If possible don't use upgrade do Full Install

Topic

New Reply

Because you will carry over any noise or garbage from the previous installation. Been there done that and figured out back in 95 to 98 what was best. Backup your stuff and do Full install where you format the hard drive wiping all trash from it and get a brand new system.
You can do that even with an upgrade disk and proper Product key of course.

Backup your Pictures, Music or whatever to an external USB drive or second hard drive.
Quit using MS created Folders like MY Documents, My Pictures. Use something on the second drive and start saving everything there. If your system gets a virus or whatever most times it won’t affect the second drive.

Best part of this is if a virus or whatever gets your main drive then you can re install and still have all your stuff.

Reply | Quote

Replies

Because you will carry over any noise or garbage from the previous installation. Been there done that and figured out back in 95 to 98 what was best. Backup your stuff and do Full install where you format the hard drive wiping all trash from it and get a brand new system.
You can do that even with an upgrade disk and proper Product key of course.

Backup your Pictures, Music or whatever to an external USB drive or second hard drive.
Quit using MS created Folders like MY Documents, My Pictures. Use something on the second drive and start saving everything there. If your system gets a virus or whatever most times it won’t affect the second drive.

Best part of this is if a virus or whatever gets your main drive then you can re install and still have all your stuff.

Van Hi and welcome

I cant tell you how right you are. I have had to help ppl fix upgraded installs with blue screens, and countless other problems. Microsoft recommends it, I do and most people who support win 7 do. You are on the money with your suggestions

thnaks

Ken

Reply | Quote

My favorite way to “upgrade” to a new OS is to buy a new disk and install it there. All the old stuff is still available on the old disk. Even works for a laptop – you can get an external drive enclosure that lets you use the old drive as a USB drive. And when you decide that you have gotten everything off the drive that you want (I put mine aside for a year or more just to make sure), you can wipe the drive and have lots of extra external storage for backups and whatnot.

Reply | Quote

My favorite way to “upgrade” to a new OS is to buy a new disk and install it there. All the old stuff is still available on the old disk. Even works for a laptop – you can get an external drive enclosure that lets you use the old drive as a USB drive. And when you decide that you have gotten everything off the drive that you want (I put mine aside for a year or more just to make sure), you can wipe the drive and have lots of extra external storage for backups and whatnot.

Peter

Great ideas and thanks

Ken Johnston

Reply | Quote

When you install a new OS, install it into its own partition. Keep all your user data on the other partition(s). Then when you next install an OS, you only need to format the primary partition to install the OS ‘fresh’. All your data is still intact on the other partition(s). Save much messing around backing up your data for a reinstall. But it does not negate the need to regularly backup your data somewhere safe.

Reply | Quote

Your advise is mostly nonsense. By your own admission, you are basing your advise on experience that is over a decade old. Any quirks that successfully get migrated by an in-place upgrade are, almost by definition, configuration quirks and one could easily claim that such quirks can easily be corrected and/or that they will quickly be reintroduced even with a clean install.

The bottom line is that a in-place upgrade MIGHT migrate a quirk or problem that MIGHT require a reinstall of the OS.

A clean install will ALWAYS require the re-installation, reconfiguration and re-updating of ALL applications with the attendant problems of finding source material and re-licensing or reregistration.

The proper preparation for an in-place upgrade fully prepares one for doing a clean install should it become necessary. There is almost nothing to be lost in an in-place upgrade attempt. In most cases it works just fine. In those cases where it does not, little has been lost beyond a couple hours spent watching the in-place upgrade attempt.

BTW, your advise to use a separate drive for user data storage has merit. Your advise to stop using the Microsoft designated folders does not.

Reply | Quote

Your advise is mostly nonsense. By your own admission, you are basing your advise on experience that is over a decade old. Any quirks that successfully get migrated by an in-place upgrade are, almost by definition, configuration quirks and one could easily claim that such quirks can easily be corrected and/or that they will quickly be reintroduced even with a clean install.

I posted this cause within first 15 posts here are so many upgrade and now problems

Wrong, been there done that(experience) means a lot more than following MS like a blind rat. MS can’t even get their help documentation correct and I’m gonna blindly follow them? not me

With Win 7 I thought I’d give upgrade a try since I had my backup on external drive and went for a Vista 64 to Seven 64 just to see if anything improved and first thing was my actual installed backup drive was not readable. I tried everything under the sun like icacls, Take ownership to regain permissions and so forth. What was MS help to say, convert to ms type Dynamic drive, well rest is history lost what I had on that drive. I wouldn’t use that MS Dynamic drive type either make it a basic.

Yes requires a little work collecting your drivers and saving them off but whats the worse happen. Worst case is Win don’t recognize a new type Sata drive where you need drivers on a floppy/usb or either injected into the install. Or maybe if it recognizes your drives on 7 you hit the desktop and screen resolution is 640 x 480. Either let WU find a driver or install from backup drive. You can inject all Drivers and Update’s into your install media with Dism

Reply | Quote

I totally agree with the clean instal over an upgrade. Too many potential issues in an upgrade instalation of an os.

Not everone has a system in A1 shape prior to upgrade. Many might not even realize they have a issue until the
upgrade fails or produces funky/unintended results.

Reply | Quote

I totally agree with the clean instal over an upgrade. Too many potential issues in an upgrade instalation of an os.

Not everone has a system in A1 shape prior to upgrade. Many might not even realize they have a issue until the
upgrade fails or produces funky/unintended results.

I am with Clint

These are one of those “holy wars” which can never be won but the un intended consequences of an “in place” upgrade might not manifest themself for days, weeks,etc. Wouldnt you then have to do a clean install anyway?

Clean installs only for me.

Reply | Quote

As stated in many other posts, I am also in the clean install camp. Chet, perhaps because of your routines, perhaps in place upgrade works for you and that’s great, but for the unlimited less informed or less experienced users, who do not have or know how to obtain pristine PCs before an in place upgrade, that option is fraught with pitfalls. There are way more problems for those people than solutions. I am not necessarily stating a format should be done before the clean install, although that is one possible senario that would work. You would have to ensure your data is available, but a clean install over your existing OS actually helps to save your data because it creates a folder called windows.old which contains your entire old OS. This folder can be opened and data dragged to the new OS. Obviously, if you have significant problems with the old OS, then a reformat would most likely help to resolve software problems. To conclude, in my opinion, for the vast majority of people out there, a clean install is a safer option, and as stated by others, the time involved is less than you might expect. The time you would take to clean up the old OS to allow a successful in place upgrade could be better used getting the newer drivers for the new OS. This will ensure the latest and greatest for your brand new OS.

Reply | Quote

Thought about this and changed the title to ‘If possible don’t use upgrade do Full Install’

I use the format myself. My first PC was probably formatted 150 times and it still running. Someone plays the old windows games I had on it. And yes after someone has a PC awhile and installing updates out the Kazoo before they released a SP a PC will become very congested. If I remember correctly there was like 88+ on XP before first SP. I count 27 updates for 7 64 bit since it was released in my Updates folder I add into my installations.

I know some are not tech savvy and might not know the difference between an update and a driver but most have family or a friend who is a computer wiz that probably uses these methods.

I started with XP and developed a program where it does all these things for you by something called Unattended. Injects updates, drivers, and adds all my applications including serial, registration and so forth. Doesn’t take that much knowledge if you can read.
I didn’t come here to promote that but I had been reading WS for awhile and finally have a little time to look over their forums.

Reply | Quote

When I upgraded to Win 7 Pro from Vista Ultimate last November, I too wanted to start afresh. However I did an upgrade because I had two pieces of software that I knew which could not re-install and successfully register for another time. I already had my data on a separate partition. Thus I purchased the laplink software to copy over specific applications and upgraded that way. It was the best compromise that I could do.

It has worked out very well and I have no regrets.

Having said that, if I did not need the two applications, I would have done a fresh install.

Reply | Quote

I can’t really add much to my reasons for recommending the in-place upgrade over the clean install upgrade. I believe the former offers an excellent chance of success, especially for the naive user who would have difficulty navigating the hazards of trying to reinstall, reconfigure, re-update and re-register each and every application they own. There is no doubt in my mind that an in-place upgrade is the far simpler process for the user and the only reasons being offered here for a clean install upgrade are based on an imagined POSSIBLE problem.

A fresh start, such as is provided a reinstall of everything, may have some merit in some circumstances but such an undertaking can be done at any time including anytime after an upgrade, should a user feel it might be necessary or beneficial. It is simply not true that it is necessary or even desirable for everyone and complicating an upgrade with the complexities of a clean install seems a very poor general recommendation.

All that aside, I think it is worthwhile pointing out that both mechanisms are an ‘upgrade’. As far as I know, all earlier versions of Windows are eligible for an upgrade and the only time a full Windows 7 package must be purchased is if it is destined for a newly created system such as a home build. Both the current and former title of this thread, and some of the posts, may be misleading.

Reply | Quote

I feel there are plenty of situations where upgrading is a reasonable choice. And as Sunrisecc reports, it certainly can work. As I understand it, you can’t really upgrade from anything but Vista, right? Upgrading from XP is really a clean install with settings copied across, and then apps migrated. I think that’s correct, please tell me if not. Seems that XP-to-7 is going to be the big upgrade. In my limited experience any maching that will run XP well, will run 7 just as well.

But I digress…in the end my opinion is that for the regular home user an upgrade is fine. I’ve spent far too much time in areas like the Adobe user forums, and odd problems can sometimes be traced back to OS upgrades. But, that crowd is using specialty fonts, and complicated software suites generally. So who knows.

What I want is a Win 7 Upgrade Advisor that doesn’t require a live Internet connection.

Reply | Quote

Sunrisecc,
Everything can be captured using something like Installwatch Pro to track the changes.
Even do MS Office since it came with PC and once done it’s updated with all updates.

Chet,
I don’t do upgrades except for others need my help on their machine and want to do that because they afraid of losing their pics and stuff but I explain all these things to them. Catch a bad enough virus you lose everything also a lot of times so it’s the same. Never had any luck removing viruses or rather don’t trust it’s gone, best way is format and start over to insure clean machine, simple.
Keep your stuff backed up which is most important to something external… before the virii get you.

I format and start over each time and haven’t lost anything from any of my applications. Firefox- all my stuff, Thunderbird- all my stuff and the 20 to 60 other things I use. Have done hundreds of installs cause i need to see exactly whats going on for my Unattended tests. Virtual Machine wasn’t worth a darn till recently but it’s still lacking and doesn’t support all hardware

Reply | Quote

Sunrisecc,
Everything can be captured using something like Installwatch Pro to track the changes.

Kinda hard to capture an installtion done many years ago. Also a re-install would work but there was an online rehistration process that is no longer available. It is not like MS Money where registration is no longer needed. The accounting package still works and there no need to convert it to a newer software.

All I am saying, that a blanket statement is nice in principle but that there are also many outside factors. The laplink software preserved the two online registrations required that I could no longer perform.

Reply | Quote

Kinda hard to capture an installtion done many years ago. Also a re-install would work but there was an online rehistration process that is no longer available. It is not like MS Money where registration is no longer needed. The accounting package still works and there no need to convert it to a newer software.

All I am saying, that a bkanket statement is nice in principle but that there are also many outside factors. The laplink software preserved the two online registrations required that I could no longer perform.

I understand that fully. But if that thing got hit by a Virrii then what would you do?

An important machine at work was hit by one because they have to have Inet access so it will do certain things under what I call a stupid program called SAP, has been a nightmare here since they went to this junk. Well with Inet access that means any person could click and go as they please and some operator did just that infecting the thing. I spent countless hours trying to restore that thing and finally gave up and opted for a fresh install. Spent another few day’s looking at backup of old hard drive before I recovered it where it will work again. I compared the registry stuff and all files from new versus old and was able to figure it out. That’s the need to know what needs to be backed up. It now is.

Reply | Quote

Chet,

Quoting statements from your two posts:

“Your advise is mostly nonsense.”

“….the only reasons being offered here for a clean install upgrade are based on an imagined POSSIBLE problem.” (italics are mine)

“It is simply not true that it is necessary or even desirable for everyone and complicating an upgrade with the complexities of a clean install seems a very poor general recommendation.”

“All that aside, I think it is worthwhile pointing out that both mechanisms are an ‘upgrade’. As far as I know, all earlier versions of Windows are eligible for an upgrade and the only time a full Windows 7 package must be purchased is if it is destined for a newly created system such as a home build. Both the current and former title of this thread, and some of the posts, may be misleading.”

First, the chosen words and tone of some remarks is a violation of Lounge Rule 9. Courtesy is a necessary ingredient in encouraging the free flow of ideas, and I am certain that is something we all want here.

Second, the context of “upgrade” in this thread makes it clear that the difference of opinion is in regard to “in place” versus “custom install” upgrades, both of which can be performed using the upgrade editions of Windows 7. There is merit to both sides of this issue, however regardless of the reasons, there are many who have had difficulties with the “in place” upgrade process. Fortunately, not everyone has had a negative experience with the “in place” upgrade option.

Reply | Quote

Chet,

Quoting statements from your two posts:

“Snip……

First, the chosen words and tone of some remarks is a violation of Lounge Rule 9. Courtesy is a necessary ingredient in encouraging the free flow of ideas, and I am certain that is something we all want here.

Second, the context of “upgrade” in this thread makes it clear that the difference of opinion is in regard to “in place” versus “custom install” upgrades, both of which can be performed using the upgrade editions of Windows 7. There is merit to both sides of this issue, however regardless of the reasons, there are many who have had difficulties with the “in place” upgrade process. Fortunately, not everyone has had a negative experience with the “in place” upgrade option.

I wanted to make the point that the original post should not be taken as an absolute and that there are very reasonable arguments to be made on behalf of an in-place upgrade. I get tired of people passing on outdated or second hand information that may never have been accurate and doing so as if it was true in some absolute manner. An opinion that a clean install is preferable is quite reasonable and invites a reasonable and reasoned response. An absolute statement that one should never never never do an in-place upgrade is a challenge worthy of a similar response.

The arguments against an in-place upgrade are based on little experience since there are really very few who have wide personal experience with either form of upgrade. The argument that a support type person sees many examples of failed in-place upgrade attempts (or reads about them online) is not a valid argument. For the most part, the only upgrade attempts that one hears about are those with problems. I have no hesitation conceding that a clean install will most often result in a successful creation ow a clean OS but the secondary problems associated with re-implimentation of the applications will frequently result in problems that service personel are unlikely to hear about. The opinion of people is heavily biased by what they see. A story I like to tell (or liked to tell before Toyota fell from grace) is about a person shopping for a new car. He goes to the Toyota dealership and observes that it has large and busy repair department busy repairing broken Toyotas. His conclusion is that Toyotas must be unreliable junk. The response to this story would usually be a rapid jump to the defence of Toyota by someone who was likely a Toyota owner. He would no doubt upbraid me by pointing out the falacy of my conclusion and citing the renowned reputation of Toyota for reliability. That’s not so likely to happen these days but both the conclusion that Toyota is unreliable junk because of what is observed in the repair department AND the conclusion that it is super reliable because of its reputation, are faulty conclusions (as recently demonstrated).

As for the possible misunderstanding of the term “upgrade” I suggest there is a real possibility of a misunderstanding as demonstrated by the post John Oliphant immediately following my last post.

Reply | Quote

”I get tired of people passing on outdated or second hand information that may never have been accurate and doing so as if it was true in some absolute manner. An opinion that a clean install is preferable is quite reasonable and invites a reasonable and reasoned response. An absolute statement that one should never never never do an in-place upgrade is a challenge worthy of a similar response.”

“The arguments against an in-place upgrade are based on little experience since there are really very few who have wide personal experience with either form of upgrade. The argument that a support type person sees many examples of failed in-place upgrade attempts (or reads about them online) is not a valid argument. For the most part, the only upgrade attempts that one hears about are those with problems.”

If you go back to the last thread you started on this subject, and reread many of the posts here, very few advocate this as an absolute. In my case, and keep in mind that I’m not bragging or trying to show off, but I’ve been in IT for 15 years supporting Windows workstations and servers. So not only do I have experience, I also have not just “read about them online”. I have actually done more “upgrades” than I can remember. Of late we have attempted a number of Win7 upgrades to see if there was merit to doing in place upgrades as opposed to re-imaging machines. In the case of Win7, and past versions of Windows combined I’d say the failure rate is about 30%. That doesn’t mean they all blew up immediately after the process completed, but many after a few days or weeks exhibited issues that were traced back to the previous OS. That to me is a failure. Given your Toyota illustration, if Toyotas failed 30% of the time, would you call them junk? Would you buy one?

My point being is that I simply don’t have the time to test each and every machine for its ability to upgrade (think 30% of 1000+ machines). I will not disagree that the issues are caused by problems in the previous OS to begin with. But therein lies the very reason a clean install is the recommended course of action. There is no real way to know if a given machine will have a successful in-place upgrade, especially when dealing with a question from someone on a Internet forum. So for me, I guess don’t need a valid argument, I already know that the better course of action is a clean install. Again, I agree that a successful in-place upgrade is certainly possible, but given the percentages of failure I’ve seen over the years, the odds are not good enough to make me think its always the right way to go.

As Gerald already stated, its really best to agree to disagree on this.

Reply | Quote

@veegertx

#1 – I can over-install with nary a problem. I just cannot do a fresh install.

#2 – I do weekly image backups (automated to an external drive) and would just go back a week if I have to.

#3 – I practice safe hex. I use my 10 year old XP Pro computer to walk on the wild side. LOL

The laplink program cost me $20 US per computer and saved me hours of work. I have used it on quite a few upgrades for my client’s computers when preservation was required. It is a lot easier than getting the client to remember what specifc settings they have etc. And cost-effective too.

I also have one client who never can find the original cds. I cannot re-install in that case.

Reply | Quote

Quote: “As for the possible misunderstanding of the term “upgrade” I suggest there is a real possibility of a misunderstanding as demonstrated by the post John Oliphant immediately following my last post.”

I am sorry Chet, but I see no grounds for misunderstanding when I read John Oliphant’s post (“you can’t really upgrade from anything but Vista, right?”) in context with Sunrisecc’s post #10. In this reference to upgrading he refers to Vista, and in this he is writing of an “in place” upgrade, which can be done in Vista. His next reference is to XP where he writes that it can only be upgraded with a “clean install” which is essentially the “custom install” MS offers in setup. John’s terminology is just a little different in this reference, but the idea is clear.

Reading each post in its context within a thread is vital to avoid misunderstanding.

And here too, we can agree to disagree.

Reply | Quote

Chet, what did I misunderstand?

-JohnO

Reply | Quote

Once again I have to agree with Gerald. In my original post to this thread, my comment was that for the average user that does not have the experience to keep their PCs in pristine condition (I am paraphrasing here because I do not want to quote my original post, just the original thought) will have a higher probability of bringing problems with them to the new OS while using the in place upgrade. These users have a far better chance of success by using the custom clean install. And yes Chet I do have experience with these users having me help them through the pitfalls associated with attempting the in place upgrade. I have spent hours trying to fix these “upgrades” and have concluded that I will only recommendd clean installs. Most of the readers of these forums are more experienced Pc users, not the users I am refering to. The vast majority of PC users do not read these, or any forums on how to use or fix their PCs. They blindly go along and do not have a clue why their systems are going so slow. Unfortunately these users propogate problems to others without even knowing they are doing this. These inexperienced usesr see that the inplace upgrade is easier and choose this method without having any idea what could happen or why the upgrade did not fix their problems.

I’m happy that the in place upgrade worked for you and any others that were successful using this method, but I have heard many more horror stories and have worked with many more problems from this method.

Sorry for the long rant!!!

Reply | Quote