"Clean" install everytime!
I keep ALL my game patches on a USB stick,along with everything else.
When re-installing games,just run the patch from the..USB,saves downloading more than once.

With web pages,just go to all your favourites online & copy & paste the web addresses into Notepad & save them all on..yes, you guessed it, the USB stick.
There's nothing like a nice clean install.

So your XP has worked the past 9 years and you are sticking with it? Great. Are you also still driving your Ford Escort from 1992? You aren't? You mean you bought a new truck and had to transfer your fuzzy dice and cd player ?

A new OS in 2009 shouldn't have to "just work" with programs and stuff from 10 years ago. If your XP works for you, shutup and shutoff. As for me, Vista came with my computer and I have no problem taking a Saturday to clean install and reinstall all my progs. Its not the end of the world people.

As for Apple OSX upgrades working all these years, maybe its because its on APPLE HARDWARE and nothing ever changes. Think of the hundreds of hardware possibilities with a PC. Theres no way an upgrade from 10 years worth of hardware changes would work.

Ubuntu? Hmm..well I hope my 30+ Windows applications will work with it. Whats that? You mean my 10 years worth of programs and windows data won't just magically stay put when I install Ubuntu? you mean I would have to clean install that too? Weird. Boy, I sure am glad Ubuntu will transfer my firefox bookmarks though. I was really worried about that....would have taken me days to transfer my bookmarks over. Thank goodness.

"This is the most inconsistently biased websites I have ever seen. It seems to me this website is more about flaming what ever product they are reviewing

posted by : brickling, 11 August 2009"

You'll notice they never do this with Binux though ;)

I'll be dual booting the dam thing with my XP Install on Win7 will be on the 64GB SSD I am getting. And XP which I am still using now will be on my current 30GB SSD for it's self and I'll have 250GB divided for storage of personal stuff like music to keep it off the main partition.

A few programs dont work in Win 7 64bit RC1 when I was giving a whirl and I just recently put in a pre-order at PC World for the Win 7 Pro 64bit at £90 instead of £190.

1st just need to upgrade my Phemon 9550 to a PII 945.

This is the most inconsistently biased websites I have ever seen. It seems to me this website is more about flaming what ever product they are reviewing, or giving it extreme praise to the point where you make it out to be "revolutionary." I think it is only a matter of time before readers start calling for inq authors to be fired. If there was a place where I could do that, I would do so in an instant.

Ed Bott over at ZDNet did a much clearer chart that contains exactly the same information.

http://i.zdnet.com/blogs/windows-upgrade-chart-eb-remake-final3.png

linked from http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=1246

When testing the Windows 7 RC I used Windows Easy Transfer to back up my settings from Windows Vista (Business) to an external hard drive, then restored them after installing Windows 7 (to another hard disk I had spare). I'll be repeating the process once I get final Windows 7 code, from the RC to final.

You can't move from 32- to 64-bit code directly (or vice versa) as numerous settings aren't applied. It wasn't supported for Windows Vista either, nor Windows XP 64-bit, so there's nothing new here.

You can't go to a lesser product version because, unless the installer was very careful about removing the old features, you would have some orphaned Windows Vista features left-over. These won't have been tested with Windows 7 as the base OS.

Oh I don't know, I find it's kind of therapeutic to clean out the computer every couple of years.

Amazing how many programs and trinkets you end up not reinstalling because you don't use them any more.

My reason for staying with xp is...simplicity. Everything or actually most things are easly accessible, you don't have to look for things to long. Example (windows firewall):
xp: control panel/windows firewall
one click and it's off permanently
win 7: control panel/windows firewall
switched it off and then found advanced options link and OMG!!!!! there are three settings for different kind of networks and only for the one I was connected to that stupid thing was switched off. And that stupid system was telling you it was off for good!! Just imagine a newbe trying to do that and after keeps wondering why this idiot system is still blocking apps.

"Where was that Linux distro CD again? It is sounding a hell of a lot easier all of a sudden."

Yes I had a feeling it would with you guys. I've never seen a website so biased as this place. Just remember no one is forcing you to buy it so you stick with your Binux

Is this a tech site or what?

Are you trying to say that its a major effort to do a clean install because you were stupid enough to store all of your documents, music photos etc on the same drive/partition as the OS?

If that's the case then you deserve pain and suffering for your endeavours.

Even if you only have a single disk system it is not exactly rocket science to partition the disk and keep your data on D:. You can then Ghost a copy of your C: drive over to D: before clean installing Win 7. Sure an external drive is belt and braces, but I've been routinely rebuilding my laptops with clean installs (or Ghost restores) while leaving my data safely untouched on D:. Of course, all data is backed up to my server and to a USB drive as well.

BB, the problem you described regarding "Linux" isn't a Linux problem at all - it's a distro and / or repository problem.

I don't have the problems you described. Then again, most of my machines are Gentoo-based, where dependency issues are extremely rare.

Every version of Windows has been the same so how is this news or any more or less of a problem than it has always been?

How many people are actually going to run an upgrade anyway? Nearly all domestic users stick with whatever came on their PC until they replace it anyway. Sure, there will be developers who will need to start testing on Win 7 as soon as they can get their hands on it but most of them are clued up enough to do a clean install anyway.

Just because it's 'possible' to do an upgrade in some circumstances doesn't mean it's a good idea. It's usually a terrible one and always has been.

Jonny is correct MS is screwed! OSX FTW!
By 2010 no one shall be using Windows, as Jonny said MS has dug itself a huge hole. Now let's all get in a circle and jerk off to some pictures of Steve Jobs with some shinny sexy Macs.

<quote
Then you get to re-install all of the software applications you have acquired over the years, find out by trial and error whether or not they still work under Windows 7, and apply all of the cumulative maintenance patches to all of those applications.

Then you get to enjoy the Vole's inevitable series of monthly Windows 7 and related software patches along with the applications administration nightmare that's bound to follow.
</quote

This DEFINITLY explains the slowness, *fragmentation*, and registry bloat I see in "fresh installs" of windows.

Personally, its either XP or 64-bit Linux for me, Mint is really quite simple. It probably runs more win 98, 2000, and XP apps than Vista or Se7en does. It is snappier, and it costs less.

I do like XP, but Linux Mint is miiiighty tempting, after all "it just works".

I have the same "upgrade" problems with Linux for anything that is not obtained via the repositories. Did the update break the libraries? Do I need to install that damn kernel patch to get that specific device to work? Will the distro version of the same program I had to manually install because the current distro didn't have that new version conflict? Do I have to set up all the RAID drivers again??

What a pain in the ass. It's what makes me stick with year-old distos. I just don't like doing it all over again.

At least I can trust that most of the programs from even MSDOS will still work in Windows. Though I must say that I trust a Linux distro to not go sour if I don't upgrade it after 5 years even.

All that said, I do loathe the (re)installation process. Good thing I only upgrade my Windows OS every half decade, and that includes reinstalls too.

I'd never prefer an upgrade install to a clean install. I don't have ANY of my data on my OS volume. So wiping that drive is exceedingly easy.

If an end user doesn't know how to back up their data they shouldn't be performing an OS install anyway.

The idea of Linux being easier for someone who can't figure out windows is laughable.

But thanks for the lame tone to an otherwise informative article.

Douche.

It is ashame that any modern OS can not be upgraded without a fresh install. Windows by design is best fresh installed, but it could have been designed to allow OS upgrades without reinstall.
If you have a lot of software, codecs, hardware, it is difficult to start with a fresh OS, I usually just start with a new machine and slowly migrate my work to the new machine, that way I keep my working machine while working on the new machine and new OS to get a working environment.

I don't think backup is essensital.

I did a clean install of win 7 rc 64-bit over win 7 rc 32-bit. I let the x64 cd boot the system & did a new install...it warned me saying "This hard-drive already consists windows etc. & the old files will be renamed to a folder named Windows.Old".

All the files from the User folder were there Documents, Music, Pictures etc.

I believe this happened even back in the days of XP.

I totally agree with you JB....Now i think i will goto a place called Grand Falls and drink beers with you ...:P

Agree whole-heartedly. The upgrade chart is utter shash, and looks like it was done so the colours would be in a pretty pattern from across the room. Get up closer and hoo-boy...train's gone off the tracks.

I believe your points were valid. "DB" must know you pretty well (and possibly have other, outstanding disagreements with you) to have lashed out in such a rigorous fashion.

Personally, of course, I don't know you from Adam - - but if you DO have these mystical, exceedingly weathly parents that can splurge on hot new hardware platforms, I'd be glad to be your pal for the hand-me-downs. :P

Good luck with your "upgrade" from Windows to Linux. I'm sure you won't have to back up all your data externally before installing that over your current OS, and all of the "applications you've accumulated" will probably just work fine with it... lol

Ultimate will cost more than pro. Therefore MS will make it easy to upgrade in place to the more expensive product and onerous to upgrade to the less product.

It is cynical, exploitative, mean spirited, and any number of other adjectives. This is M$ we are talking about, so it is not strange.

You obviously have not been in the computer industry for long have you... People (most of us at least) actually pay several thousand dollars for that software that doesn't work with Vista/Win7 when you have invested that much money in the software you will be pissed at both Microsoft and the Vendor of the software that you bought. The comment of not being in the industry for long refers to a day and age where there were no standards and everyone did their own things. So if you started with a Tandy or a Patriot system it didn't mean that it would work with an IBM compatible (what X86 used to be called a long time ago). I will admit that this backwards compatibility issue has been the bain of all software developers since time and memorial the problem still remains. People spend good money on software that allows them to make money/do their job. Having to fork out for a new version of that software every time windows comes out becomes very costly.

We are not all lucky like you who has a rich mommy and daddy to buy everything for us. We are working stiffs that make our own money and when you grow up you will understand what I'm talking about, until then know your place and don't talk adult stuff until you have reached it. Thank you for you comments though it does prove a point of what the young'ns think, you almost have the big picture but you only see the world from your perspective still.

I miss Charlie. This "news" article is trying to be funny, but its not. The upgrade table *is* funny tho, ill give you that. Then again, why would anyone want to "upgrade"? If you are competent enough to understand that there is a thing called operating system and you wish to upgrade, then you ought to be competent enough to master the "copy to external usb drive" command. If not then live with your XP/Vista or pop in the much admired Ubuntu install and upgrade. By the way, I actually use my pc to play games. No Linux distro can offer my a viable alternative and i suspect it never will.

Try to keep you pants on and write another article why Ubuntu is so great.

BTW if you favourite software/hardware does not work with Windows 7, then why the fuck do you blame Microsoft for that? Think about it, unless the VENDOR of that application/hardware is actually Microsoft, then your argument against software-hardware compatibility is retarded.

Lol.... sorry for the immature title, I had to.

Just wanted to point out to all those people convinced that a fresh install is really not that bad: when's the last time an Apple OS required a fresh install? As far as I can remember, they've supported Apple Up-To-Date upgrades to newer versions dating at least all the way back to Cheetah (Mac OS X 10.0) -- 8-9 years and counting now... Of course, nothing is better than an entirely fresh install, but its not something that should be required of users, IMO. I think Microsoft is just incapable of really manipulating their own operating systems in that way, so they take the easy route and tell people to do a fresh install. Not to mention they've got to push out a brand new OS every 2-3 years to keep people interested.

Honestly, their best course of action would've been to incrementally upgrade XP (as it's been their best OS to date, by FAR) in the same way Apple has incrementally upgraded Mac OS X. Microsoft shot themselves in the foot with Vista... why not just add in Aero, widgets, and their mediocre attempt to mimic Spotlight to XP in an update? They were pretty much the only good things to come out of Vista... I'm actually doubting Windows 7's prospects too. If it should flop, Microsoft is going to have dug themselves into a HUMONGOUS hole...

Jesus, The Inquirer is losing it again, used to be a fantastic read but honestly- what is "news" about this? How in their right mind would WANT the mess left behind of the OLD OS anyway? Clean install all the way and what is the problem with this? I bet support calls would be halved by people doing this and getting rid of the dead wood on the old system!

If you can read instructions, you can use the Microsoft Deployment Toolkit to install windows 7 and have all your old "stuff" right there. it is much quicker than the files and setting transfer thingy.

What does look strange is that you can upgrade from 'vista home premimium' to 'win 7 home premimium' or 'win 7 ultimate' BUT NOT the one in between 'win 7 Professional'?

I have a right for a couple of blue boxes for my fav. OS. ATM. XP64 is newer then XPSP2...

I'm sorry (irony) but Windows 7 is so simple to install, configure and use it is virtually moron proof, editing conf files to get a bloody display working isn't and I won't even mention the rest of the geek show, command line rubbish that you have to go through to get the most simple of things running in StfUbuntu large pelican. Try looking at things without your MS hating glasses on for a change you half wits.

What works best is my love.

In my opinion a clean install is the only way! Even if I could get hold of an upgrade version I'd find a way of doing a full install.

Recently, I decided to build a new PC. Vista was a total non-starter and retail Win7 is still not available so I decided that my 64bit quad core CPU, 4GB of RAM and Intel's x-25M SSD would be better served by Ubuntu 9.04 on an EXT4 partition. I could not be happier. It had been a long time since I ran Linux. Aside from having to edit xorg.conf to get my HDTV working, Ubuntu is a delight to use. Everything just works!
Other than Vista users, for obvious reasons, it is beyond me why anyone would want to bother "upgrading" to Win7. When it comes pre-installed on new PCs-- fine. Other than that? No thanks!

I thought there were not any upgrades in the EU so this chart is meaningless for us.

The Ubuntu install CD will resize partitions for you (without losing data) and import settings from compatible applications from your Windows profile (Firefox bookmarks for example). Your data is still accessible on the old Windows partition.
Yes, I'd call that an upgrade.

Apparently, if you get the currently available free (handling costs excepted) upgrade from Vista, that can't be applied in place for any version, because of some legal requirement. Of course, they may just be saying that, given past record of keeping courts happy with words alone.

It is confusing yes but stop your BS. There are no upgrades from Windows XP but the said are possible from Vista provided they are same versions i.e.

Home Premium Vista Home Premium 7

and tell me if you can UPGRADE from Windows to Linux without a clean install.