Vista for XP64er's

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by =?Utf-8?B?cmFoY29t?=, Feb 23, 2007.

  1. Why would MS leave us xp64 bitter's out in the cold when it comes to upgrades
    for Vista? I do not want to lose information just to get a Vista OS. Didn't
    MS think about this? )of course they did( ...and decided our 'small' end of
    their vast OS universe just isn't that critical to their bottom line.
    Wouldn't you think, those which have the capability to run xp64 would most
    likely purchase the most expensive consumer version OS ever placed into the
    recent market? For shame, for shame...
    :(

    Sure we are capable of imaging, backups, installs, etc. Then why not reduce
    the price for xp64er's due to the one midigating fact; the extra time
    involved to perform an upgrade (or in our case, a new install) and have to
    re-install all our programs, documents, peripherals, and settings, etc. As MS
    knows time is money and to make us perform these extra steps because they are
    not willing (or capable) to producing a product that offers the same options
    as other, equally well suited customers.

    MS--not really taking their customers into concideration--here. Not to
    mention our original purchase of, and subsiquent use of xp64 has also helped
    in the development of current OS (Vista) through error reporting, feedback
    response, and the such.

    This sure is making a clear case for opting out of MS and moving to
    something else: MAC, Linux. Which are two very capable solutions to an MS
    mountain, and its current mis-directed devotion to the customer. Sometimes
    mountains turn into valcanos, and when they eventully erupt, most certainly
    they become much a lessor hill. Has MS become a valcano?

    I do not expect to receive anything for my rants; certainly not any
    solutions to my requests. (Those MAC commercials are very convincing) Can you
    say request, accept, deny.

    -----
    Bob
    =?Utf-8?B?cmFoY29t?=, Feb 23, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. We've talked about this before here, and the case has been pretty clearly
    stated. The single biggest reason is the need for signed drivers which would
    cause direct upgrades to fail all too often.

    Now, that being said, most of us who have been around for a while do NOT
    recommend doing an upgrade anyway. It's just not how you want to start life
    on a new OS, with all that old detritus hanging around. Finally, the new
    Windows Easy Transfer (WET) is MUCH better than the old Files and Settings
    Transfer Wizard. Use it, and you won't lose much at all. Of course, make a
    backup, that goes without saying. But I've done several and it's not painful
    at all.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/xperts64


    "rahcom" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Why would MS leave us xp64 bitter's out in the cold when it comes to
    > upgrades
    > for Vista? I do not want to lose information just to get a Vista OS.
    > Didn't
    > MS think about this? )of course they did( ...and decided our 'small' end
    > of
    > their vast OS universe just isn't that critical to their bottom line.
    > Wouldn't you think, those which have the capability to run xp64 would most
    > likely purchase the most expensive consumer version OS ever placed into
    > the
    > recent market? For shame, for shame...
    > :(
    >
    > Sure we are capable of imaging, backups, installs, etc. Then why not
    > reduce
    > the price for xp64er's due to the one midigating fact; the extra time
    > involved to perform an upgrade (or in our case, a new install) and have to
    > re-install all our programs, documents, peripherals, and settings, etc. As
    > MS
    > knows time is money and to make us perform these extra steps because they
    > are
    > not willing (or capable) to producing a product that offers the same
    > options
    > as other, equally well suited customers.
    >
    > MS--not really taking their customers into concideration--here. Not to
    > mention our original purchase of, and subsiquent use of xp64 has also
    > helped
    > in the development of current OS (Vista) through error reporting, feedback
    > response, and the such.
    >
    > This sure is making a clear case for opting out of MS and moving to
    > something else: MAC, Linux. Which are two very capable solutions to an MS
    > mountain, and its current mis-directed devotion to the customer. Sometimes
    > mountains turn into valcanos, and when they eventully erupt, most
    > certainly
    > they become much a lessor hill. Has MS become a valcano?
    >
    > I do not expect to receive anything for my rants; certainly not any
    > solutions to my requests. (Those MAC commercials are very convincing) Can
    > you
    > say request, accept, deny.
    >
    > -----
    > Bob
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Feb 23, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Charlie,
    Great, then why does MS offer upgrade options to current OS's, based on your
    statements:
    >'Now, that being said, most of us who have been around for a while do NOT
    > recommend doing an upgrade anyway. It's just not how you want to start life
    > on a new OS, with all that old detritus hanging around.'

    From a customer, also of many, many years(Do you remember Windows1.0): MS
    and your statements would appear to offset the other.
    Also, based on your response, it appears MS did not do their homework
    regarding the customer, marketing Vista, and driving a clear understanding of
    which version of Vista is the
    version. Now, do we get the upgrade or
    the full version of one of the following: Vista Basic, Vista Home, Vista Home
    Premium, Vista Business, Vista Business Premium, Vista Ultimate, or was that
    the Vista Ultimate Premium Business, and would that be in the 32bit or 64bit
    flavor. Are you beginning to see the confusion and frustration(?), from a
    long time, and loyal MS customer point of view, of course. We are not alone
    on thisl MS has reminded us of the true dictionary definitions of the words:
    confusion and frustration.
    --
    Bob


    "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

    > We've talked about this before here, and the case has been pretty clearly
    > stated. The single biggest reason is the need for signed drivers which would
    > cause direct upgrades to fail all too often.
    >
    > Now, that being said, most of us who have been around for a while do NOT
    > recommend doing an upgrade anyway. It's just not how you want to start life
    > on a new OS, with all that old detritus hanging around. Finally, the new
    > Windows Easy Transfer (WET) is MUCH better than the old Files and Settings
    > Transfer Wizard. Use it, and you won't lose much at all. Of course, make a
    > backup, that goes without saying. But I've done several and it's not painful
    > at all.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >
    >
    > "rahcom" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Why would MS leave us xp64 bitter's out in the cold when it comes to
    > > upgrades
    > > for Vista? I do not want to lose information just to get a Vista OS.
    > > Didn't
    > > MS think about this? )of course they did( ...and decided our 'small' end
    > > of
    > > their vast OS universe just isn't that critical to their bottom line.
    > > Wouldn't you think, those which have the capability to run xp64 would most
    > > likely purchase the most expensive consumer version OS ever placed into
    > > the
    > > recent market? For shame, for shame...
    > > :(
    > >
    > > Sure we are capable of imaging, backups, installs, etc. Then why not
    > > reduce
    > > the price for xp64er's due to the one midigating fact; the extra time
    > > involved to perform an upgrade (or in our case, a new install) and have to
    > > re-install all our programs, documents, peripherals, and settings, etc. As
    > > MS
    > > knows time is money and to make us perform these extra steps because they
    > > are
    > > not willing (or capable) to producing a product that offers the same
    > > options
    > > as other, equally well suited customers.
    > >
    > > MS--not really taking their customers into concideration--here. Not to
    > > mention our original purchase of, and subsiquent use of xp64 has also
    > > helped
    > > in the development of current OS (Vista) through error reporting, feedback
    > > response, and the such.
    > >
    > > This sure is making a clear case for opting out of MS and moving to
    > > something else: MAC, Linux. Which are two very capable solutions to an MS
    > > mountain, and its current mis-directed devotion to the customer. Sometimes
    > > mountains turn into valcanos, and when they eventully erupt, most
    > > certainly
    > > they become much a lessor hill. Has MS become a valcano?
    > >
    > > I do not expect to receive anything for my rants; certainly not any
    > > solutions to my requests. (Those MAC commercials are very convincing) Can
    > > you
    > > say request, accept, deny.
    > >
    > > -----
    > > Bob

    >
    =?Utf-8?B?cmFoY29t?=, Feb 23, 2007
    #3
  4. =?Utf-8?B?cmFoY29t?=

    DP Guest

    "rahcom" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > Sure we are capable of imaging, backups, installs, etc. Then why not
    > reduce
    > the price for xp64er's .......



    Actually, they have, in a way. This has been discussed a lot in this group
    and on planetamd64.com .
    As an x64 user, you can buy an upgrade version of Vista, which of course is
    cheaper than the "full" version.
    You still have to do a clean install, but at least you pay the upgrade
    price.

    I have not tried that myself. I simply bought an OEM version of Vista
    Ultimate 64-bit for $200 from New Egg.
    This is legitimate: it's not like those sites that are selling OEM for $79.
    MS issued an edict recently about who can buy Vista OEM. I can probably find
    it if you need to see it. Of course, OEM means you don't get MS technical
    support. So, if you're computer savvy and don't usually have to call tech
    support (I only remember calling MS tech support once in my life), then this
    might be the way you want to go.

    I installed my Vista last night. Works like a charm. Still had to go through
    all the driver headaches, but I had it up and running in a matter of hours.
    I would have had to do the same thing if I'd clean-installed from the
    upgrade copy, so I don't see that as a big chunk of time.

    Besides, that means I still have a legitimate license on XP x64, so I'm dual
    booting (I'm writing this from X64 simply because that happened to be the OS
    I booted up in.)
    DP, Feb 23, 2007
    #4
  5. =?Utf-8?B?cmFoY29t?=

    DP Guest

    "DP" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > I installed my Vista last night. Works like a charm. Still had to go
    > through all the driver headaches, but I had it up and running in a matter
    > of hours.


    Sorry. I meant, I had all the drivers in place in a matter of hours. The OS
    was up and running immediately after the install was complete.
    DP, Feb 23, 2007
    #5
  6. =?Utf-8?B?cmFoY29t?=

    BSchnur Guest

    > Now, that being said, most of us who have been around for a while do NOT
    > recommend doing an upgrade anyway. It's just not how you want to start life
    > on a new OS, with all that old detritus hanging around. Finally, the new
    > Windows Easy Transfer (WET) is MUCH better than the old Files and Settings
    > Transfer Wizard. Use it, and you won't lose much at all. Of course, make a
    > backup, that goes without saying. But I've done several and it's not painful
    > at all.


    You mean I can upgrade in place from Win 3.1 to Win 95 to Win 98 to Win
    ME to Win XP to Win XP 64 to Vista XP 64... Bummer....
    >
    >


    --
    Barry Schnur
    BSchnur, Feb 23, 2007
    #6
  7. Excuse me, but I am NOT Microsoft. My recommendations are not theirs. They
    officially support upgrades. Good. That's their position, and they stick to
    it. But they do not now, nor have they ever, promised or supported an
    upgrade from XP x64 or any other version of Windows to 64-bit Windows Vista.

    I see no confusion about versions. MS has been quite clear about what
    version is what, and the upgrade paths are both clear and pretty logical. MS
    doesn't support a direct upgrade path from home versions to business
    versions. Nor the other direction. Might not be my choice, but that's
    _their_ decision. I need to buy the right version and they've made that
    quite clear, if you take the time to actually read it.

    Do your homework and stop trying to make claims about versions that don't
    even exist. This isn't exactly hard to figure out.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/xperts64


    "rahcom" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Charlie,
    > Great, then why does MS offer upgrade options to current OS's, based on
    > your
    > statements:
    >>'Now, that being said, most of us who have been around for a while do NOT
    >> recommend doing an upgrade anyway. It's just not how you want to start
    >> life
    >> on a new OS, with all that old detritus hanging around.'

    > From a customer, also of many, many years(Do you remember Windows1.0): MS
    > and your statements would appear to offset the other.
    > Also, based on your response, it appears MS did not do their homework
    > regarding the customer, marketing Vista, and driving a clear understanding
    > of
    > which version of Vista is the
    version. Now, do we get the upgrade
    > or
    > the full version of one of the following: Vista Basic, Vista Home, Vista
    > Home
    > Premium, Vista Business, Vista Business Premium, Vista Ultimate, or was
    > that
    > the Vista Ultimate Premium Business, and would that be in the 32bit or
    > 64bit
    > flavor. Are you beginning to see the confusion and frustration(?), from a
    > long time, and loyal MS customer point of view, of course. We are not
    > alone
    > on thisl MS has reminded us of the true dictionary definitions of the
    > words:
    > confusion and frustration.
    > --
    > Bob
    >
    >
    > "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
    >
    >> We've talked about this before here, and the case has been pretty clearly
    >> stated. The single biggest reason is the need for signed drivers which
    >> would
    >> cause direct upgrades to fail all too often.
    >>
    >> Now, that being said, most of us who have been around for a while do NOT
    >> recommend doing an upgrade anyway. It's just not how you want to start
    >> life
    >> on a new OS, with all that old detritus hanging around. Finally, the new
    >> Windows Easy Transfer (WET) is MUCH better than the old Files and
    >> Settings
    >> Transfer Wizard. Use it, and you won't lose much at all. Of course, make
    >> a
    >> backup, that goes without saying. But I've done several and it's not
    >> painful
    >> at all.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.
    >> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >>
    >>
    >> "rahcom" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > Why would MS leave us xp64 bitter's out in the cold when it comes to
    >> > upgrades
    >> > for Vista? I do not want to lose information just to get a Vista OS.
    >> > Didn't
    >> > MS think about this? )of course they did( ...and decided our 'small'
    >> > end
    >> > of
    >> > their vast OS universe just isn't that critical to their bottom line.
    >> > Wouldn't you think, those which have the capability to run xp64 would
    >> > most
    >> > likely purchase the most expensive consumer version OS ever placed into
    >> > the
    >> > recent market? For shame, for shame...
    >> > :(
    >> >
    >> > Sure we are capable of imaging, backups, installs, etc. Then why not
    >> > reduce
    >> > the price for xp64er's due to the one midigating fact; the extra time
    >> > involved to perform an upgrade (or in our case, a new install) and have
    >> > to
    >> > re-install all our programs, documents, peripherals, and settings, etc.
    >> > As
    >> > MS
    >> > knows time is money and to make us perform these extra steps because
    >> > they
    >> > are
    >> > not willing (or capable) to producing a product that offers the same
    >> > options
    >> > as other, equally well suited customers.
    >> >
    >> > MS--not really taking their customers into concideration--here. Not to
    >> > mention our original purchase of, and subsiquent use of xp64 has also
    >> > helped
    >> > in the development of current OS (Vista) through error reporting,
    >> > feedback
    >> > response, and the such.
    >> >
    >> > This sure is making a clear case for opting out of MS and moving to
    >> > something else: MAC, Linux. Which are two very capable solutions to an
    >> > MS
    >> > mountain, and its current mis-directed devotion to the customer.
    >> > Sometimes
    >> > mountains turn into valcanos, and when they eventully erupt, most
    >> > certainly
    >> > they become much a lessor hill. Has MS become a valcano?
    >> >
    >> > I do not expect to receive anything for my rants; certainly not any
    >> > solutions to my requests. (Those MAC commercials are very convincing)
    >> > Can
    >> > you
    >> > say request, accept, deny.
    >> >
    >> > -----
    >> > Bob

    >>
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Feb 26, 2007
    #7
  8. yeah. Assuming you meant but didn't type "can't". Bummer.

    Do you really want all that crap still on there?

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/xperts64


    "BSchnur" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >> Now, that being said, most of us who have been around for a while do NOT
    >> recommend doing an upgrade anyway. It's just not how you want to start
    >> life
    >> on a new OS, with all that old detritus hanging around. Finally, the new
    >> Windows Easy Transfer (WET) is MUCH better than the old Files and
    >> Settings
    >> Transfer Wizard. Use it, and you won't lose much at all. Of course, make
    >> a
    >> backup, that goes without saying. But I've done several and it's not
    >> painful
    >> at all.

    >
    > You mean I can upgrade in place from Win 3.1 to Win 95 to Win 98 to Win
    > ME to Win XP to Win XP 64 to Vista XP 64... Bummer....
    >>
    >>

    >
    > --
    > Barry Schnur
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Feb 26, 2007
    #8
  9. Yeah, I thought that was what you meant. My timing of the install on decent
    but not screaming hardware was under 30 minutes. The new imaging technology
    is a good deal faster. Of course, in place upgrades are not as fast.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/xperts64


    "DP" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "DP" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> I installed my Vista last night. Works like a charm. Still had to go
    >> through all the driver headaches, but I had it up and running in a matter
    >> of hours.

    >
    > Sorry. I meant, I had all the drivers in place in a matter of hours. The
    > OS was up and running immediately after the install was complete.
    >
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Feb 26, 2007
    #9
  10. =?Utf-8?B?cmFoY29t?=

    BSchnur Guest

    > yeah. Assuming you meant but didn't type "can't". Bummer.

    Well it would be a serious bummer if one COULD do that sort of attic
    collection serial upgrade..

    --
    Barry Schnur
    BSchnur, Feb 26, 2007
    #10
  11. Charlie,
    I know you’re not Microsoft. I have read numerous posts on other forums (not
    just for 64bitter's), complaints include buying versions of Vista only to
    find it to be the incorrect version. No return policy (we know why).
    Of course MS has never supported an upgrade in the 64bit version of Vista
    (that was my original rant).
    I am quite aware of what I need to do ergo, I've done my homework (I am
    retired and have plenty of time for research). I am merely conveying what I
    have ascertained from other forums. This is not difficult for me; it is
    plenty difficult for the average computer user, which leaves most with no
    recourse other than buying a new computer, and quite possibly, printer,
    scanner, digital camera, etc, etc.
    Personally, I will upgrade (install fresh version of Vista Ultimate). I also
    dual-boot with Ubuntu and will continue to do so.
    I never intended to personally attack you, so lighten up. Everything’s doing
    fine in the Universe.

    BTW: Keep up the good work you are doing….
    --
    Bob


    "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:

    > Excuse me, but I am NOT Microsoft. My recommendations are not theirs. They
    > officially support upgrades. Good. That's their position, and they stick to
    > it. But they do not now, nor have they ever, promised or supported an
    > upgrade from XP x64 or any other version of Windows to 64-bit Windows Vista.
    >
    > I see no confusion about versions. MS has been quite clear about what
    > version is what, and the upgrade paths are both clear and pretty logical. MS
    > doesn't support a direct upgrade path from home versions to business
    > versions. Nor the other direction. Might not be my choice, but that's
    > _their_ decision. I need to buy the right version and they've made that
    > quite clear, if you take the time to actually read it.
    >
    > Do your homework and stop trying to make claims about versions that don't
    > even exist. This isn't exactly hard to figure out.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.
    > http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    >
    >
    > "rahcom" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Charlie,
    > > Great, then why does MS offer upgrade options to current OS's, based on
    > > your
    > > statements:
    > >>'Now, that being said, most of us who have been around for a while do NOT
    > >> recommend doing an upgrade anyway. It's just not how you want to start
    > >> life
    > >> on a new OS, with all that old detritus hanging around.'

    > > From a customer, also of many, many years(Do you remember Windows1.0): MS
    > > and your statements would appear to offset the other.
    > > Also, based on your response, it appears MS did not do their homework
    > > regarding the customer, marketing Vista, and driving a clear understanding
    > > of
    > > which version of Vista is the
    version. Now, do we get the upgrade
    > > or
    > > the full version of one of the following: Vista Basic, Vista Home, Vista
    > > Home
    > > Premium, Vista Business, Vista Business Premium, Vista Ultimate, or was
    > > that
    > > the Vista Ultimate Premium Business, and would that be in the 32bit or
    > > 64bit
    > > flavor. Are you beginning to see the confusion and frustration(?), from a
    > > long time, and loyal MS customer point of view, of course. We are not
    > > alone
    > > on thisl MS has reminded us of the true dictionary definitions of the
    > > words:
    > > confusion and frustration.
    > > --
    > > Bob
    > >
    > >
    > > "Charlie Russel - MVP" wrote:
    > >
    > >> We've talked about this before here, and the case has been pretty clearly
    > >> stated. The single biggest reason is the need for signed drivers which
    > >> would
    > >> cause direct upgrades to fail all too often.
    > >>
    > >> Now, that being said, most of us who have been around for a while do NOT
    > >> recommend doing an upgrade anyway. It's just not how you want to start
    > >> life
    > >> on a new OS, with all that old detritus hanging around. Finally, the new
    > >> Windows Easy Transfer (WET) is MUCH better than the old Files and
    > >> Settings
    > >> Transfer Wizard. Use it, and you won't lose much at all. Of course, make
    > >> a
    > >> backup, that goes without saying. But I've done several and it's not
    > >> painful
    > >> at all.
    > >>
    > >> --
    > >> Charlie.
    > >> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> "rahcom" <> wrote in message
    > >> news:...
    > >> > Why would MS leave us xp64 bitter's out in the cold when it comes to
    > >> > upgrades
    > >> > for Vista? I do not want to lose information just to get a Vista OS.
    > >> > Didn't
    > >> > MS think about this? )of course they did( ...and decided our 'small'
    > >> > end
    > >> > of
    > >> > their vast OS universe just isn't that critical to their bottom line.
    > >> > Wouldn't you think, those which have the capability to run xp64 would
    > >> > most
    > >> > likely purchase the most expensive consumer version OS ever placed into
    > >> > the
    > >> > recent market? For shame, for shame...
    > >> > :(
    > >> >
    > >> > Sure we are capable of imaging, backups, installs, etc. Then why not
    > >> > reduce
    > >> > the price for xp64er's due to the one midigating fact; the extra time
    > >> > involved to perform an upgrade (or in our case, a new install) and have
    > >> > to
    > >> > re-install all our programs, documents, peripherals, and settings, etc.
    > >> > As
    > >> > MS
    > >> > knows time is money and to make us perform these extra steps because
    > >> > they
    > >> > are
    > >> > not willing (or capable) to producing a product that offers the same
    > >> > options
    > >> > as other, equally well suited customers.
    > >> >
    > >> > MS--not really taking their customers into concideration--here. Not to
    > >> > mention our original purchase of, and subsiquent use of xp64 has also
    > >> > helped
    > >> > in the development of current OS (Vista) through error reporting,
    > >> > feedback
    > >> > response, and the such.
    > >> >
    > >> > This sure is making a clear case for opting out of MS and moving to
    > >> > something else: MAC, Linux. Which are two very capable solutions to an
    > >> > MS
    > >> > mountain, and its current mis-directed devotion to the customer.
    > >> > Sometimes
    > >> > mountains turn into valcanos, and when they eventully erupt, most
    > >> > certainly
    > >> > they become much a lessor hill. Has MS become a valcano?
    > >> >
    > >> > I do not expect to receive anything for my rants; certainly not any
    > >> > solutions to my requests. (Those MAC commercials are very convincing)
    > >> > Can
    > >> > you
    > >> > say request, accept, deny.
    > >> >
    > >> > -----
    > >> > Bob
    > >>

    > ​
    =?Utf-8?B?cmFoY29t?=, Feb 27, 2007
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. John

    Vista Home v Vista Ultimate

    John, Feb 4, 2007, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    526
    j1mb0jay
    Feb 15, 2007
  2. DP
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    719
    Aaron Kelley
    Jul 23, 2006
  3. =?Utf-8?B?RGVhdGhOQUNhbg==?=

    Please start Vista 32 bit and Vista 64 Newsgroups

    =?Utf-8?B?RGVhdGhOQUNhbg==?=, Oct 10, 2006, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    343
    Colin Barnhorst
    Oct 11, 2006
  4. Larry Hodges

    Non-Vista print drivers in Vista 64 RC1?

    Larry Hodges, Oct 24, 2006, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    720
    Aaron Kelley
    Oct 30, 2006
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    742
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page