Microsoft Confirms Vista Upgrade Limitations (Updated with Workaround)
A Web Exclusive from WinInfo
January 29, 2007
Paul Thurrott
WinInfo
InstantDoc #95011
WinInfo
With a support note quietly posted to its Web site, Microsoft confirmed what enthusiasts have long feared: Users who purchase Upgrade versions of Windows Vista will not be able to perform clean installs of the operating system. Instead, they will need to first install their previous OS and then upgrade in-place to Vista.
"This problem occurs because Windows Vista [Setup] does not check upgrade compliance," a support note on Microsoft's Web site reads. "Therefore, you cannot use an upgrade key to perform a clean installation of Windows Vista."
While this is sure to infuriate some users--and certainly, it contradicts information Microsoft provided me with last year--the reality is that upgrade installs of Windows Vista essentially wipe out the OS and perform an install that is very much like a clean install. The real problem here, therefore, will be the length of time it takes to install Vista using the Upgrade media: Though Vista often installs in about 30 minutes, previous versions often take twice as long.
UPDATE: I haven't tested this yet, as I don't have Vista Upgrade media to test, but I'm told that Microsoft's internal documentation does explain how to clean install Vista using an Upgrade version. It appears to be more of a workaround than a true clean install, however. Here's what it says.
1. Boot with the Windows Vista Upgrade DVD.
2. Click "Install Now."
3. Do not enter a Product Key When prompted.
4. When prompted, select the Vista product edition that you do have.
6. Install Vista normally.
7. Once the install is complete, restart the DVD-based Setup from within Windows Vista. Perform an in-place upgrade.
8. Enter your Product Key when prompted.
Reader Comments
" 'This problem occurs because Windows Vista [Setup] does not check upgrade compliance,' a support note on Microsoft's Web site reads. 'Therefore, you cannot use an upgrade key to perform a clean installation of Windows Vista.' " Oh happy day. After five years of development and millions of dollars, Microsoft couldn't figure out how to fix this self-described "problem"? Better keep those XP install discs, kiddies. You'll need 'em. Good news for resellers and tech geeks, though. One more reason for them to recommend a Vista Upgrade from the myriad choices available--more billable hours for them when things go wrong.
lotsamystuff -January 29, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a windows fan I'm going to say: "This is some sad sh*t". Let me get this straight... if I want to do a clean install using an upgrade CD I have to first spend time installing XP before I can upgrade to Vista? God why? Why can't Vista just ask for the previous versions CD like **every other Windows version since 98 does** ??
sticknick -January 29, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have to say I agree with lotsa. I do like MS and their products, but ... sheesh, guys! Come on! I do have a question : I have XP Pro, and am buying Vista Ultimate tonight. I take it I can do the clean install. This impacts those who upgrade from Vista to Vista, yes? I am a bit confused by the first paragraph (because clearly I'm buying Vista Ultimate Upgrade)--though I suppose should I have to reinstall, I'll have to install XP Pro again (or just insert the CD or provide my serial number?). Best, Keith
keithdvo -January 29, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i had read some forums where Microsoft MVP's frequent, as well as asked my Microsoft rep and what they told me is this: in any case, your Windows XP copy must be activated AND validated. the only option to install 32-bit Windows Vista Upgrades is from WITHIN said Windows XP. both CLEAN and UPGRADE install options are available. the upgrade 32-bit versions are bootable for repair functions only. the 64-bit versions actually REQUIRE booting off the disc in order to install because of restrictions with the locked filesystem. it still checks for a validated, installed copy though. i say, why bother with these unless you need direct support from Microsoft. who do you know of, that's a home-user, that actually calls their phone tech support anyway? just buy OEM versions instead and do it yourself. they're cheaper, and they don't require any previous installation. they are effectively full version products with few limitations and sell for CONSIDERABLY less. the install process is vastly simpler than XP and the Getting Started guide even guides new users through the installation process. OEM products DO NOT allow for in-place upgrades though, but again, who really does that? just as Paul stated in Windows Weekly, the percentage of retail purchases is very, very small, so i doubt this is much of an issue. with Microsoft offering downloads of products, as well as MLK's (media less kits with licenses only), there's plenty of ways around this supposed issue. XP
Waethorn -January 29, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not make a backup image of Windows XP with a program like Acronis True Image 10.0? Its Vista compatible. If you have to reinstall Vista just load the Windows XP image on your drive, it takes about 2 minutes, and then reinstall Vista over Windows XP.
tomcallahan2@comcast.net -January 29, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
or of course, Norton Ghost will work, not to mention Windows Backup. XP
Waethorn -January 29, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the clarification, Waethorn. I was about to post the same info. The reason they changed to this method is that someone could download an image of XP, burn it on a CD, insert the Vista upgrade DVD, and use the image to "validate" the upgrade. People could get away with purchasing the upgrade for Vista without owning XP. It makes perfect sense. Unfortunately, it is a *major* inconvenience and hassle. Needless to say, I will not be purchasing any upgrade copy of Vista.
NateB2 -January 29, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"WOW begins now!" Not like anyone on this site is affected. Most of you simply use your workplace's MSDN copy of Windows for your home machine. On the Mac OS X side of things, the only "upgrade" CDs are the *free* "CPU drop in" upgrade discs added to Macintosh computer boxes for computers already on the shelf when the new version of OSX comes out. The user's Mac comes with a factory-installed Mac OS X install which is immediately upgradable using the CPU drop in CD. If they want a clean install, they simply boot from the CPU drop in CD, insert their System Restore CD when prompted (for proof of the previous OSX) and then pop back in the CPU drop in CD to continue.
vandil2 -January 29, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure it is an inconvenience not to mention a hassle, however, this was the hassle I believe Microsoft originally intended for the user no matter what "Upgrade" version or whether we are talking about Vista or not. They just never got it right the first time with windows 98 and ME. Basically buying something named upgrade puts the prerequisite and stamp on the product that says that you need to have both the fundamental version from which you are to upgrade from and the upgrade itself. People call this a "self-described" problem, however, I believe it is not a problem at all. At least not from Microsoft's perspective. I believe that they did this intentionally. I mean it is an incredibly smart market trick against piracy of their xp product as it the home-users xp copy will probably go through a validation. Another aspect is also to make things so inconvenient that the couple of buck you put out to buy an actual instead of an upgrade version of VIsta will be worth it. In terms of an economist this is sort of a "price-discrimination" theme, where Microsoft has actually managed sectionise customers and thus being more able to over-price some of its' product over the actual market accepted price. One such product that gets the privelege to be over-priced and draw in extra income is actually the Windows Vista - Ultimate. The other versions are just there to foreshadow the over-pricement, where we as customers only see a gradual ascension in price whereas if we would look at Vista Ultimate for what it really is - it truly is just a bunch of crappy extra features over-priced only for the sake of business. Anyone buying Windows Vista Ultimate can consider themselves 'bloodsucked' from the mighty lord dracula himself - i.e. Bill Gates.
Wushudragon99 -January 29, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh no! Its the end of the world! I always thought it worked that way in previous versions so it really doesn't bother me.
anonymous -January 29, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"just buy OEM versions instead and do it yourself." With 23 versions of Windows Vista to choose from, I'm sure the "Average Joe" will find that advice very compelling. Does DELL's Vista page default to the OEM version, "Waethorn"? "OEM products DO NOT allow for in-place upgrades though, but again, who really does that?" Yeah, that' s right. No one! "there's [sic] plenty of ways around this supposed issue." It's not a "supposed issue", "Waethorn", it's a PROBLEM. That's how Microsoft refers to it, anyway. And we all know you bow at the altar of MonkeyBoy Ballmer. "the percentage of retail purchases is very, very small, so i doubt this is much of an issue." And I'm sure you'll be there to take money from folks who can't follow the "reinstall Windows" advice from their favorite tech support geek when they need to. It's a "win-win" for "Waethorn"!
lotsamystuff -January 29, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I really don't see the problem here. The majority of people who would be upgrading their systems won't do a clean install - they wouldn't know how/can't be bothered with it. The people who will want to install fresh will know how to do it and know better than grab the upgrade version anyway.
jersey72 -January 29, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Um... Let's just be blunt for a moment. Upgrade DVDs are cheaper for a reason... this is that reason. "Does DELL's Vista page default to the OEM version" If I'm not mistaken, arn't all vendor/prebuilt PCs shipped with an OEM version of an OS? --- And I'd like to point out, that now with Beryl and Debian, OSX is officially overpriced by a long shot. For free you can get the exact same quality OpenGL gui and 'security' of OSX, "competitively" priced at 130US more. Granted neither has the software/hardware compatibility of Windows, but at least with Debian/Beryl/XGL you don't have to feel ripped off. --- Also on a SideNote (tm), if people keep reiterating that there are 23 versions of Vista, then that means that in a few weeks OSX will go from being the 2nd most popular OS to the 25th. As every single version of Vista will outsell OSX in a timespan of weeks. Yep, gonna get schooled by Windows Vista Home Basic Upgrade OEM (what's that cost? like 40 bucks?). Mmm, bet that just burns your biscuts. Don't worry, if Jobs runs the company broke again, I'm sure Gates will bail you out... again.
will84 -January 29, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
as per Paul's workaround, does the trial install (which is what you get when you don't input a product key) allow you to add a product key in during the activation wizard after installation as a full install version would? someone needs to confirm this. losta: "Does DELL's Vista page default to the OEM version?" you're a complete moron if you don't know losta: "It's not a "supposed issue", "Waethorn", it's a PROBLEM. That's how Microsoft refers to it" WRONG! are you completely stupid?! they wanted it this way. just another Microsoft hating Mac user with nothing to do. sorry 'bout that - no games for OSX for you to spend your free time on. losta: "And I'm sure you'll be there to take money from folks who can't follow the "reinstall Windows" advice from their favorite tech support geek when they need to. It's a "win-win" for "Waethorn"!" another moronic comment. of course i will - that's my job. intelligence pays. you should know that already - your intelligence consists of knowing that "DING!" = "fries are done". XP
Waethorn -January 29, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Microsoft Vista, what a fiasco and what a clunker.... Wonder what kind of Fiasco Apple will come up with their next OS??? It's called how to alienate your customer base......these people must be learning from the recording industry; that sad faction that has ruined their portion of the entertainment industry by over analysis of the consumer... Too bad...
treeorc -January 29, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As far as I'm concerned you used to be able to do this, now you can't = it's broken. Sure, you can buy OEM but what end user knows about this? Lunchpail Joe is either going to buy a new computer OR they're going to run to the store and buy a boxed copy... ... there are going to be people out there who have done clean installs from an upgrade disc BECAUSE MS SUPPORT HAD THEM DO IT (and yes, I speak from personal experience). Now they have removed this. Why? And, to me, that's the question: WHY? I have yet to hear ONE good reason why MS would remove this functionality. Why? ... anyone? ... Bueller?
sticknick -January 29, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Why? And, to me, that's the question: WHY? I have yet to hear ONE good reason why MS would remove this functionality. Why?" To make "Waehtorn" happy. :-) "of course i will - that's my job. intelligence pays. " In this case, ignorance pays. Ignorance on the part of Microsoft, who continues to make things difficult for their customer base. It's amazing--no, make that sickening--what people will put up with when they don't know any better.
lotsamystuff -January 30, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Typical Joe Sixpack scenario: Buy a new Windows PC with XP. Run it for 3-6 months. It's now littered with spyware/adware and viruses. They take it to the local smalltown computer shop who runs removal tools, etc. to clean the machine up, only to have the problem return in another few months. Then Joe Sixpack picks up a copy of Vista Home Premium Upgrade. "It's got to run better than that XP." Eventually, Vista succumbs to spyware/malware and needs to be brought in for cleaning. The small town shop says "we need to reinstall Windows to fix this. Please give us your Vista CD." The customer handily offers up his Vista Home Premium Upgrade CD. "We're sorry, we'll need the System Restore CD that came with your computer." Joe Sixpack then informs the people that he never got an OEM CD with his machine. Worse. His "reinstallation" image is on a hidden partition on his hard disk, but his damaged Vista install can't boot to run the program that allows him to burn the image to a CD/DVD. "Well, I'm afraid in order for us to get Vista reinstalled, you'll need a Windows XP installation on the machine or a full version DVD of your Vista Home Premium. And look, we have OEM copies of Windows XP and Windows Vista on sale!! The Vista Upgrade limitations will only allow predatory "OEMs" like Waethorn and small town computer shops to get more revenue out of clueless consumers who just want to their "broken" PC to work again. These consumers will do anything to get their computer to run again. Unfortunately, those consumers never learn that they can simply invest in an Intel-based Mac, and never have to worry about spyware/viruses again, and still have the ability to run Windows at a later time (virtually or dual-booting) if they must run some Windows-only app.
vandil2 -January 30, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On my Windows Vista laptop, I checked for updates, and there was a total of....... 2gigs of updates! And no, I am not kidding. @vandil2 No, they will not need the XP CD because they already have an activated version of Vista installed. The only way the person will need the XP CD is if the hard drive is completely lost. Also, check out the MOAB website. I'm sure that malware writers will exploit those holes if OS X gets more marketshare. It sounds like have bought into the utter *lie* than OS X is more inherently secure than Vista. Also, please stay away from ad-hominem attacks against Waethorn. It doesn't help your argument.
NateB2 -January 30, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
losta: "It's not a "supposed issue", "Waethorn", it's a PROBLEM. That's how Microsoft refers to it" WRONG! are you completely stupid?! they wanted it this way. just another Microsoft hating Mac user with nothing to do. " "Waethorn", you really need to learn to read. Paul's story quotes Microsoft thusly: ""This problem occurs because Windows Vista [Setup] does not check upgrade compliance," a support note on Microsoft's Web site reads." See that word? PROBLEM. As in "This PROBLEM occurs". It's direct from Microsoft. Now, as I've asked of you before: STFU. Or at the very least, take some remedial reading courses.
lotsamystuff -January 30, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, dang it. I was planning to keep XP MCE 2005 on one partition and install the upgrade version of Vista on another partition so I could have the new platform but also have XP MCE to fall back to in case anything is completely broken in Vista. Lord knows I'm not going to pay the full version price. Well, hopefully it soon becomes known whether the workaround works. Very disappointing. Thanks for reporting this early, Paul. Much appreciated. Oh, and before it's posted, no, I have no desire to switch to Mac, so don't waste your breath. Macs are excellent computers, yes, but I personally can't stand 'em.
nmt01 -January 30, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
losta, you may know how to read words, but some basic comprehension studies would be in order for you. for Microsoft, there is no "problem". sorry. ???? ???? ?? ???? ??? ?????? comprender? XP
Waethorn -January 30, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
nah of course not....you wouldn't know the first thing to finding a way of understanding that.... XP
Waethorn -January 30, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am glad I am switching to a Mac. And so is my brother. And a couple of my friends have just done so. And a couple coworkers too. And when I look around the airport or the coffee shop these days, the majority of the machines are suddenly Macs. I hope this issue turns out to be the turning point for the Great Humbling of Microsoft. They seriously need to be cut down a whole lot now!
Grantcv1 -January 30, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Lord knows I'm not going to pay the full version price. " Why not? It thought it was a relative bargain?
lotsamystuff -January 31, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"when I look around the airport or the coffee shop these days, the majority of the machines are suddenly Macs. " I'm noticing the same thing. The majority may not be Macs, but they are certainly represented in numbers far beyond those of their reported market share. On any given day, more than half the machines I see in such places are Macs. "I hope this issue turns out to be the turning point for the Great Humbling of Microsoft." Won't happen. Inertia will keep them going, along with fear of the unknown. The Microsoft FUD machine has been in high gear for so long, most people don't realize they even have a viable alternative, and the rants of folks like "Waethorn" (who have their heads so far up Microsofts a$$ that they can't see daylight) don't help much, either.
lotsamystuff -January 31, 2007