Upgrading W2K to XP2446
Just tried to upgrade my W2k box with the new 2446 beta, but it didn't work. Not tragic, can do a full install but I wonder what goes wrong / if anybody has succeeded with an upgrade install and has some tips.
Just tried to upgrade my W2k box with the new 2446 beta, but it didn't work. Not tragic, can do a full install but I wonder what goes wrong / if anybody has succeeded with an upgrade install and has some tips.
Here what happens:
Started the upgrade install (from within W2K) starts fine, boots, copies the files, boots ... boot menu (dual boot to Dos7, just as it was with w2k) starts, flashes the new intro screen, and BAM, blue screen saying it stopped to prevent damage to the hardware, blah blah, blah. As I said, install from scratch works just fine.
Here's the essential hardware:
ABIT KA7-100
Athlon 800 @800
128 MB of PC100 SDRAM
128 MB of PC133 SDRAM
IBM 45GB -7200 rpm ATA100
IBM 27GB -7200 rpm ATA66 (boot drive during install)
Advansys SCSI Controller
SCSI Jaz drive
Matrox Millennium G400 DH
Asus 50x CD-R
Ricoh 7060A CD-RW
Soundblaster Live! 1024
3COM Dynalink 3C905C-TX-M NIC
Here what happens:
Started the upgrade install (from within W2K) starts fine, boots, copies the files, boots ... boot menu (dual boot to Dos7, just as it was with w2k) starts, flashes the new intro screen, and BAM, blue screen saying it stopped to prevent damage to the hardware, blah blah, blah. As I said, install from scratch works just fine.
Here's the essential hardware:
ABIT KA7-100
Athlon 800 @800
128 MB of PC100 SDRAM
128 MB of PC133 SDRAM
IBM 45GB -7200 rpm ATA100
IBM 27GB -7200 rpm ATA66 (boot drive during install)
Advansys SCSI Controller
SCSI Jaz drive
Matrox Millennium G400 DH
Asus 50x CD-R
Ricoh 7060A CD-RW
Soundblaster Live! 1024
3COM Dynalink 3C905C-TX-M NIC
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
Quote:<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by jdulmage:
oh god, and you wonder why nobody posted back? hehe
</font>
Hardly time for that, it took you all of 27 minutes to post back.
Sure,a clean install of an OS is the way to go, and for a "permanent" install I'd choose that route too.But still, an upgrade should work, at least to some degree as long as it is offered as an option in the setup. When you just want to test out a new beta, it is kinda practical not having to install a lot of apps too. At least it would be easier that way. And it worked with several W2K betas I recall...
I'm still curious if it has something to do with the dual boot to DOS 7 or my hardware, anyone out there who has succeeded with a upgrade - pls post.
H.
oh god, and you wonder why nobody posted back? hehe
</font>
Hardly time for that, it took you all of 27 minutes to post back.
Sure,a clean install of an OS is the way to go, and for a "permanent" install I'd choose that route too.But still, an upgrade should work, at least to some degree as long as it is offered as an option in the setup. When you just want to test out a new beta, it is kinda practical not having to install a lot of apps too. At least it would be easier that way. And it worked with several W2K betas I recall...
I'm still curious if it has something to do with the dual boot to DOS 7 or my hardware, anyone out there who has succeeded with a upgrade - pls post.
H.
Well, if youve got a mix of NTFS and FAT32 parititions, that could be part of the problem. Id heard that XP could be used with NTFS or FAT32, just like Win2k.
You could do a dual-,or triple-boot with XP.
That might work if you do a clean install on a separate partition-if possible. Thats the way to go.
Upgrades, even in full OS arent as good as a full, clean install-even on multi-boot configurations.
Multi-boot is the best option.
You could do a dual-,or triple-boot with XP.
That might work if you do a clean install on a separate partition-if possible. Thats the way to go.
Upgrades, even in full OS arent as good as a full, clean install-even on multi-boot configurations.
Multi-boot is the best option.
Brian, sorry for being unclear, but my problem isn't really about how to conduct an upgrade, but thanks for the comments anyhow.
What I'm trying to figure out is why and what kills my attempt to upgrade a specific W2K system with XP 2446, when a clean install of XP2446 on the SAME box works just fine. That sort of excludes hardware and partitioning problems. Why is it XP is so picky about installed software, before the real install even starts? Or maybe some of my drivers are incompatible. Or whatever, time for bed now.
[This message has been edited by Dirty Harry (edited 12 March 2001).]
What I'm trying to figure out is why and what kills my attempt to upgrade a specific W2K system with XP 2446, when a clean install of XP2446 on the SAME box works just fine. That sort of excludes hardware and partitioning problems. Why is it XP is so picky about installed software, before the real install even starts? Or maybe some of my drivers are incompatible. Or whatever, time for bed now.
[This message has been edited by Dirty Harry (edited 12 March 2001).]
Quote:<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by EddiE314:
most people WILL agree not to ever upgrade an OS.</font>
Sure, me too, but apparently most guys in Redmond don't agree as they build their OS with that option.
Seriously, I do a fresh install fairly often, and for a "permanent" system I would recommend anyone to do so.
Still I wonder wtf 2446 refuses to upgrade and if an upgrade has worked for anyone ?
H.
most people WILL agree not to ever upgrade an OS.</font>
Sure, me too, but apparently most guys in Redmond don't agree as they build their OS with that option.
Seriously, I do a fresh install fairly often, and for a "permanent" system I would recommend anyone to do so.
Still I wonder wtf 2446 refuses to upgrade and if an upgrade has worked for anyone ?
H.
I suspect the main reason that doesn't work is because one of your Win2k drivers doesn't work so well in the new XP environment. I remember upgrading from 2K to 2296 worked fine, but after that, it's BSOD hell if I tried it with any later builds.
Usually, BSODs mean driver problems. However, when the RC's come out, MS will probably work towards virtually every Win2k driver working in XP as it did in 2K.
Usually, BSODs mean driver problems. However, when the RC's come out, MS will probably work towards virtually every Win2k driver working in XP as it did in 2K.
Thanks Hit and Vampyr,
now I know it can be done and can keep on wasting my time on the exercise. Maybe I nuke out a few suspect drivers (soundblaster to start with) and try again next weekend.
H.
now I know it can be done and can keep on wasting my time on the exercise. Maybe I nuke out a few suspect drivers (soundblaster to start with) and try again next weekend.
H.