you, but it is not the solution to the problem you recognised, nor is it the best way to advocate Linux use."
It is the best solution I know for the problem I recognized. That problem being the need for MS users to have other options. Options that suit their abilities and skill set. Do you have a better suggestion for a *nix distro for a brand new user who has previously only known MS? Do you have a better way to advocate Linux use than getting ignorant users on an easy to use flavor? Do they have to learn everything via command line first? Try thinking about the lowest common denominator.
Re:Are you kidding me? (Score:3, Insightful)
The format command is the best spyware remover there is.
And what is wrong with this? XP did the same (Score:3, Insightful)
1) No shit, it is an upgrade disk
2) the XP upgrade disk required the same/similar. It required either that you had a windows OS installed or that you had the disk and could insert it.
My main argument lies with (1).
Re:Well... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:And the problem is? (Score:5, Insightful)
It is. It's better than all other versions of Windows. But that doesn't make is stable or secure.
Re:Are you surprised? (Score:3, Insightful)
OS agnostic, eh? What OS is running your website [samsharpe.net], the babbages difference engine?
Why do Ubuntu people suggest Ubuntu? Because we know Ubuntu works; because if the people I recommend Ubuntu to have a problem, I'll see their forum post. Because I know that if I recommend a Distro that doesn't "just work", they'll be reinstalling Windows within the week. That's why, when people are getting off Windows, I don't recommend FreeBSD, or Gentoo, or Redhat; I recommend an OS/Distro that has QA, is easy to set up, and has fanatical community support (which doesn't consist of "RTFA"). I'm going to send them to a distro where what the wiki/forums/help docs don't cover, 40 people in IRC will.
Linux and BSD have tons of choices, options, and ability to customize. That said, for the user that's used to Windows, and is looking for not-Windows, I'm not going to send them to bootstrap Gentoo. I'm going to send them to a distro that works out of the box, is supported, and is free. I use Ubuntu on my server, Ubuntu on my workstation, Ubuntu on my desktop, and Ubuntu on my laptop. I haven't decided on a distribution that's right for everyone, but for me it's Ubuntu.
If that's your definition, then yes, I'm a tosser.
Re:Well... (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, and how many people played Streets of Sim City? 10?
Applying common sense to this situation, the only reasons why a developer would write for DX 10 are because DX 9 is technically incapable of materializing their desires, because the company in question is owned by Microsoft, or because Microsoft is giving them a hefty bribe.
In the case of the former, well, this person is probably a hobbyist, because no sane person in today's gaming industry would sacrifice revenue just so they could have 128-bit textures on the barbie doll female boss's metal bustier. This all but rules out releasing an exclusive for purely technical reasons. No doubt, DX 10 is the cat's pajamas - but even so, most games will probably just have multiple rendering paths for maximum compatibility.
Ownership could be a tricky matter, because I'm not sure how many companies MS has by the short hairs. However, I think it's pretty safe to say that they would have to have a massive controlling interest to be able to force a decision which in no way benefitted the company and in every way benefitted MS.
In the case of the bribe, they would only take the bribe and go through with it if they thought the potential revenue sacrificed by requiring a bleeding-edge and thoroughly buggy OS that has everyone in the industry scared shitless is smaller than the bribe. This is pretty much just the C- titles, such as Streets of Sim City, where it is mostly clear that the game is a piece of shit, but they do a release to maybe recoup some of the development costs.
Re:Backup space is expensive. (Score:2, Insightful)
So that you can restore one backup to your entire fleet of machines on the network. Heard of Ghost?
Re:thank u bill (Score:2, Insightful)
I think it's an issue of Apple management being smarter their Microsoft counterparts. In a company as large and high-profile as Microsoft, it's folly to assume that they don't have some good engineers . . . but it's quite apparent that their management tree could use some pruning.
Re:Are you surprised? (Score:3, Insightful)
Furthermore, no pentium pro ever had mmx. Your box is either not a pentium pro system, or it does not support mmx, or it is a pentium 2 system. The latter is not likely, since the p2 started at 233Mhz. Anyways, 200Mhz is tough to get a good gnome desktop on, unless your graphics card can do a lot of acceleration. I strongly recommend that you read some documentation, as your problems should be quite solvable. I also recommend that you stop putting silly quotations around things as though you are incredulous about all the terminology.
Re:How long? (Score:5, Insightful)
From what they hear, Linux is a OS for hippies which only geeks who live in their parent's basements can use.
Re:What is an "upgrade" about? (Score:3, Insightful)
This totally sucked.
That's why in the mid-nineties companies switched to selling upgrade-install media instead. Really, its much better. But if you want upgrade pricing, you have to prove at some point (purchase or use) that you own the older software. That's only reasonable.
Or do you have another (workable) solution?
Re:thank u bill (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Are you surprised? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:thank u bill (Score:1, Insightful)
No, BSD's engineers are smarter since that is basically all OSX is.
Re:Good. (Score:3, Insightful)
Free support for the family without any restrictions is a recipe for disaster. I tell my family members that I'll help them with their support issues as long as they agree contact me for suggestions before they make major hardware purchases. Somebody buys a piece of crap (like a Vista PC) without asking me about it first so I could tell them why it's a bad idea, they're cut-off. The last time I was consulted pre-purchase in that fashion, said family member got a Mac Mini instead of another Dell, and is now one of their happy faithful. Everybody wins this way.
Re:thank u bill (Score:3, Insightful)
You are not the target market. Large corporations do not need to take steps to make the minority markets happy, even if those markets may be better educated on the given product. Why does everyone on Slashdot assume they're an expert who could manage Microsoft better? Guess what, they're doing alright!
Re:thank u bill (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:thank u bill (Score:3, Insightful)
The BSD guys are (clearly) amazing, but you're terribly misguided if you think they had anything to do with the fact that 32-bit IOKit drivers can be loaded into the 64-bit kernel, or that 64-bit Cocoa is 32-bit safe.
Re:Are you kidding me? (Score:4, Insightful)
So, reinstalling the OS from scratch on a workstation certainly is a good way to perform disaster recovery; the workstation is borked, and all the user settings are server-side, so why NOT nuke the workstation?
Of course, such a company would probably also install the workstations from a ghost image. However I work for a company that does go the centralized route and yet doesn't use ghost images (we have an instruction list of what to install and how to set the machine up).
Re:thank u bill (Score:3, Insightful)
Retail discs include both 32-bit and 64-bit binaries (OEM and VLK discs have separate discs, for some reason).
The reason why OEM discs are like that should be pretty obvious - you (supposedly) buy an OEM copy for a specific machine, so the disc would only have the version of Windows for that specific machine on it.
The best Microsoft present to virus writers (Score:4, Insightful)
And suddenly there's a huge rush of virus with the ability to both infect the OS running on computer and the VHD file containing the backup.
Every time the user try to reverts to the VHD backup, in fact he re-installs the virus.
Thank you, Microsoft ! By leveraging your monopoly to push your own backup solution to every user, you've made it an easier task for virus writers to circumvent backups.
* : specially the clueless "My nephew installed my computer, he's a computer genius, you know !" -kind of users.
Re:Microsoft seems to be confident that the Vista (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Another reason to keep backups current. (Score:4, Insightful)
LB
Re:Another reason to keep backups current. (Score:2, Insightful)