Re: Replace Mobo in XP??
From: Shenan Stanley (news_helper_at_hushmail.com)
Date: 04/29/04
- Next message: Kelly: "Re: XP's Paint Program - Can't Set Landscape Printing"
- Previous message: Kelly: "Re: Error when I add Network Place"
- In reply to: jim: "Replace Mobo in XP??"
- Next in thread: jim: "Re: Replace Mobo in XP??"
- Reply: jim: "Re: Replace Mobo in XP??"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 02:21:32 -0500
Answers inline...
jim wrote:
> I'd like to ask some questions about replacing/changing a mobo in an
> XP pro system. I've done some research on this issue and have come to
> the following conclusions.
>
> XP is not quite as Plug & Play as 98[SE] was in this regard. One can
> not just take the OS HD and put it in another box and expect it to
> boot and re-find everything and install all the appropriate drivers
> etc. like it would in 98SE.
Yes - XP is not as "Ghost/Clone friendly" as its predecessors. You could
take all Windows OS's before it (Windows 95, 98, ME, NT, 2000) and usually
put it on a different set of hardware and with minimal muss/fuss, you could
get it going. You could even then make an image with the additional
drivers/HAL information added and now the image would function on multiple
machines without a problem. With the advent of WIndows XP, this simplicity
and grace went away, a more forceful approach (or actually using tools like
sysprep) became necessary in order to clone the software to another set of
hardware than that it was originally installed upon.
> The limitations appear to be in two areas. The first is the HAL
> which is a function of the CPU and number thereof and
> presence/absence of ACPI mobo BIOS. The second is the HD drivers.
>
> I've found all sorts of site/articles regarding how to do this and
> fix these issues for the mobo ATA controller case. Other HD cases
> seem to be tractable using the F6 install drivers(SCSI technique).
> One that seems to be similar to many others regarding the mobo ATA HD
> issue is: www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
>
> My conclusion is that one should make the registry and file additions
> on any XP system so that failure recovery on new hardware is more
> convenient at a later time. Am I missing something here or is that
> about right.
The concerns with your conclusion is that you know when the failure is going
to occur and what hardware you will be moving it to before that failure
occurs. Not only that, this is Windows XP - not that important of an OS in
the scheme of things - certainly not a server-level catastrophic failure
event. If it is, then you have not thought out your network/user
environment well, or in the case of a single-user environment, you were dumb
enough not to make backups.
Assuming this has nothing to do with JUST failure recovery, but just ease of
movement to a new set of hardware or even, as is done in many university
type environments, ghosting to diverse lab machines - then some of your
assumptions are correct. I know of a group that uses one image (clone) to
ghost several different sets of hardware (vastly different) by ripping out a
large section of the registry and replacing that chunk with the proper chunk
before the first GUI boot after applying a cloned image. XP fought them
tooth and nail on doing the older style they were used to with Windows 2000
and before of just adding additional hardware information so that
application to another set of hardware components were built in - it seemed
to clean itself up in other words - the new drivers needed took out the old
drivers instead of just being added - thus their new methodology.
> The second issue is that HAL. If the old and new systems are single
> CPU ACPI mobos then everything works. It makes no difference is one
> is a VIA chipset and Athlon and the other an Intel chipset and an
> Intel CPU. Do I have this right so far?
No. You are not. Try it. Get two systems, identical in everything but
chipset and swap hard drives. I don't mean two different versions of a VIA
chipset or something lame, but one Intel, one via. My experience says
Windows XP will freak - to put it in layman's terms.
> If one is going from a single CPU case to a new P4 supporting HT then
> one must force in a new HAL for multiprocessor ACPI. Apparently that
> can be done in Recovery console or by putting the HD in another
> system where files may be manipulated before attempting a boot on the
> new mobo. Right so far?
This is true. With some manipulation (as mentioned above earlier, before
booting in the new system) you can accomplishing some pretty cool things.
> Are the above the only two issues? Will all the other gadgets and
> chipsets etc. be redetected and appropriate drivers installed? Will
> one be able to boot and move forward in most all cases if the above
> two issues are dealt with?
I think I covered this above. YES, it is possible to do what you are
suggesting in some ways. Practical, no - possible, yes. If your purpose is
disaster recovery, as implied - not only is it impractical, but impossible
to predict when the failure will occur and what hardware (chipset, drives,
video cards, network cards, etc) will be in the replacement system, or if
the data on the drive will even be in a state to do this recovery.
You state "My conclusion is that one should make the registry and file
additions on any XP system so that failure recovery on new hardware is more
convenient at a later time." To me, that is the true failure of this whole
discussion. If your conclusion had been "My conclusion is that one could
make the registry and file removals/changes on an XP system so that cloning
on new hardware is possible." Then you would have me agreeing 100% - but
you said recovery. If you are using XP as a server or even as a personal
system and something fails - I don't care if it is as simple as the
motherboard and all data is recoverable - it is easier, faster and more
practical in the worse case scenario (or just simple fact you consider
hardware failure an opportunity to upgrade power/speed) of all hardware/not
data replacement to do a repair installation and move on with life. You
cannot predict in a failure scenario what hardware you will be moving to.
And if it is not a failure scenario - again - yes - I agree, there are
things you can do to move without doing an actual repair installation, but
unless doing it on a grander scale than the casual home user - it seems like
a worthless endeavor...
UNLESS, and here is my other conclusion (possible scenario actually) from
your persistence in this matter - you are trying to come up with some
programmatic way of transferring the system so you can create a product to
do exactly what you are discussing here - in which case you have made a bad
business decision in discussing it here, as people who are doing it now may
decide, "Not only is it possible and I am doing it now, but I can create a
product and get it to market now and this guy made me realize it." -- They
may thank you...
Otherwise, in my years of cloning thousands of systems every 3-5 months with
100+ applications installed upon each system working together and thousands
of roaming profile users all with different needs/wants - it seems only
practical and worthwhile to someone like me - who would have figured out
other methods are usually faster, making sure that the users data is never
stored on the local machine anyway and if it is, tough luck, they should
back it up.
That's my spill/take on it.
-- <- Shenan -> --
- Next message: Kelly: "Re: XP's Paint Program - Can't Set Landscape Printing"
- Previous message: Kelly: "Re: Error when I add Network Place"
- In reply to: jim: "Replace Mobo in XP??"
- Next in thread: jim: "Re: Replace Mobo in XP??"
- Reply: jim: "Re: Replace Mobo in XP??"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
