×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Full Upgrades To Windows 8 Only From Windows 7?

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the my-win3.1-box-is-sad dept.

Windows 222

CWmike writes "Microsoft will support full upgrades to Windows 8 only from the three-year old Windows 7, according to a report Thursday by ZDNet blogger Mary Jo Foley. Citing unnamed sources, Foley said that Microsoft has informed select partners of the upgrade paths to Windows 8. While Microsoft may be revealing upgrade paths to some partners, it has been much more reticent to keep customers informed than three years ago when it rolled out Windows 7. Among the details the company has not disclosed are the on-sale date and the pricing of the two retail editions. By this time in 2009, Microsoft had revealed both: On June 2 that year, it pegged a launch date for Windows 7, and by June 25 had not only posted prices for the operating system but had also kicked off a pre-sale that discounted upgrades by as much as 58%. The increased secrecy from the company was demonstrated best last week, when it unveiled its first-ever tablet, the Surface, but left many questions unanswered, including the price, sales date, and even the hardware's battery life."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

222 comments

I don't see the problem with this (5, Insightful)

pointyhat (2649443) | about 2 years ago | (#40504499)

I don't see the problem with this. Firstly, I've not purchased a Windows upgrade for 13 years (NT->2K). Secondly, Windows 7 is supported until 2020 so it's not like you have to upgrade it. Corporate customers need not worry as their license agreements give them the new OS for no additional cost.

Re:I don't see the problem with this (1, Informative)

Teresita (982888) | about 2 years ago | (#40504579)

Problem: You can't roll back to 7 once you start down the dark path of 8. Forever will those metro tiles dominate your destiny.

Re:I don't see the problem with this (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40504703)

with a format/reinstall i most certainly can

Re:I don't see the problem with this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40505849)

I agree, reinstall is the same as roll back, and there is no restriction to the number of reinstalls

Re:I don't see the problem with this (1)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | about 2 years ago | (#40504861)

I don't see the problem with this. Firstly, I've not purchased a Windows upgrade for 13 years (NT->2K). Secondly, Windows 7 is supported until 2020 so it's not like you have to upgrade it. Corporate customers need not worry as their license agreements give them the new OS for no additional cost.

Pity you got modded down for making the reasonable decision rather than just blindly arguing because everyone should hate M$. If I were selling software, I'd take this tact too. Not that I'm a Microsoft lover in particular, but I figure if you're going to hate a company you should do it for the right reasons.. which in the case of MS I would describe as them abusing their monopoly to dissuade users and OEMS from using other software.

Re:I don't see the problem with this (-1, Flamebait)

History's Coming To (1059484) | about 2 years ago | (#40505461)

I might even forgive them that if they were doing it with a secure, stable, efficient OS that could run on very old hardware and was backward compatible.

Re:I don't see the problem with this (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40505059)

Given their past history, I'll never be an early adopter of the new Windows version anyway. Especially since they are delving into new territory - something they're not particularly good at IMHO - by the time I get around to it, Windows 7 will more than three years old.

Re:I don't see the problem with this (1)

Mabhatter (126906) | about 2 years ago | (#40505927)

Well Apple's Mountain Lion is $19 for starts. Even if you had to buy Lion at $29 at's still less than the traditional Windows upgrade.

I think there will be FEW upgrades this round because Microsoft wants Windows 8 tied to the proper hardware. I think they are making the consumer push first to grab some hardware sales, companies aren't going to upgrade for 6-12 months anyway.

And... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40504505)

So. Vista is six years old (if my memory serves me well) and XP is eleven years old. You should have upgraded already, no?

Re:And... (5, Insightful)

guruevi (827432) | about 2 years ago | (#40504539)

No, XP is used in so much environments for just about everything still.
- Scientific tools are still mostly XP-only (or DOS still), Vista/7 is possible sometimes with XP compatibility but it's not guaranteed
- Most corporate programs still run only on XP including IE6
- XP is fine on 10 year old computers without all the bells and whistles, 7 is a lot heavier on the resources and requires a more recent computer to run well even with all the bells and whistles turned off.

Re:And... (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40504709)

"XP is fine on 10 year old computers without all the bells and whistles, 7 is a lot heavier on the resources and requires a more recent computer to run well even with all the bells and whistles turned off."

I respectfully disagree. XP SP 3 runs shittier than a stock Windows 7 when the UI dialed down and the background processes tamed. I would not run either without 4 GB of RAM (and by that I mean XP SP3 which recognizes 3.5 and thus is maxed out) and Windows 7 recovers from dumb shit like accidentally browsing a dead network share.

256 MB (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40505123)

My laptop, which has 256 MB RAM, runs XP SP3 just fine. Yes, it starts up a bit slow but once it's running it isn't slow at all.

My desktop runs Windows 7 with 4 GB (and, truth be told, it runs absolutely flawless!). I've tried to install Windows 7 on my laptop but that didn't work at all.

Re:And... (1)

newcastlejon (1483695) | about 2 years ago | (#40505231)

I respectfully disagree. XP SP 3 runs shittier than a stock Windows 7 when the UI dialed down and the background processes tamed.

*Emphasis mine*
I'm curious, was XP similarly optimised when you did that comparison?

Re:And... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40505449)

Well I respectfully disagree with you. I'm running Windows 7 64-bit with the UI dialed down on a 16GB RAM quad-core I7 machine with an SSD system drive and a 1.25GB Nvidia GTX 570 graphics card, and all the fluffy background tasks shut down that I could do without. Overall, this machine is screamingly fast for most things, but the UI still has strange fits of lagginess that I don't ever see on my lowly Core 2 Duo, 4GB XP 32-bit machine that has been similarly optimized. Sure, perhaps "something is wrong" with my Windows 7 machine or I don't know what I'm doing? But every Windows 7 machine I've ever used has more latency than a well-configured XP machine with similar hardware or even a generation back (e.g., Core 2 versus i5/i7).

Grandparent is completely correct. Windows 7 is a hog. It's fine given the additional features when used with decent hardware, and 64-bit support is far better than for XP 64-bit, but I still prefer XP and on an older machine I'd always pick XP over Windows 7 if I had a choice. The only reason I run Windows 7 on the machine mentioned above is for the >2GB of RAM for certain specialized programs that need it. Otherwise I wouldn't.

Re:And... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40505643)

Kill Aero. Win7's UI was broken into shape around it. MS is killing Aero in Win8, there's a reason for that. It was an experiment and it failed.

Re:And... (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about 2 years ago | (#40505673)

you are funny. XP has been running fine for me for almost a decade with 768MB of RAM for running websites that require IE, Microsoft Office & H&R Taxblock, try that with your windows 7

Re:And... (1)

Mister Whirly (964219) | about 2 years ago | (#40505925)

I use Windows 7 and also use IE and MS Office just fine. H&R Block's website [hrblock.com] states their tax software works with XP, Vista, and Windows 7.(And IE version 6.0 or higher.) So what were you ranting about again? you are funny.

Re:And... (1)

Little Brickout (896529) | about 2 years ago | (#40505745)

Funny, Win7 and Win8 preview are slightly laggy on my desktop. WinXP SP3 feels a lot like XFCE in responsiveness (I do keep a pretty bare install though).

Athlon II x3 @ 3 GHz
AMD 690G
2GB RAM
Radeon 4770 512MB

Re:And... (5, Interesting)

Karmashock (2415832) | about 2 years ago | (#40504587)

corporate america is full of old legacy programs that most of the company has forgotten but are essential to the operation of the organization. Somewhere in the sub basement there are a few machines only a few members of the IT department are aware of... they are often the reason it takes "two days to process" certain requests... you could argue they whole thing should be reprogrammed from scratch but you're dealing with proprietary programs that could be very complicated and were built bit by bit in spaghetti code fashion over decades.

It's something of a mess. But the companies work and if everyone does their jobs the system runs.

You see this sort of thing in big international banks. Large retail chain head quarters. Or even medium sized businesses that have been operating a few franchises since the 80s.

Requiring them to upgrade isn't going to work. They're already trying to move these system to VMs. But compatibility for these old programs even in VMs is spotty. It's a serious problem.

Re:And... (5, Informative)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 years ago | (#40504715)

The corporate WORLD is full of old legacy programs. But that's only half of the deal. The other one is how corporations work.

First of all, we're talking about a serious budget position. The licensing fee for a corporation wide system upgrade isn't something your average IT department can rubber stamp. This can easily run the six to eight digit range, and that often requires the ok from some C-level goon. Sadly, to my eternal regret, it is rarely the CISO or even the CIO, i.e. the two Cs that would actually know what they would buy.

More often than not, such a "problem" finds its way to the CEOs desk. Where it sits for a while because CEOs don't make decisions. No, I'm not kidding. They do not make decisions. They wait 'til some "meaningful" (read: economic) paper writes something about the item. If you want something approved from your CEO, don't come with facts or university studies, subscribe to the same economy papers he reads and wait for them to push an article that goes in your favor, then ask him "oh, sir, have you read..." and you're in.

This is, sadly, not a joke.

And until that time, you will not see a CEO make any decisions about upgrading Windows.

Then, when they finally get their butt into gear, integration tests come. That alone can take a year in larger enterprises. Another hint, never ever volunteer to be one of the test subjects. Unless you don't have anything important to do anyway, or if your boss understands that due to IT issues your reports are late. You will lose days. Not hours. Days. Because one of the proprietary tools you use every once in a blue moon won't work and you get to figure out by yourself how to make it run. Which is in turn a huge headache for your security department, but I digress.

In other words and in a nutshell, I know quite a few companies that still run on XP as their main system, who have been running integration tests for Vista and 7 for a while now and are just about to roll it out... unless of course their CEO notices that 8 is around the corner and he halts the program because he wants to leapfrog the "obsolete" versions...

Re:And... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40504823)

A touch to hard on the CEO's in the world i think?

I've worked for a lot CEO's who act like you say from day to day but if you have earned their trust this is not how they operate.

They rely more on the smart people around them they trust and have proven themselves. Yes they spout out a lot of news buzz that's probably old news to all of us by the time they "get it" but challenge yourself to become their friends instead of dismissing them based on some perceived ignorance of our professions.

I find the best time to engage them is when everything is failing and they really need our help.

Re:And... (1)

Karmashock (2415832) | about 2 years ago | (#40504837)

I'm not talking about that.

And the CEOs frequently ask what it would cost to upgrade these systems. They say 'wow, those are old, get back to me with an upgrade proposal.'

They're proprietary backbone systems. They're frequently the soul of the company's electronic infrastructure. Old legacy databases processing some critical but arcane transactions that can't be done by any system that hasn't been specifically programmed from the ground up to do it.

Trust me. They want to upgrade. The cost is just a significant percentage of their profit margin for that quarter. And IT has learned that you don't tell management that it has to do something expensive. That just means management needs to find someone smarter then you that can come up with a clever way to eat the cake and have it too.

And that's what we in IT have been doing in many of these companies for years. We find a way to solve the problem so management doesn't have the problem and doesn't have to pay for the full system upgrade.

And for this amongst other things we keep our jobs. We solve the problem.

Would it be better to simply rewrite the whole thing from scratch? Yes. But it would require years of reprogramming it from scratch with internal developers or we'd have to outsource at a huge cost to another group. And then we'd have to sync all our sub offices to the new system.

Our only hope is VMing the whole thing into some sort of abstraction at some point. Then we can dump it on any new system, hide the text based interface with scripts and everyone can get what they need.

MS is letting us down by not maintaining backward compatibility. But the VMs seem to be stepping up.

Re:And... (1)

Belial6 (794905) | about 2 years ago | (#40505657)

MS is letting us down by not making the VM the backward compatibility. At this stage of the game, we should be able to run any application all the way back to DOS 1.0 with complete backward compatibility on Windows 7.

Re:And... (2)

BitZtream (692029) | about 2 years ago | (#40504953)

First of all, we're talking about a serious budget position. The licensing fee for a corporation wide system upgrade isn't something your average IT department can rubber stamp.

Sounds like a fairly shitty IT department/management. When you roll out a large project thats going to cost a fortune 5 years down the road to upgrade, you don't wait 5 years and ask for 500k. You roll it out, including an additional 100k in yearly operating costs/maintenance, and then have 500k sitting in your pool ready to purchase the upgrade at the 5 year mark. This is basic business planning. If you didn't think of that, you aren't qualified to do any planning for a project that costs that much, and thats the first problem in your post.

If you weren't doing it wrong from the start, you wouldn't be waiting on the CEO to make a decision and the rest of your post becomes a non-starter.

Re:And... (2)

Ryanrule (1657199) | about 2 years ago | (#40504755)

There is usually soooo much bs in the systems, because people with connections can get the system set up to favor them. I do consulting on sales/configuration software. Everything goes fine until the sales assholes get on it and find out the super secret discount that gives them a fat bonus that they used to be able to do on the paper system wasnt put in.

Re:And... (1)

Karmashock (2415832) | about 2 years ago | (#40504917)

Your software isn't customized to their business. This is just the sort of problem that kills upgrade deals.

The software MUST be dynamic.

Re:And... (1)

Ryanrule (1657199) | about 2 years ago | (#40504995)

Oh it is. But you cannot customize to infinity. These people would have it so they upload a cell phone picture of a few scrawls on a napkin and it creates a complete configured "x" on quote with all proper backend integration everything. They also want to import ALL their old deals, even stuff from 30 years ago that is completely custom to the company, and has decades worth of addons made up at the time and never used again. It goes on and on. And of course, upper management is littered with people who came from sales, so yeah.

Might see re-emergence of "downgrade" ads (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40504537)

After MS shipped Vista, MicroCenter used to advertise desktop systems with Vista preloaded and "XP downgrade rights". Expect similar with Windows 8 and "Win 7 downgrade".

Re:Might see re-emergence of "downgrade" ads (0)

John Bodin (189895) | about 2 years ago | (#40504925)

Already out there started June 1st. By any system with any version of Windows 7 and you can for less then $20US, I forget if its $19,99 or $14,99, get Win 8 Professional. After you buy the system you go to a website that I cant remember right now and not at work to read the sign we got by the computers we sell.

Re:Might see re-emergence of "downgrade" ads (2)

SScorpio (595836) | about 2 years ago | (#40505287)

They always have their upgrade program when a new version of Windows is coming out to keep people from holding off a few months to get a new computer since it would be dumb to buy one now when a new version is coming out in two months.

What the OP is talking about is that new computers that came with Vista on them came with the ability to downgrade to XP. We'll see if 8 is as hated as Vista, but forcing Metro down everyone's throat might lead to that. I also don't understand forcing metro into the new version of server. Metro is great for a tablet, but I'm still not sold on it as an interface for a traditional desktop.

Re:Might see re-emergence of "downgrade" ads (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40505421)

Whoooosh!!

What part of "downgrade" did you not understand? What you mention are upgrades. Dumbass.

Even better (4, Informative)

kurt555gs (309278) | about 2 years ago | (#40504545)

Free upgrade to Ubuntu from any version of windows.

Re:Even better (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40504613)

Who gives a fuck? Ubuntu is a train wreck. If you're going to promote Linux, at least promote a good distro.

Re:Even better (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about 2 years ago | (#40505687)

the flavor of Ubuntu known as Xubuntu is fine. Even the KDE flavor Kubuntu fixed the initial crap of KDE 4.0/4.1 a couple years ago.

Re:Even better (3, Funny)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 years ago | (#40504719)

Sorry for offtopic, but I've been trying for ages and cannot figure it out: How do you get a shell in the latest version of Ubuntu? Somehow I can't seem to find it...

Re:Even better (4, Informative)

swanzilla (1458281) | about 2 years ago | (#40504813)

Sorry for offtopic, but I've been trying for ages and cannot figure it out: How do you get a shell in the latest version of Ubuntu? Somehow I can't seem to find it...

Ctrl+Alt+t

Re:Even better (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 2 years ago | (#40504897)

Click the icon that looks like a terminal in one of the dock bars, tap Windows T E R M, and select Terminal, Alt-F2 and enter gnome-terminal, or press crtl-alt-T.

Re:Even better (4, Insightful)

westlake (615356) | about 2 years ago | (#40505165)

Free upgrade to Ubuntu from any version of windows.

No free Linux upgrade or port for every significant software package that runs under Windows.

While damn near everything client-side in FOSS is ported to Windows or begins as a native Windows app.

The parent post gets a predictable mod-up here.

But the truth of the thing is that only 1% of desktop users have seen any added value in Linux. I do not expect that to change,

Re:Even better (1)

LurkerXXX (667952) | about 2 years ago | (#40505195)

To avoid upgrading your desktop to a new OS with crappy tablet UI (Windows 8), you recommend upgrading to a new OS with a crappy tablet UI (Ubuntu)???

Mint Linux, etc, would likely be a more comfortable upgrade for most folks.

Re:Even better (-1, Flamebait)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 2 years ago | (#40505201)

Mom: "Hey, I just installed it. How come Netflix doesn't work? Or any of my cooking applications. How do I print? Why the hell does it display all those error messages everytime it starts up?"

Free doesn't mean more usable, and that's what Microsoft and Apple have on Linux... the reason why the Year of the Linux Desktop is perpetually reset to be about 2 years from now: Ease of use. It was designed by programmers, for programmers, and you can't get away from those roots no matter how hard you kick sand.

doesn't matter... (2, Interesting)

steveb3210 (962811) | about 2 years ago | (#40504553)

It's not like anyone will want to buy that franken-ui anyways...

Re:doesn't matter... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 years ago | (#40504727)

Since when has buying a new Windows version been a matter of "wanting"? Usually you just wanted some piece of program to run sensibly that was designed for $your_windows_version + 1 only.

Re:doesn't matter... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40504799)

well people that got vista ended up wanting to buy xp

Actually at work we have a program that runs on xp bu not vista or win7 I wonder whats going to happen in the future when we can't get any laptops that work with win xp. My personal laptop has many driver issues with win xp when I tried it to boost proformance.

Re:doesn't matter... (1)

Patch86 (1465427) | about 2 years ago | (#40505045)

There's a department in my company that does risk underwriting, and because of some vitally important legacy programme, each one of them has two computers- one running the stock corporate Win XP, one stained beige box running Win NT 4.0.

I presume a relevant brain has at some point been bent to the task of somehow porting the programme to XP, and I can only assume that they failed.

MS doesn't see the demise of Windows (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40504555)

It seems to me that MS is shooting itself in the foot. If I were in charge of Microsoft, I would be afraid of OS X and iOS. Once Apple starts leveraging its market share in iPhones and iPads to push people towards OS X, Microsoft is going to feel a lot of pain.

MS is no longer the 800 lb gorilla in the room. The integration of iOS and OS X is going to create an OS that has enough applications to really take off.

Re:MS doesn't see the demise of Windows (4, Insightful)

game kid (805301) | about 2 years ago | (#40504927)

I agree, except between Windows 8 and the Cisco cloud silliness, Apple will probably follow the trend and push OSX users to iOS instead. More control and all that.

Re:MS doesn't see the demise of Windows (1)

TheLink (130905) | about 2 years ago | (#40505349)

The upgrade limitation isn't a problem - the ones who haven't upgraded to Windows 7 already, are the ones who are even less likely to want Windows 8.

As long as Microsoft don't shoot both feet and make it impossible to stick with Windows 7, they will still retain most of their marketshare.

I don't like Windows 7 that much, but I actually prefer it (and XP ) to OS X. I think 10-20% or so will really love OS X, but the rest will be fine with Windows XP/7.

If Microsoft sells Windows 8 but allows "downgrade rights" to Windows 7 (and maybe even XP), they'd still be raking in their usual cut.

Re:MS doesn't see the demise of Windows (1)

Khyber (864651) | about 2 years ago | (#40505995)

"Once Apple starts leveraging its market share in iPhones and iPads to push people towards OS X"

Apple will have to take their own antitrust lawsuit and likely lose just as hard as Microsoft.

Increased secrecy (0)

bool2 (1782642) | about 2 years ago | (#40504559)

"The increased secrecy from the company was demonstrated best last week, when it unveiled its first-ever tablet, the Surface, but left many questions unanswered, including the price, sales date, and even the hardware's battery life."
.
Taking a leaf out of Apples playbook then. I wonder if Apple patented it?

Re:Increased secrecy (2)

Relayman (1068986) | about 2 years ago | (#40504693)

Ah, no. Apple typically releases that information on the day of the announcement and actually has copies of the device available at the announcement to play with. Shipping is usually soon after announcement. Example: The MacBook Pro with Retina Display.

Based on Microsoft's track record, there's a significant chance that Surface will be canceled before it ships.

Re:Increased secrecy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40505835)

Right, so you missed the point. This was MORE SECRET than Apple. Apple tells you how much it costs. Microsoft keeps that a secret. Apple tells you when it will ship. Microsoft keeps it a secret. See, that's "increased secrecy".

Re:Increased secrecy (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 years ago | (#40504751)

Hang out in the vicinity of IT-reporters, if you're lucky you might snatch a Surface someone "lost" before he gets it.

Re:Increased secrecy (2)

Patch86 (1465427) | about 2 years ago | (#40505063)

Taking a leaf out of Apples playbook then. I wonder if Apple patented it?

One can only hope they haven't taken a leaf from anything resembling a Playbook...

What is the problem? (3, Interesting)

rgbrenner (317308) | about 2 years ago | (#40504583)

So you have to have the previous version to upgrade... what is the problem? Doesn't everyone do this?

Off hand: Adobe, Ubuntu, Fedora, Debian all require the immediate previous version to upgrade.

Honestly, I didn't even know you could upgrade Windows from a version older than the previous version.

Re:What is the problem? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40504695)

The previous versions of Ubuntu, Fedora, and Debian cost $0. Windows costs somewhat more.

I just won't mention Adobe.

Re:What is the problem? (0)

grumbel (592662) | about 2 years ago | (#40504699)

Linux versions are free, Windows is not. So buying a Windows7 license just to throw it away five minutes later would be rather ridiculous.

Re:What is the problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40504901)

5 minutes.. 3 years.. same thing

Re:What is the problem? (2)

Patch86 (1465427) | about 2 years ago | (#40505095)

If you're still running Windows XP and you want to upgrade to Windows 8, you'd have to buy upgrade packages for both Windows 7 and Windows 8 (or a full copy of Windows 8, and accept that you have to wipe and reinstall from scratch). That's a copy of Windows 7 that you'll only see as you whiz right past it.

If you're running an ancient version of Ubuntu, and you need to daisy chain the upgrades as you plough towards the latest version- at least all those intermediary copies are free.

Re:What is the problem? (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 2 years ago | (#40504915)

When upgrading someone's machine from Ubuntu 10.10 to 12.04 recently, it came up with an 'upgrade' option, which surprised me a bit. I thought they only supported previous versions and LTS->LTS upgrades, but it appears that at least some other upgrade paths are available.

Re:What is the problem? (2)

marcello_dl (667940) | about 2 years ago | (#40504945)

> Off hand: Adobe, Ubuntu, Fedora, Debian all require the immediate previous version to upgrade.

Nope, using debootstrap on debian lets you install debian from whatever previous version, and whatever other linux distro. Stuck with only one partition? The system is in a folder you can chroot into, so you reboot from another media and move the current install to a backup folder, the chroot to the root, rerun the update-grub or whatever is needed by your bootloader.

Re:What is the problem? (1)

Jerome H (990344) | about 2 years ago | (#40505221)

To be fair when you use debootstrap you install a new system, you don't upgrade an existing system.
For example debootstrap won't magically import all your old configuration files whereas upgrading will at least present you a dialog box and some options.

Re:What is the problem? (0)

hamsjael (997085) | about 2 years ago | (#40505311)

You cant upgrade Windows. Period. (from bitter experience)

(unless its a pristine install of the older version that has never been touched, but then whats the point :-) )

Re:What is the problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40505735)

Wrong for Adobe, unless I imagined getting a PS CS3 -> PS CS6 upgrade for $199...

that is greate (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40504603)

as always in windows happends little surprises... =)))

----------------
my blog [li4ka.info]

I want the opposite ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40504615)

I'm much more interested in downgrade from Windows 8 to 7. When I buy a computer with this junk 8 installed can I downgrade easily ?

JAM

Re:I want the opposite ! (1)

couchslug (175151) | about 2 years ago | (#40505127)

Since installing a clean, "free" version of 7 has been effortless for years, and MSFT gets your money of a version of 8 you don't want, it's your call how you wish to "downgrade".

Does anybody still "upgrade"? (4, Insightful)

timeOday (582209) | about 2 years ago | (#40504665)

Back in the day a computer was $3000 and often a new OS version was actually an improvement over the previous one, so I could see why somebody would do it. But paying $100 (wild guess) to upgrade a $400 computer to an OS that is marginally better, if at all, with the time it would take and ever-present risk of it breaking something, isn't worth it. I wonder how many bother.

Re:Does anybody still "upgrade"? (1)

couchslug (175151) | about 2 years ago | (#40505077)

"I wonder how many bother."

Only those suckered into it buy unethical PC repair shops and similar.

Re:Does anybody still "upgrade"? (1)

OzPeter (195038) | about 2 years ago | (#40505313)

I wonder how many bother.

I know you are talking about Windows, but on the Apple side of things I have taken my $1300 iMac from Leopard to Snow Leopard to Lion and expect to take it to Mountain Lion. I would have taken my Dell laptop from XP to Windows 7 (or even a hackintosh) but it only has a core duo processor and not a core 2 duo.
 
I'm not going to get rid of a perfectly good computer when it still does everything that I want it to do.

Re:Does anybody still "upgrade"? (1)

Little Brickout (896529) | about 2 years ago | (#40505987)

I do, Windows Upgrade licenses are great. Unlike OEM licenses, you can move them to a new computer when your old one becomes obsolete. My WinXP Upgrade saw use on 3 consecutive computers.

I would never use Upgrade media for anything but a fresh install though.

Why upgrade? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40504707)

With the relatively low cost of PCs and the relatively high price of the Windows OS upgrade, why WOULD you spend so much to get what exactly?

Thats right. Nothing you can actually use or have a use for.

Get off my lawn.. (1)

SuperCharlie (1068072) | about 2 years ago | (#40504721)

Is anyone else tired of the never-ending upgrade/version parade? Maybe Im just getting old but dam.. every year upgrade Office, upgrade Windows, upgrade your phone, upgrade your laptop, get a new tablet, get a new tv, get a new car, f*** me running its like Im your personal money spigot and all you need to do is have some 1/2 baked mass produced crap and Im supposed to get in line to shower you with money. Screw you. Im tired of chasing the mess. Now get off my lawn.

Re:Get off my lawn.. (2)

Teresita (982888) | about 2 years ago | (#40505139)

Newer is not better. I run Win98SE on this $35 used Compaq (running on top of DOS 7.10) and I run XP on another one for my Cakewalk music apps. I boot Puppy Linux 4.3.1 from DOS with LINLD. Chat with Mirc 5.9. Listen to tunes with Winamp 2.80. Do my budget and diet on Excel 4.0. Write stuff on Wordstar 5.5 (DOS) and make it printer-ready in Wordperfect 8 and/or Open Office. I'm happy as a clam, but I ain't making Microsoft any richer.

Re:Get off my lawn.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40505153)

Having recently paid to upgrade my wife... Amen brother.

Re:Get off my lawn.. (1)

couchslug (175151) | about 2 years ago | (#40505163)

"Is anyone else tired of the never-ending upgrade/version parade?"

No.

I benefit greatly from early adopters buying "new stuff". I benefit even more from not being one of them.

"Im tired of chasing the mess."

I never chased it, and so am not tired.

"Now get off my lawn."

I paid off my lawns because I never chased the mess. Everyone ELSE, however, should race after it with gusto.

So what? It is a Moore's law world (2)

cryfreedomlove (929828) | about 2 years ago | (#40504803)

Hey folks, most of the world does not care about 3 year old operating systems. Innovation marches on at an exponential pace. It is not fair to demand that Microsoft jump off that fast track to support the vanishing legacy. If they do, then you can bet their competitors will not.

Should I also upgrade your wall mounted rotary phone to an IPhone 5? Should I upgrade your Model-T to a Tesla Roadster? Geez!

this seems like a flamebait article (2)

joeflies (529536) | about 2 years ago | (#40504807)

" By this time in 2009, Microsoft had revealed both: On June 2 that year, it pegged a launch date for Windows 7, and by June 25 had not only posted prices for the operating system but had also kicked off a pre-sale that discounted upgrades by as much as 58%."

Well, that's interesting only if MIcrosoft promised to ship and reneged. If it hasn't been pegged to ship, then I don't see how you can fault them for secrecy for not making announcements. I don't see why the article sites the "by this time in 2009" as a reason either unless there was some requirement to announce exactly three years after the last one.

surface is already a joke (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40504831)

google glasses are also dorky vaporware but at least they're innovative. oh god, what a turd surface is.

OEM Version! (1)

ebinrock (1877258) | about 2 years ago | (#40504885)

Forget the upgrade version, then. Just buy and install the OEM version, it's only about $30 more and it's a full clean version without the upgrade hassles anyway. Duh!

XP qualifies for upgrade pricing (5, Informative)

michaelmalak (91262) | about 2 years ago | (#40505017)

The article is about how much data gets preserved during the upgrade process not about pricing. Since Windows machines should be re-imaged anyway periodically, that is pretty irrelevant. As for the pricing, the relevant issue, yes, XP evidently qualifies for upgrade pricing:

XP-to-Windows 8 upgrades preserve the least amount in a move: User accounts and files only.

7 was the same (3, Interesting)

EricX2 (670266) | about 2 years ago | (#40505159)

You could only do a 'true upgrade' from Windows Vista to Windows 7, so how is this any different? I don't think you could upgrade from Windows ME to XP either.
Vista is how old now? It came out in 2006. How many years old will OS X 10.8 allow upgrades from? Snow leopard from 2009.

They aren't saying XP or Vista don't meet the requirements for an upgrade edition, just that you can't do an in place upgrade. Of course you can't, the file structure isn't the same.

This is even better, it means once again you will be able to use the upgrade pricing for clean installs. Good deal!

Re:7 was the same (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40505381)

you could upgrade windows from version to windows 7. Sure you lose a lot from ME to XP and even more from XP to Vista, it was possible. There is a video out on youtube of someone doing this.

's ok (2)

roc97007 (608802) | about 2 years ago | (#40505283)

No plans to upgrade to Windows 8 anyway. But this does remind me that I need to buy a few copies of 7 while it's still available. And then, wait until something good comes out.

Stupid secrecy versus smart secrecy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40505359)

When Apple is secretive, it's so they don't tip-off competitors about what they are up to.

When Microsoft is secretive (e.g., about the price, battery life, and all sorts of other details about the Surface), it's so they can benefit ... um ... from the ridicule of critics? No, that can't be it.

So they can stifle competition (e.g., HP's recent abandonment of their Windows RT tablet)? Kind of a mixed bag there, given it might discourage others from using Windows RT.

So they can fool gullible pointy-haired bosses into committing to the next version of Windows before determining whether or not it's a bad idea compared to staying with previous versions?

There we go. Now it makes sense.

Non-issue (1)

insnprsn (1202137) | about 2 years ago | (#40505571)

OS upgrades are a bad idea anyways, fresh install and no worries
All of you have backed up your data already... right?

Sandy Bridge and above (1)

Bryan Bytehead (9631) | about 2 years ago | (#40505717)

Until they fix the issue with systems running Sand Bridge and above slowly losing their minds (apps lock up slowly one by one...), I'm not about to even think about upgrading. Running the CP now, and I'll be back to running Win 7 here shortly. Sad that this bug exists in the Developer's Preview and the Release Preview.

Worst Microsoft beta experience ever.

Re:Sandy Bridge and above (1)

Mashiki (184564) | about 2 years ago | (#40505969)

Haha. Locking up is the worst beta experience you've ever had? There was a bug I had in a game that I was beta testing which shall remain nameless. On uninstalling, the uninstaller would nuke the entire Program Files tree. Locking up apps is, painful, and recoverable, this required an entire windows reinstall.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...