RE: In-Place Upgrade - 2000 to 2003
- From: "Michel Boks" <MichelBoks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 13:56:12 -0700
Well, an in-place upgrade cannot complete clean-up W2k stuff. This means
you'll probably end up with a W2K3 systemen with loads of W2K files around.
Second, an upgrade is VERY risky: you could very well end up with nothing
instead of a fresh installed machine.
Third, upgraded installs tend to be less stable than clean installs.
Just a few examples I can think of at the moment....
Regards,
--
Michel Boks - B.ICT
MCSE NT4/2000
"Keith" wrote:
> Can anyone suggest any reasons why I should NOT do the following:
>
> In-place upgrade from 2000 to 2003.
>
> Server has Exchange 2000 (also to upgrade to 2003) and ISA 2000 (to stay as
> 2000) on it.
>
> Some people have advised against in-place upgrades but didn't give too much
> info as to why - just said it was not adviseable.
>
>
>
.
- Prev by Date: RE: Event ID 8032 and 8021 on my servers
- Next by Date: Re: Logon Script for adding printers to clients
- Previous by thread: RE: 3.5GB RAM instead of 4GB
- Next by thread: Re: In-Place Upgrade - 2000 to 2003
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
