Re: WINDOWS XP HOME EDITION : UPGRADE vs FULL INSTALL VERSION

In news:ehGNgTwPFHA.2824@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Donald L McDaniel <donmcdaniel2005@xxxxxxxxx> typed:

> Ok, let us theorize for a minute:
>
> Let us assume that a user does own a previous copy of Windows,
> but it
> is on his hard drive, not a CD (which this theoretical user
> thoughtlessly threw out). Will he be entitled to use the XP
> Upgrade
> kit to install cleanly? If this is so (and I believe our EULA
> entitles us to use the XP Upgrade kit to install cleanly even
> if we
> have NO copy of Windows on a CD anymore), then your statement
>
>>> "The requirement to use an upgrade version is to *own* a
>>> previous
>>> qualifying version's installation CD (with an OEM restore CD,
>>> see
>>> below), not to have it installed."
>
> Note that you state here "own a previous qualifying versions
> installation CD...".
> This is your statement, not mine.
> I am plainly stating that this statement is NOT completely
> true.
>
> I have stated something entirely different (note that the
> following
> is a paraphrase of my thesis)
> "the requirement to use the XP Upgrade kit is to own a previous
> installation of Windows, WHETHER it is on a CD, OR on a hard
> drive."


I can't tell whether you're nitpicking or just being obstinate,
but yes, I agree. I said exactly the same thing. You have not
said something "completely different," you've said the same thing
I have. Would you prefer if I changed it to "The requirement to
use an upgrade version is to *own* a previous qualifying
version's installation CD, not *necessarily* to have it
installed."? As far as I'm concerned, that "necessarily" was
implied, but if it makes you happy, I'll add the word.



> Note that there are TWO ways to own a copy of Windows: EITHER
> by
> possessing a CD or other distribution media, such as floppies,
> OR by
> possessing an installation residing on one of your hard drives.


Yes, as I keep saying.


> NOT
> one(possessing the distribution media of a previous version of
> Windows), as you seem to imply.


No, I've never implied that. Again, I think you've simply misread
my sentence.


> Since the way I have shown to use the XP Retail Upgrade kit to
> cleanly
> install XP on a hard drive works perfectly well, I say that
> Microsoft
> has put its imprimature on using current installations of
> Windows as
> proof of qualifying media.


Yes.


> By the OP's own words, he currently possesses an installation
> of ME
> residing on his HD. I say that this is totally adequate for
> using
> the XP Retail Upgrade kit to install XP on his HD cleanly.


Yes.


> So giving
> him advice that he must have a physical CD to use the XP Retail
> Upgrad kit to install XP cleanly is misleading,


Yes. I never said that, and again, you've misread my sentence.

....

> Wow! got lost in the clouds somehow...


Yes, I think so.

--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User
Please reply to the newsgroup


.

Relevant Pages

  • RE: Open Source Supported Graphics Cards
    ... I thought the niche Debian was trying to fill was rock solid ... small part of the battle for a typical Windows user moving to Linux. ... Though if you were read the HTML installation manual, ... They refer to all manner of things of which the casual user ...
    (Debian-User)
  • RE: Server Migration
    ... How to Move a Windows 2000 Installation to Different Hardware ... you try to restore a backup to different hardware. ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.setup_upgrade)
  • Re: Windows Update Error on XP 64bit: update is redirected from v6
    ... Antivir *usually* does not interfere with the installation of core ... Proxycfg settings WORKED. ... Microsoft Windows 2000 Operating System Group Policy Result tool ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsupdate)
  • Re: Ubuntu installation questions
    ... installation and would like to ask a few questions ... pertaining to ubuntu. ... NT-based Windows versions - i.e. Windows NT, Windows 2000, ... Every user account created during the Ubuntu installation procedure is ...
    (comp.os.linux.setup)
  • Re: Phone Activation
    ... Actually it is a microsoft PUBLIC newsgroup that happens to have a very ... a legitimate "fair use" and is in legal fact software piracy. ... And the margin on windows is nearly as high as the markup on illegal ... >> Not if it has been over 120 days since the previous installation. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)