Get our Latest Finds
Subscribe to our RSS feed or enter your email address below to get the feed delivered to you by email:
Follow Gizmo
Using this Site
Top Rated
Gizmo's Freeware is Recruiting
We are currently looking for people with skills and/or interest in the following areas:
- Rootkit Scanner and Remover
- Web Browser for Android
If this sounds like you then click here for more details
How To "Upgrade" from Windows XP to Windows 7
While you can't technically "upgrade" from Windows XP to Windows 7, you can achieve the same results using the Windows Easy Transfer program. This tutorial from Scott Hanselman gives step by step, screen shot by screen shot directions on how to get it done.
You'll need a Windows 7 disk and one of the following: an external hard disk drive, a USB flash drive, an Easy Transfer cable (they do exist), or a network.
You'll also need a few hours of your time, but when you're done, you'll have a fresh installation of Windows 7 with all your settings intact.
Step-By-Step: How To "Upgrade" from Windows XP to Windows 7
- Article type:
Printer-friendly version
Comments
Now let me get this straight....so I can't upgrade (easily) XP to Windows 7. Then again, since XP isn't broke there is no need (and some 800 patches later I really understand it)...oh, you say it's faster. Yep it may well be but for less money I can put a really fast CPU and new motherboard in my computer that would do far more for me (if I needed it). Opps, forgot I may have to do that anyway if I install Win 7 as it takes a lot more resource....darn (have to think about that more). Better security....well, that remains to be seen (294 patches on a new Windows 7 oem install out of the box didn't exactly build my confidence) and don't forget there's Ickernet Explorer(not a spelling error) the worst browser out there with the greatest number of security holes, many not fixed (and not planned to be fixed), and many more to be exploited courtesy of ActiveX. Oh yeah....I really don't need that since FireFox, Chrome and others are available. So let me summarize this:
I don't use the MS browser.
I can buy a motherboard and new cpu at less cost to achieve a greater performance improvement.
My XP Pro system is not broke but there is a reason I should do this for "security" maybe (based on MS's track record and 294 patches out of the box I don't think so) or maintenance (and Windows 7 has very little "real"
maintenance if you were not aware of that) which is almost non-existent (thank you 3rd party developers), perhaps by design (or abject neglect) since a lot of folks bought new computers "cuz there's was getting old and slow (in reality 7 year old technology, if the machine is maintained, is more than adequate for what 98% of the user community does).
Yep.....sounds like a great deal. All I have to do is buy the operating system, upgrade my computer for a couple hundred, spend a lot of time reloading my applications (those that will work without XP compatibility mode), and then learn the new bugger (a week?).
Conclusion....nah....I think I will wait until two weeks before support for XP runs out (2014 and thanks Corporate America for forcing that issue) and then move to whatever is the best in the world of Linux (and by the way the latest version of Ubuntu looks good...as in easy to install and use) since it's free and Microsoft (since they are a "copy the other guy's improvements company") won't be doing a whole lot more. On the other hand I might even buy Microsoft Microsoft's offering since whatever version of Windows they have then will have to compete with close to free....and $20.00 won't bankrupt me.
Morale of the story...Common sense is not common!
PS Cut and paste if you agree on blogs elsewhere. Caio.....Steve
I believe in sticking what works for you. Not what works for me or anyone else. Many, many people will be sticking with XP, which works fine.
I went with Windows 7 because I like to play with the newest and latest stuff. I'm also one of those tech-geek types that formats her hard drive for fun. :)
About Linux - I like Mint myself, and it gets a few votes in the site forums as well, though I think Ubuntu is a little more popular. The interface for their upcoming release is awesome.
I've installed win7 on two completely different machines, one an AMD 64x2 with 3 gigs of ram, the other an AMD sempron (86) with 1 gig of ram. Win7 appears to use resources directly proportional to the amount of resources available and both machines perform well. I am running 32 bit windows on the 64 bit machine for compatibility with existing 32 bit software and as yet have encountered no obvious conflicts between apps and OS. I did however encounter many issues when running the 64 bit OS with 32 bit apps.
??? Why is file sharing so popular? Maybe because the likes of M/Soft got greeedy(Oh and the rest of them)!
I only looked at the first post by rhiannon this is also on the windows site it is a clean install. And easy transfer works nice. It will not transfer everything as some programs are not compatable with windows 7, but it will tell which programs wont work.
How to “Upgrade” Windows XP to Windows 7? All the Info you Need!
http://techpp.com/2009/08/11/how-to-upgrade-migrate-windows-xp-to-window...
Here is one of my favorite comments of all time:
So your advice to is to wait because your proprietary code monkeys have to hammer out the bugs before you recommend the latest OS to grandpa who is going to use the computer for email and looking at pictures of the grand kids?
These comments about Vista are silly, just like the change from windows 95 to 98 then 2000, etc etc. I have Vista and it works great, I have pre-ordered Windows 7, I think after reading the upgrade blogs, it will be an improvement upon Vista, like the change from 95 to 98.
I think people are afraid of change. I have a buddy who thinks explorer 6 is it, he doesn't want to change to 7,or 8. I told him he's getting old and afraid of change, not that there is something wrong with the newer versions.
All this stuff starts out with bugs and they fix it with SP upgrades, think about it. How many times do you hear about recalls with cars ? Even Imports!!
Its just another way of a Sp1 upgrade. Think of all you can do with a computer versus a car, there has to be bugs and patches.
Just my opinion !!!
Agreed!
But I won't update my IE since I am not using it! lol
Having used Win7 for 3 months, I can tell you that Vista to Win7 is *much* more of a change than from 95 to 98. Much more like 2000 to XP or perhaps even ME to XP.
The differences are much more than cosmetic. Win7 (for me) has been *absolutely* rock solid. Whereas I *regularly* had to reinstall (from an Acronis image) Vista...maybe 5-6 times per month when things got screwed up, I haven't had to do this at all with Win7.
Win7 is quite simply superb...good enough to kill off the Mac...good enough to kill off Linux. Try it and you won't want to go back to anything else. I couldn't say the same thing about Vista. At all.
Windows 7, and Office 2010 are going to be cost prohibitive to most people even if they wanted it, and even if they could afford it why would someone replace XP and Office/2003/2007 or Open Office, when 90% of the time a PC is used to surf, email, and create word documents?
Also to run XP apps under Windows 7 it will require using the "compatibility mode" which slows down the PC.
As a computer tech and dealing with PC issues every day in this economic climate, people barely have enough money to maintain what they have, let alone consider some new razzle/dazzle software from Microsoft, and a new learning curve to learn something new, when all they have to do is just use the use what they already have - LOL.
XP will be running a long time, I sold my Microsoft stock a long time ago.
Tom
moderator note: commercial link removed in accordance with site policy
Firstly, Windows 7 will run Office 2003/2007 or Open Office without problems.
Nobody knows yet what will actually figure in Office 2010 so making any prediction is pointless.
It is NOT generally necessary to run applications designed for Windows XP in compatibility mode under either Windows Vista or Windows 7 (32 or 64 bit versions.) I have found that applications designed for the NT kernel (and thus API) often require compatibility mode. The same generally applies to applications designed for Windows 9x.
Even if compatibility mode is required the overhead is slight compared to that incurred when running 32 bit applications under 64 bit Windows. Compatibility mode is based on the use of application or OS 'shims.' A shim is a simple piece of code designed to make the calling application believe it is running in the correct environment. 32 bit applications are executed natively, no smoke and mirrors, thunking, COM, code injection, all simple stuff.
Device drivers of course are a different matter. XP drivers will not work with the Vista or later kernels (as of Vista SP1, desktop and server kernels are the same.) To help with this problem the Enterprise/Ultimate and Professional versions of Windows 7 (32 and 64 bit) can run XPM, 32 bit XP SP3 in a virtual machine. XPM supports device drivers for legacy EXTERNAL devices, it also provides support for many 16 bit applications that simply will not run under 32 bit Vista or Windows 7.
Windows Vista never, in my view, made a case to replace Windows XP. I believe Windows 7 will prove over the coming months that it makes that case beyond doubt.
Rik Mayell - Category Editor - Best Free Windows 7 / Vista 64 bit Software
The Office part is correct, however being in this business for over 30 years has taught me the next razzle/dazzle OS shouldn't be used until about 4 years later when all the bugs are "ironed out", unless you are absolutely forced into it, which is rare.
>>>>It is NOT generally necessary to run applications designed for Windows XP in compatibility mode under either Windows Vista or Windows 7 >>>>
"Generally" - won't cut it when someone has invested 10's of thousands of dollars into software, and then has to make it work under W7, and compare "apples to apples" in extensive systems testing, and risk having down periods, let alone compatibility issues. I have seen a lot of Managers lose their jobs over decisions just like this.
>>>>Even if compatibility mode is required the overhead is slight compared to that incurred when running 32 bit applications under 64 bit Windows. Compatibility mode is based on the use of application or OS 'shims.'>>>>
Has all types of software been tested together, has all conditions been tested, have all CPUs been used, has extreme loads been used?????
I doubt it, I will let this all "pan out" as the "sparks fly", because I have seen this movie before.
Tom
moderator note: commercial link removed in accordance with site policy
I'm not suggesting companies rush to embrace Windows 7, even if it is what Windows Vista should have been. There is no harm though in setting up a test environment and checking whether your multi-thousand dollar investment in software works. If it doesn't then your first port of call should be your legal department.
If the figures add up then the migration of any environment is possible. To make it work you need strong links into the business and top quality IT staff. Sadly, many companies lack both.
BTW, I have 25 years industry experience and have used all versions of Windows, desktop and server, and many of the infrastructure products, SMS, Exchange, SQL Server, SNA Server and so on. I can also develop user and system level applications for these environments, one of the benefits of being a computer scientist, instead of a technologist, I suppose.
Rik Mayell - Category Editor, Best Free Windows 7 / Vista 64 bit Software
I see you shuffled the posts around, and added that you have 25 years of experience.
commentator note: 30 years of "Fortune 5" support experience to backup all posts, from Mainframe to Oracle/Sql 2005 Server.
Do what you want but every well-written program that I've tried with Win7 works well. And -- by the way -- while you are waiting your 4 years for the "bugs" to be worked out, your competitors will be increasing their productivity over you dramatically.
If YOU are in charge of waiting 4 years before you roll out this OS, I'm thinking that you'll never see it. You'll be fired for incompetence in under 6 months.
Go ahead and be a "Phase II Clinical Trial" candidate that is about to take place, and I will laugh when I hear all the W7 users screaming for Service Pack 1 to arrive to alleviate all the incompatible issues and headaches - the same story on ALL Windows releases happened.
Meanwhile my shop will "chug away" like a fined tuned clock using XP, while I listen to all the SOS distress calls from all who bought into MS new razzle/dazzle W7, and will my shop hasn't spent 10 cents on anything new.
The new W7 razzle/dazzle won't give them a edge, because they will be too busy trying to keep their heads above water, and having burnt up too many people and cash resources won't give them any edge.
Like I said I've seen this movie for the last 30 years being in the business.
Tom
moderator note: commercial link removed in accordance with site policy
Any IT department worth its salt will do an extensive in-house test using all environmentally relative software packages/drivers with a free showcase copy of W7 that only requires you to get up off your fogled rear.
It makes no sense to jump into the invisible swimming pool head-first (before you figure out if it indeed is full of water), but it's ridiculous to assert that you shouldn't also be able to walk down the steps in the shallow end without serious consequences.
Or did you fall asleep during that part of your movie?
Sure if you have the time, resources, and plenty of capital, but to make a move because the next razzle/dazzle OS offers very little, and the chances of things going "haywire" are high there isn't any pressing need.
With Vista we had a dedicated test box and determined it wasn't worth the effort, so we didn't waste any more resources, and Management applauded the decision.
We will do the same with W7, but if it offers little advantage and doesn't have a good ROI, it will be scrapped too, because budgets are tight.
The people who are asleep at the movie are the lemmings who are willing to jump into this head first, history repeats itself and W7 won't be any different.
Tom
moderator note: commercial link removed in accordance with site policy
A quick search of the 'Net now indicates there will be upgrade options from XP to Win7 under certain very specific conditions, but it appears at this time there will be no in-place upgrade option available, only a clean install. Therefore it will be important to know the procedure for using the Easy Transfer program.
If Microsoft is done shaking out the upgrade paths, Ed Bott has a chart on his ZDNet blog that makes sense. For now anyway. =)
Windows 7 Upgrade chart
I have 3 computers running XP. One of the reasons is that I still have some old MSDos programs that I don't particularly want to give up. Why should I want to swap to Windows 7? Would I still be able to run my old programs? I think I'm a reasonably intelligent and experienced user, but I am not a 'nerd.' Moving to W7 seems to me to be something I could do, but only if there are *significant* advantages to doing so.
Bill McWeeny
For many people & businesses there are no significant, compelling or justifiable reasons to upgrade to Windows Seven from XP or Vista.
When you replace your hardware make sure it comes with the then current OS, if that happens within the next 3 years that'll be 7, beyond that you may be looking at 8.
The only way to find out if your command line programs run on Windows 7 is to try them out. If they run OK on XP then they're unlikely to be hard wired MS-Dos applications as such; my guess is they'll be OK, unless they're doing something weird with devices or the file system.
I cant see any advantage to it, I love XP, if it works why the need to change? and Vista is a nightmare, nobody I know likes the OS, why should I think Windows 7 would be any better?
Actually, there is a lot to be said in favor of Win98. However, I currently have one computer running XP and one with Vista. The newer computer runs Vista and the computer running XP was originally built for 98. The older computer runs better and is more responsive only because XP doesn't have all of the cumbersome bells and whistles which seem to be little more than resource hogs. It is the only thing which can explain why a computer which is less than 2 years is often so sluggish compared with an 11 year old rebuilt computer with only a fraction of the memory and one much smaller CPU. In my view, Microsoft would have done better to work out the bugs in Vista instead of inventing some new OS. I suspect Win7 is more like an effort to make more money than it is an effort to improve anything. One may call me an old stick-in-the-mud or whatever, but I'm not buying any. I've had a look and it appears to be too much of nothing but a jumped up version of Vista and I'm not at all impressed. The newest and shiniest thing is not always the best thing.
I was afraid of change but I needed a 64 bit OS for my new comp. I was having big problems with Xp 64 bit and Vista was just a nightmare. I decided to give Win7 Ultimate a try and I cant believe the difference. Flat out the best Windows OS ever. It boots up and shuts down fast, full of very nice, usable features and runs like it's turbo charged. I've had a few minor software problems but overall I couldn't be happier. Win7 Ultimate is my new main OS with Xp pro x86, x64, and Win 2000 Pro all running in VM Ware.
I agree
Post new comment