A friend is running Windows 98, he has an XP disc, if he uses it to upgrade
to XP , will he lose any of his present configuration or folders?
James

JAMES wrote:
He shouldn't--but he should make a backup anyway. Oh, and BTW, I have
run tests with this under Virtual PC virtual machines and found that
Mozilla programs (Firefox, Thunderbird, Seamonkey, Mozilla, Netscape,
etc.) lose all their configuration data--meaning, that you need to back
up email messages, favorites, etc. first if you use one of these programs!

"JAMES" <JAMES41@BELLssssssssSOUTH.NET> wrote in message
news:hh%hh.2189$%e7.434@bignews2.bellsouth.net...

Highly advised *not* to upgrade win98 to XP

backup your data and perform a clean install...

or install XP on another partition and dual boot



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"philo" <philo@privacy.net> wrote:

Why? I have done dozens of upgrades from Windows 98 to XP, and quite
a number from Windows Me to XP. All without problems.

And during the beta testing of XP I often installed the same beta
version both as an upgrade over 98 or Me and as a clean install.

I can honestly state that the only substantive difference that I have
ever found between an upgrade install and an clean install of Windows
XP is that a clean install is invariably a total p.i.t.a. because of
the hours and hours and hours that it takes to reinstall applications,
reconfigure them, and restore data files from backups.

My suggestion is to always do an upgrade install unless there are
significant problems with the current installed Windows (98 or Me)
that cannot be remedied. In these situations upgrading can likely
result in the problems being carried forward to XP.

And in the (highly unlikely) event that an upgrade to XP does go badly
then the option to do a clean install is still there.

But if you opt for a clean install and then the data backups fail to
restore properly or there are problems locating or reinstalling the
application programs you are in real trouble.

Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP (1997 - 2006)
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca
Syberfix Remote Computer Repair

"Anyone who thinks that they are too small to make a difference
has never been in bed with a mosquito."

Ebeneezer Ponder <cjspambuffer@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:


That is how it used to be, with the old Windows folder being retained
and lots of leftovers.

With Windows XP the operation of the upgrade process has changed
substantially, and this has made upgrades to Windows XP far more
successful than they ever were with previous versions of Windows,
especially the 9x versions.

When you upgrade to Windows XP the first thing that happens is that
the existing Windows folder is renamed and a new empty Windows folder
is completed. Then a basic clean install of Windows XP is made into
the new Windows folder. Then selected items are imported from the
old Windows folder and registry, but only those items that are
actually needed, such as .DLL files that are used by installed apps.
When the install is finished the old Windows folder is deleted.

This new approach pretty well eliminates extraneous files, obsolete
registry entries, and so forth.

As I said in my other response on this thread, the only difference
that I have ever noted between an upgrade install and a clean install
was that a clean install is a p.i.t.a. because of all of the extra
time and work this entails. I have never noticed any difference in
performance or stability between an upgrade install and a clean
install of Windows XP. And I could not say that about any previous
version of Windows.

Hope this explains the situation.

Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP (1997 - 2006)
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca
Syberfix Remote Computer Repair

"Anyone who thinks that they are too small to make a difference
has never been in bed with a mosquito."

"Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:18eho2hjm6ftdulodm2j6er85tgbl08gi7@4ax.com...
<snip>

Though I've never had a problem with a clean install...
upgrades can be quite a problem.

I've tried a few on win98 systems that were working OK
and ended up with only partially working systems ranging from problems as
simple as corrupted icons...all
the way to unstable performance.

Yes I know that supposedly a properly prepped win98 install is supposed to
be upgradable
but it's not.(At least not always)

Upgrading a win9x system to an NT-based system is asking for problems...
OTOH upgrading from win2k to XP is not likely to cause problems

BTW: To those who say that if win98 is working perfectly...it can be
yupgraded to XP...
all I ask is : Why upgrade is win98 is working perfectly?



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

AnonyMouse wrote:
Oops...forgot to mention, my test was with 98SE upgrading to 2000 Pro,
not XP.

On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 04:23:08 GMT, Ron Martell <ron.martell@gmail.com>
wrote:

That's interesting and conflicts with my own limited experience. Have
tried to upgrade ME (working reasonably well) on a couple PCs to XP,
and result was simply unusable.

I've largely avoided upgrading because of it's bad reputation, even
amongst PC techs, but I hear what you are saying.

When I upgrade from XP SP1 to SP2, my PC no longer boots.

Clean install is "guaranteed" to work though as you say it is a pain
to then rebuild the PC.

gb

On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 18:19:06 GMT, Ron Martell <ron.martell@gmail.com>
wrote:
Has the above been the case for the earliest versions of WinXP (since
2002) or has it only become so in the past few years? XP has been
patched greatly since the first releases.

gb

<portions snipped>



After searching Google for about 2 seconds I came up with this:

http://labmice.techtarget.com/window...n9xupgrade.htm

There are dozens of documented problems in upgrading win98 to XP.

Though you think a clean install is a PITA...

wait 'till you have a bad upgrade and have to double your effort and finally
end up
doing a clean install anyway!

Yes...I'm sure you've done plenty up upgrades that worked...
but that does *not* make it a good idea !!!!



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 15:33:11 -0600 Too Much Ying and you will Pay With
Yang then "philo" <philo@privacy.net> sent this :

Although I've had trouble with clean installs I've very rarely had a
problem with an Upgrade



--
Free Windows/PC help,
http://www.geocities.com/sheppola/trouble.html
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page...m?bandID=88558

Gaius Baltar <baltar@nowere.now> wrote:


My experience with XP Upgrades goes back to the early beta versions in
2000. Some beta releases were indicated as being for clean installs
only, others were indicated as upgrade installs preferred, and still
others were unspecified in that aspect.

Except for those beta builds that were indicated as "clean installs
only" I would always install as an upgrade, using a copy of my
installed Windows Me (my principal O/S at that time) as the base. If
time permitted I would sometimes install the same beta release as a
clean install in a different partition, just to compare the two.

I never repeat never encountered a problem with the upgrade process
that was not a legitimate "beta bug", and there were very few of those
that affected upgrades specifically. And as I said previously the
only detectable difference that I ever found between an upgrade
install and a clean install was just the vast amounts of time that it
took to install apps, restore data from backups, and get everything
configured.

Also I should mention that my experiences with upgrading to earlier
versions of Windows, such as from Windows 95 to Windows 98 or Windows
Me, was not same. These upgrades quite often did turn out to be
problematic. But that has never been my experience with upgrades to
Windows XP from the 9x versions of Windows.

Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP (1997 - 2006)
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca
Syberfix Remote Computer Repair

"Anyone who thinks that they are too small to make a difference
has never been in bed with a mosquito."

"philo" <philo@privacy.net> wrote:


From that site:

"Although Microsoft supports the upgrade path from Windows 95/98 to
Windows XP,..."

Upgrades from Windows 95 to Windows XP have never repeat never been
supported and quite simply do not work. XP will not even start the
upgrade process.

Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP (1997 - 2006)
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca
Syberfix Remote Computer Repair

"Anyone who thinks that they are too small to make a difference
has never been in bed with a mosquito."

"Ron Martell" <ron.martell@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4ollo2llvihleps8nqn1lcrkscan9645ks@4ax.com...

That's clearly an error...
officially MS supports and upgrade from 98/ME (not 95/98)

However if you perform a clean install with an XP upgrade cd
I've been told that a win95 cd can serve as a qualifying product (I've never
tried it but have seen a lot of posts that it worked)
(but that's not officially supported by MS of course)



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' ''''''''''''''''''''''''''
''''''''''''''''
"Shep©" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:usdlo2lbp5p9sfvvmfqhdaa70mkno9j2g8@4ax.com...
Veeeery funny wise guy



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 17:06:22 -0600 Too Much Ying and you will Pay With
Yang then "philo" <philo@privacy.net> sent this :

Heh.Heh

I'm not the,"Wise guy".The MSVP is.

I hated setup.dll right up to Win98.It got sooo... much better in
win98SE and has nearly got sorted in WinXP.

It doesn't matter if it's an,"Upgrade" or a,"Clean" install.There will
always be work to do to get the system working right.1st clean the
device manager using Safemode(Even in Win2k/XP)

Then clean and compact the registry of the some 300+ pieces of junk
no matter clean or upgrade.

I use all of these,

http://www.majorgeeks.com/download.php?det=2048

http://www.hoverdesk.net/freeware.htm

and,
http://www.mispbo.com/regcleaner210.zip

Cleans and compacts WinXP registry


Also way faster and better free defrag,
http://www.auslogics.com/disk-defrag/

Rule 1:Never use,"Norton software".
Rule 2:See rule 1 =)

"The more things change,the more they stay the same"



--
Free Windows/PC help,
http://www.geocities.com/sheppola/trouble.html
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page...m?bandID=88558

Thanks for the links

Too bad about Norton...they used to be good...
but that was a long time ago



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

philo wrote:
It can serve as a qualifying product for a clean install from an upgrade
CD, but can't be upgraded from directly.

<snip>

Thanks for the confirmation.

BTW: Any machine old enough to have had win95 on it...
is sure not going to be a great candidate for XP...
however...a win95 cd could be handy for one who only wishes to purchase
the cheaper XP_upgrade cd



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com