Replace Mobo in XP??

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

I'd like to ask some questions about replacing/changing a mobo in an XP pro
system. I've done some research on this issue and have come to the following
conclusions.

XP is not quite as Plug & Play as 98[SE] was in this regard. One can not
just take the OS HD and put it in another box and expect it to boot and
re-find everything and install all the appropriate drivers etc. like it
would in 98SE.

The limitations appear to be in two areas. The first is the HAL which is a
function of the CPU and number thereof and presence/absence of ACPI mobo
BIOS. The second is the HD drivers.

I've found all sorts of site/articles regarding how to do this and fix these
issues for the mobo ATA controller case. Other HD cases seem to be
tractable using the F6 install drivers(SCSI technique). One that seems to
be similar to many others regarding the mobo ATA HD issue is:
www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html

My conclusion is that one should make the registry and file additions on any
XP system so that failure recovery on new hardware is more convenient at a
later time. Am I missing something here or is that about right.

The second issue is that HAL. If the old and new systems are single CPU
ACPI mobos then everything works. It makes no difference is one is a VIA
chipset and Athlon and the other an Intel chipset and an Intel CPU. Do I
have this right so far?

If one is going from a single CPU case to a new P4 supporting HT then one
must force in a new HAL for multiprocessor ACPI. Apparently that can be
done in Recovery console or by putting the HD in another system where files
may be manipulated before attempting a boot on the new mobo. Right so far?

Are the above the only two issues? Will all the other gadgets and chipsets
etc. be redetected and appropriate drivers installed? Will one be able to
boot and move forward in most all cases if the above two issues are dealt
with?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

While one person's experience is hardly something to depend on, I replaced a
failed mobo in a Gateway a couple of months ago, going from a P4/Intel
system to Athlon/Via, fully expecting to have to reinstall with a new copy
of XP (because the original was a Gateway OEM.)

To my surprise, the hardware was recognized and installed just as it usually
is in ME or 98. Once I installed all the Via drivers, everything worked
absolutely without a hitch. I still thought I'd have to reinstall because
activation popped up, but once I explained on the phone that it was the same
machine and new MB with the product sticker still right there on it, there
was no problem.

I had to pinch myself to see if I was dreaming. 8^)

Gary

"root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
news:OWbhf9MLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I'd like to ask some questions about replacing/changing a mobo in an XP
pro
> system. I've done some research on this issue and have come to the
following
> conclusions.
>
> XP is not quite as Plug & Play as 98[SE] was in this regard. One can not
> just take the OS HD and put it in another box and expect it to boot and
> re-find everything and install all the appropriate drivers etc. like it
> would in 98SE.
>
> The limitations appear to be in two areas. The first is the HAL which is
a
> function of the CPU and number thereof and presence/absence of ACPI mobo
> BIOS. The second is the HD drivers.
>
> I've found all sorts of site/articles regarding how to do this and fix
these
> issues for the mobo ATA controller case. Other HD cases seem to be
> tractable using the F6 install drivers(SCSI technique). One that seems to
> be similar to many others regarding the mobo ATA HD issue is:
> www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
>
> My conclusion is that one should make the registry and file additions on
any
> XP system so that failure recovery on new hardware is more convenient at a
> later time. Am I missing something here or is that about right.
>
> The second issue is that HAL. If the old and new systems are single CPU
> ACPI mobos then everything works. It makes no difference is one is a VIA
> chipset and Athlon and the other an Intel chipset and an Intel CPU. Do I
> have this right so far?
>
> If one is going from a single CPU case to a new P4 supporting HT then one
> must force in a new HAL for multiprocessor ACPI. Apparently that can be
> done in Recovery console or by putting the HD in another system where
files
> may be manipulated before attempting a boot on the new mobo. Right so
far?
>
> Are the above the only two issues? Will all the other gadgets and
chipsets
> etc. be redetected and appropriate drivers installed? Will one be able to
> boot and move forward in most all cases if the above two issues are dealt
> with?
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

"Gary R." <roberthouse@geocities.com> wrote in message
news:%23ql$YrNLEHA.988@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> While one person's experience is hardly something to depend on, I replaced
a
> failed mobo in a Gateway a couple of months ago, going from a P4/Intel
> system to Athlon/Via, fully expecting to have to reinstall with a new copy
> of XP (because the original was a Gateway OEM.)
>
> To my surprise, the hardware was recognized and installed just as it
usually
> is in ME or 98.

That follows from what my research showed. Standard mobo ATA and single
processor ACPI HAL and it'll boot and fix it self after sufficient new
drivers are added. Although you did a rather major HW change, you didn't
change either of the two critical elements. That allowed it to boot and
from there it can fix itself.

> Once I installed all the Via drivers, everything worked
> absolutely without a hitch. I still thought I'd have to reinstall because
> activation popped up,

Nope, the new activation requirement is expected.

>but once I explained on the phone that it was the same
> machine and new MB with the product sticker still right there on it, there
> was no problem.
>
> I had to pinch myself to see if I was dreaming. 8^)
>
> Gary
>
> "root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
> news:OWbhf9MLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > I'd like to ask some questions about replacing/changing a mobo in an XP
> pro
> > system. I've done some research on this issue and have come to the
> following
> > conclusions.
> >
> > XP is not quite as Plug & Play as 98[SE] was in this regard. One can
not
> > just take the OS HD and put it in another box and expect it to boot and
> > re-find everything and install all the appropriate drivers etc. like it
> > would in 98SE.
> >
> > The limitations appear to be in two areas. The first is the HAL which
is
> a
> > function of the CPU and number thereof and presence/absence of ACPI mobo
> > BIOS. The second is the HD drivers.
> >
> > I've found all sorts of site/articles regarding how to do this and fix
> these
> > issues for the mobo ATA controller case. Other HD cases seem to be
> > tractable using the F6 install drivers(SCSI technique). One that seems
to
> > be similar to many others regarding the mobo ATA HD issue is:
> > www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
> >
> > My conclusion is that one should make the registry and file additions on
> any
> > XP system so that failure recovery on new hardware is more convenient at
a
> > later time. Am I missing something here or is that about right.
> >
> > The second issue is that HAL. If the old and new systems are single CPU
> > ACPI mobos then everything works. It makes no difference is one is a
VIA
> > chipset and Athlon and the other an Intel chipset and an Intel CPU. Do
I
> > have this right so far?
> >
> > If one is going from a single CPU case to a new P4 supporting HT then
one
> > must force in a new HAL for multiprocessor ACPI. Apparently that can be
> > done in Recovery console or by putting the HD in another system where
> files
> > may be manipulated before attempting a boot on the new mobo. Right so
> far?
> >
> > Are the above the only two issues? Will all the other gadgets and
> chipsets
> > etc. be redetected and appropriate drivers installed? Will one be able
to
> > boot and move forward in most all cases if the above two issues are
dealt
> > with?
> >
> >
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

One reason for this is the WPA (Windows Product Activation)
which is new beginning with XP. Major changes look like you
are installing a pirated copy of XP.

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.



"root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
news:OWbhf9MLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| I'd like to ask some questions about replacing/changing a
mobo in an XP pro
| system. I've done some research on this issue and have
come to the following
| conclusions.
|
| XP is not quite as Plug & Play as 98[SE] was in this
regard. One can not
| just take the OS HD and put it in another box and expect
it to boot and
| re-find everything and install all the appropriate drivers
etc. like it
| would in 98SE.
|
| The limitations appear to be in two areas. The first is
the HAL which is a
| function of the CPU and number thereof and
presence/absence of ACPI mobo
| BIOS. The second is the HD drivers.
|
| I've found all sorts of site/articles regarding how to do
this and fix these
| issues for the mobo ATA controller case. Other HD cases
seem to be
| tractable using the F6 install drivers(SCSI technique).
One that seems to
| be similar to many others regarding the mobo ATA HD issue
is:
| www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
|
| My conclusion is that one should make the registry and
file additions on any
| XP system so that failure recovery on new hardware is more
convenient at a
| later time. Am I missing something here or is that about
right.
|
| The second issue is that HAL. If the old and new systems
are single CPU
| ACPI mobos then everything works. It makes no difference
is one is a VIA
| chipset and Athlon and the other an Intel chipset and an
Intel CPU. Do I
| have this right so far?
|
| If one is going from a single CPU case to a new P4
supporting HT then one
| must force in a new HAL for multiprocessor ACPI.
Apparently that can be
| done in Recovery console or by putting the HD in another
system where files
| may be manipulated before attempting a boot on the new
mobo. Right so far?
|
| Are the above the only two issues? Will all the other
gadgets and chipsets
| etc. be redetected and appropriate drivers installed?
Will one be able to
| boot and move forward in most all cases if the above two
issues are dealt
| with?
|
|

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

The necessity for a Repair Installation or other detection actions
have nothing to do with WPA.
If WPA was removed, these actions would still be required to properly
detect the new hardware in Windows XP.
Do not confuse hardware detection and WPA, they are independent of
each other.
You apparently picked up one of the many myths spread by those
critical of Microsoft and particularly Windows Product Activation.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote in message
news:uy6ZvaNLEHA.1272@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> One reason for this is the WPA (Windows Product Activation)
> which is new beginning with XP. Major changes look like you
> are installing a pirated copy of XP.
>
> --
> The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
> But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
>
>
>
> "root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
> news:OWbhf9MLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> | I'd like to ask some questions about replacing/changing a
> mobo in an XP pro
> | system. I've done some research on this issue and have
> come to the following
> | conclusions.
> |
> | XP is not quite as Plug & Play as 98[SE] was in this
> regard. One can not
> | just take the OS HD and put it in another box and expect
> it to boot and
> | re-find everything and install all the appropriate drivers
> etc. like it
> | would in 98SE.
> |
> | The limitations appear to be in two areas. The first is
> the HAL which is a
> | function of the CPU and number thereof and
> presence/absence of ACPI mobo
> | BIOS. The second is the HD drivers.
> |
> | I've found all sorts of site/articles regarding how to do
> this and fix these
> | issues for the mobo ATA controller case. Other HD cases
> seem to be
> | tractable using the F6 install drivers(SCSI technique).
> One that seems to
> | be similar to many others regarding the mobo ATA HD issue
> is:
> | www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
> |
> | My conclusion is that one should make the registry and
> file additions on any
> | XP system so that failure recovery on new hardware is more
> convenient at a
> | later time. Am I missing something here or is that about
> right.
> |
> | The second issue is that HAL. If the old and new systems
> are single CPU
> | ACPI mobos then everything works. It makes no difference
> is one is a VIA
> | chipset and Athlon and the other an Intel chipset and an
> Intel CPU. Do I
> | have this right so far?
> |
> | If one is going from a single CPU case to a new P4
> supporting HT then one
> | must force in a new HAL for multiprocessor ACPI.
> Apparently that can be
> | done in Recovery console or by putting the HD in another
> system where files
> | may be manipulated before attempting a boot on the new
> mobo. Right so far?
> |
> | Are the above the only two issues? Will all the other
> gadgets and chipsets
> | etc. be redetected and appropriate drivers installed?
> Will one be able to
> | boot and move forward in most all cases if the above two
> issues are dealt
> | with?
> |
> |
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Thanks for the clarification. WPA has not bothered me, in
fact it might make a retail OS purchase a little less
expensive due to reduced piracy.
I simply made a poor assumption but still think that there
could be some detection problem if the new hardware didn't
match the OS on the hard drive. It seems there would be a
driver issue with new CPU and mobo, but also WPA could also
be detecting what looks like a pirated OS? Doesn't the OS
check on every boot for the match of the hardware to the
installed OS?

Guidance would be welcome.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.




"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote in
message news:%23XcEKEOLEHA.3052@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| The necessity for a Repair Installation or other detection
actions
| have nothing to do with WPA.
| If WPA was removed, these actions would still be required
to properly
| detect the new hardware in Windows XP.
| Do not confuse hardware detection and WPA, they are
independent of
| each other.
| You apparently picked up one of the many myths spread by
those
| critical of Microsoft and particularly Windows Product
Activation.
|
| --
| Jupiter Jones [MVP]
| http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
|
|
| "Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote
in message
| news:uy6ZvaNLEHA.1272@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
| > One reason for this is the WPA (Windows Product
Activation)
| > which is new beginning with XP. Major changes look like
you
| > are installing a pirated copy of XP.
| >
| > --
| > The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
| > But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
| >
| >
| >
| > "root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
| > news:OWbhf9MLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| > | I'd like to ask some questions about
replacing/changing a
| > mobo in an XP pro
| > | system. I've done some research on this issue and have
| > come to the following
| > | conclusions.
| > |
| > | XP is not quite as Plug & Play as 98[SE] was in this
| > regard. One can not
| > | just take the OS HD and put it in another box and
expect
| > it to boot and
| > | re-find everything and install all the appropriate
drivers
| > etc. like it
| > | would in 98SE.
| > |
| > | The limitations appear to be in two areas. The first
is
| > the HAL which is a
| > | function of the CPU and number thereof and
| > presence/absence of ACPI mobo
| > | BIOS. The second is the HD drivers.
| > |
| > | I've found all sorts of site/articles regarding how to
do
| > this and fix these
| > | issues for the mobo ATA controller case. Other HD
cases
| > seem to be
| > | tractable using the F6 install drivers(SCSI
technique).
| > One that seems to
| > | be similar to many others regarding the mobo ATA HD
issue
| > is:
| > | www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
| > |
| > | My conclusion is that one should make the registry and
| > file additions on any
| > | XP system so that failure recovery on new hardware is
more
| > convenient at a
| > | later time. Am I missing something here or is that
about
| > right.
| > |
| > | The second issue is that HAL. If the old and new
systems
| > are single CPU
| > | ACPI mobos then everything works. It makes no
difference
| > is one is a VIA
| > | chipset and Athlon and the other an Intel chipset and
an
| > Intel CPU. Do I
| > | have this right so far?
| > |
| > | If one is going from a single CPU case to a new P4
| > supporting HT then one
| > | must force in a new HAL for multiprocessor ACPI.
| > Apparently that can be
| > | done in Recovery console or by putting the HD in
another
| > system where files
| > | may be manipulated before attempting a boot on the new
| > mobo. Right so far?
| > |
| > | Are the above the only two issues? Will all the other
| > gadgets and chipsets
| > | etc. be redetected and appropriate drivers installed?
| > Will one be able to
| > | boot and move forward in most all cases if the above
two
| > issues are dealt
| > | with?
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Jim;
Rather than myself try in a flimsy way, take a look here for what WPA
does:
http://aumha.org/win5/a/wpa.htm

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote in message
news:exq9gPOLEHA.2704@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Thanks for the clarification. WPA has not bothered me, in
> fact it might make a retail OS purchase a little less
> expensive due to reduced piracy.
> I simply made a poor assumption but still think that there
> could be some detection problem if the new hardware didn't
> match the OS on the hard drive. It seems there would be a
> driver issue with new CPU and mobo, but also WPA could also
> be detecting what looks like a pirated OS? Doesn't the OS
> check on every boot for the match of the hardware to the
> installed OS?
>
> Guidance would be welcome.
>
>
> --
> The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
> But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
>
>
>
>
> "Jupiter Jones [MVP]" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote in
> message news:%23XcEKEOLEHA.3052@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> | The necessity for a Repair Installation or other detection
> actions
> | have nothing to do with WPA.
> | If WPA was removed, these actions would still be required
> to properly
> | detect the new hardware in Windows XP.
> | Do not confuse hardware detection and WPA, they are
> independent of
> | each other.
> | You apparently picked up one of the many myths spread by
> those
> | critical of Microsoft and particularly Windows Product
> Activation.
> |
> | --
> | Jupiter Jones [MVP]
> | http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
> |
> |
> | "Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote
> in message
> | news:uy6ZvaNLEHA.1272@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> | > One reason for this is the WPA (Windows Product
> Activation)
> | > which is new beginning with XP. Major changes look like
> you
> | > are installing a pirated copy of XP.
> | >
> | > --
> | > The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
> | > But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | > "root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
> | > news:OWbhf9MLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> | > | I'd like to ask some questions about
> replacing/changing a
> | > mobo in an XP pro
> | > | system. I've done some research on this issue and have
> | > come to the following
> | > | conclusions.
> | > |
> | > | XP is not quite as Plug & Play as 98[SE] was in this
> | > regard. One can not
> | > | just take the OS HD and put it in another box and
> expect
> | > it to boot and
> | > | re-find everything and install all the appropriate
> drivers
> | > etc. like it
> | > | would in 98SE.
> | > |
> | > | The limitations appear to be in two areas. The first
> is
> | > the HAL which is a
> | > | function of the CPU and number thereof and
> | > presence/absence of ACPI mobo
> | > | BIOS. The second is the HD drivers.
> | > |
> | > | I've found all sorts of site/articles regarding how to
> do
> | > this and fix these
> | > | issues for the mobo ATA controller case. Other HD
> cases
> | > seem to be
> | > | tractable using the F6 install drivers(SCSI
> technique).
> | > One that seems to
> | > | be similar to many others regarding the mobo ATA HD
> issue
> | > is:
> | > | www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
> | > |
> | > | My conclusion is that one should make the registry and
> | > file additions on any
> | > | XP system so that failure recovery on new hardware is
> more
> | > convenient at a
> | > | later time. Am I missing something here or is that
> about
> | > right.
> | > |
> | > | The second issue is that HAL. If the old and new
> systems
> | > are single CPU
> | > | ACPI mobos then everything works. It makes no
> difference
> | > is one is a VIA
> | > | chipset and Athlon and the other an Intel chipset and
> an
> | > Intel CPU. Do I
> | > | have this right so far?
> | > |
> | > | If one is going from a single CPU case to a new P4
> | > supporting HT then one
> | > | must force in a new HAL for multiprocessor ACPI.
> | > Apparently that can be
> | > | done in Recovery console or by putting the HD in
> another
> | > system where files
> | > | may be manipulated before attempting a boot on the new
> | > mobo. Right so far?
> | > |
> | > | Are the above the only two issues? Will all the other
> | > gadgets and chipsets
> | > | etc. be redetected and appropriate drivers installed?
> | > Will one be able to
> | > | boot and move forward in most all cases if the above
> two
> | > issues are dealt
> | > | with?
> | > |
> | > |
> | >
> | >
> |
> |
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Thanks
Jim

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.


"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote in
message news:%23$EcRcOLEHA.2260@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
| Jim;
| Rather than myself try in a flimsy way, take a look here
for what WPA
| does:
| http://aumha.org/win5/a/wpa.htm
|
| --
| Jupiter Jones [MVP]
| http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
|
|
| "Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote
in message
| news:exq9gPOLEHA.2704@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| > Thanks for the clarification. WPA has not bothered me,
in
| > fact it might make a retail OS purchase a little less
| > expensive due to reduced piracy.
| > I simply made a poor assumption but still think that
there
| > could be some detection problem if the new hardware
didn't
| > match the OS on the hard drive. It seems there would be
a
| > driver issue with new CPU and mobo, but also WPA could
also
| > be detecting what looks like a pirated OS? Doesn't the
OS
| > check on every boot for the match of the hardware to the
| > installed OS?
| >
| > Guidance would be welcome.
| >
| >
| > --
| > The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
| > But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
| >
| >
| >
| >
| > "Jupiter Jones [MVP]" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com>
wrote in
| > message news:%23XcEKEOLEHA.3052@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
| > | The necessity for a Repair Installation or other
detection
| > actions
| > | have nothing to do with WPA.
| > | If WPA was removed, these actions would still be
required
| > to properly
| > | detect the new hardware in Windows XP.
| > | Do not confuse hardware detection and WPA, they are
| > independent of
| > | each other.
| > | You apparently picked up one of the many myths spread
by
| > those
| > | critical of Microsoft and particularly Windows Product
| > Activation.
| > |
| > | --
| > | Jupiter Jones [MVP]
| > | http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
| > |
| > |
| > | "Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm>
wrote
| > in message
| > | news:uy6ZvaNLEHA.1272@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
| > | > One reason for this is the WPA (Windows Product
| > Activation)
| > | > which is new beginning with XP. Major changes look
like
| > you
| > | > are installing a pirated copy of XP.
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > The people think the Constitution protects their
rights;
| > | > But government sees it as an obstacle to be
overcome.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > "root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
| > | > news:OWbhf9MLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| > | > | I'd like to ask some questions about
| > replacing/changing a
| > | > mobo in an XP pro
| > | > | system. I've done some research on this issue and
have
| > | > come to the following
| > | > | conclusions.
| > | > |
| > | > | XP is not quite as Plug & Play as 98[SE] was in
this
| > | > regard. One can not
| > | > | just take the OS HD and put it in another box and
| > expect
| > | > it to boot and
| > | > | re-find everything and install all the appropriate
| > drivers
| > | > etc. like it
| > | > | would in 98SE.
| > | > |
| > | > | The limitations appear to be in two areas. The
first
| > is
| > | > the HAL which is a
| > | > | function of the CPU and number thereof and
| > | > presence/absence of ACPI mobo
| > | > | BIOS. The second is the HD drivers.
| > | > |
| > | > | I've found all sorts of site/articles regarding
how to
| > do
| > | > this and fix these
| > | > | issues for the mobo ATA controller case. Other HD
| > cases
| > | > seem to be
| > | > | tractable using the F6 install drivers(SCSI
| > technique).
| > | > One that seems to
| > | > | be similar to many others regarding the mobo ATA
HD
| > issue
| > | > is:
| > | > | www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
| > | > |
| > | > | My conclusion is that one should make the registry
and
| > | > file additions on any
| > | > | XP system so that failure recovery on new hardware
is
| > more
| > | > convenient at a
| > | > | later time. Am I missing something here or is
that
| > about
| > | > right.
| > | > |
| > | > | The second issue is that HAL. If the old and new
| > systems
| > | > are single CPU
| > | > | ACPI mobos then everything works. It makes no
| > difference
| > | > is one is a VIA
| > | > | chipset and Athlon and the other an Intel chipset
and
| > an
| > | > Intel CPU. Do I
| > | > | have this right so far?
| > | > |
| > | > | If one is going from a single CPU case to a new P4
| > | > supporting HT then one
| > | > | must force in a new HAL for multiprocessor ACPI.
| > | > Apparently that can be
| > | > | done in Recovery console or by putting the HD in
| > another
| > | > system where files
| > | > | may be manipulated before attempting a boot on the
new
| > | > mobo. Right so far?
| > | > |
| > | > | Are the above the only two issues? Will all the
other
| > | > gadgets and chipsets
| > | > | etc. be redetected and appropriate drivers
installed?
| > | > Will one be able to
| > | > | boot and move forward in most all cases if the
above
| > two
| > | > issues are dealt
| > | > | with?
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

"root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
news:OWbhf9MLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I'd like to ask some questions about replacing/changing a mobo in an XP
pro
> system. I've done some research on this issue and have come to the
following
> conclusions.
>
> XP is not quite as Plug & Play as 98[SE] was in this regard. One can not
> just take the OS HD and put it in another box and expect it to boot and
> re-find everything and install all the appropriate drivers etc. like it
> would in 98SE.
>
> The limitations appear to be in two areas. The first is the HAL which is
a
> function of the CPU and number thereof and presence/absence of ACPI mobo
> BIOS. The second is the HD drivers.
>
> I've found all sorts of site/articles regarding how to do this and fix
these
> issues for the mobo ATA controller case. Other HD cases seem to be
> tractable using the F6 install drivers(SCSI technique). One that seems to
> be similar to many others regarding the mobo ATA HD issue is:
> www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
>
> My conclusion is that one should make the registry and file additions on
any
> XP system so that failure recovery on new hardware is more convenient at a
> later time. Am I missing something here or is that about right.
>
> The second issue is that HAL. If the old and new systems are single CPU
> ACPI mobos then everything works. It makes no difference is one is a VIA
> chipset and Athlon and the other an Intel chipset and an Intel CPU. Do I
> have this right so far?
>
> If one is going from a single CPU case to a new P4 supporting HT then one
> must force in a new HAL for multiprocessor ACPI. Apparently that can be
> done in Recovery console or by putting the HD in another system where
files
> may be manipulated before attempting a boot on the new mobo. Right so
far?
>
> Are the above the only two issues? Will all the other gadgets and
chipsets
> etc. be redetected and appropriate drivers installed? Will one be able to
> boot and move forward in most all cases if the above two issues are dealt
> with?
>
>
Only thing you will need to do is a repair install of xp then your mobo
drivers and your set. O & apply all your critical patches from windows
update as a repair install wipes these out.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

"CrazyEyes" <me@there.com> wrote in message
news:eqwR1HNLEHA.2388@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>
> "root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
> news:OWbhf9MLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > I'd like to ask some questions about replacing/changing a mobo in an XP
> pro
> > system. I've done some research on this issue and have come to the
> following
> > conclusions.
> >
> > XP is not quite as Plug & Play as 98[SE] was in this regard. One can
not
> > just take the OS HD and put it in another box and expect it to boot and
> > re-find everything and install all the appropriate drivers etc. like it
> > would in 98SE.
> >
> > The limitations appear to be in two areas. The first is the HAL which
is
> a
> > function of the CPU and number thereof and presence/absence of ACPI mobo
> > BIOS. The second is the HD drivers.
> >
> > I've found all sorts of site/articles regarding how to do this and fix
> these
> > issues for the mobo ATA controller case. Other HD cases seem to be
> > tractable using the F6 install drivers(SCSI technique). One that seems
to
> > be similar to many others regarding the mobo ATA HD issue is:
> > www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
> >
> > My conclusion is that one should make the registry and file additions on
> any
> > XP system so that failure recovery on new hardware is more convenient at
a
> > later time. Am I missing something here or is that about right.
> >
> > The second issue is that HAL. If the old and new systems are single CPU
> > ACPI mobos then everything works. It makes no difference is one is a
VIA
> > chipset and Athlon and the other an Intel chipset and an Intel CPU. Do
I
> > have this right so far?
> >
> > If one is going from a single CPU case to a new P4 supporting HT then
one
> > must force in a new HAL for multiprocessor ACPI. Apparently that can be
> > done in Recovery console or by putting the HD in another system where
> files
> > may be manipulated before attempting a boot on the new mobo. Right so
> far?
> >
> > Are the above the only two issues? Will all the other gadgets and
> chipsets
> > etc. be redetected and appropriate drivers installed? Will one be able
to
> > boot and move forward in most all cases if the above two issues are
dealt
> > with?
> >
> >
> Only thing you will need to do is a repair install of xp then your mobo
> drivers and your set. O & apply all your critical patches from windows
> update as a repair install wipes these out.

Yes, there is that long hard way but what about what I've proposed above?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

"Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote in message
news:exq9gPOLEHA.2704@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Thanks for the clarification. WPA has not bothered me, in
> fact it might make a retail OS purchase a little less
> expensive due to reduced piracy.
> I simply made a poor assumption but still think that there
> could be some detection problem if the new hardware didn't
> match the OS on the hard drive. It seems there would be a
> driver issue with new CPU and mobo, but also WPA could also
> be detecting what looks like a pirated OS? Doesn't the OS
> check on every boot for the match of the hardware to the
> installed OS?

"match of the hardware to the installed OS?" What?

The OS will boot or it wont. Apparently the conditions precedent to booting
are that the HAL is right and that the boot process can find/knows which
disk driver to use to read the boot drive. Having been able to read the
boot drive and run the HAL, gives the boot process the ability to start
processing. That includes loading drivers for the various gadgets. That
process also checks to see what those gadgets are so that it knows what
drivers to load. All that gets done and then there is another process that
does WAP stuff and finding things changed significantly cause the
requirement for a new authorization.

> "Jupiter Jones [MVP]" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote in
> message news:%23XcEKEOLEHA.3052@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> | The necessity for a Repair Installation or other detection
> actions
> | have nothing to do with WPA.
> | If WPA was removed, these actions would still be required
> to properly
> | detect the new hardware in Windows XP.
> | Do not confuse hardware detection and WPA, they are
> independent of
> | each other.
> | You apparently picked up one of the many myths spread by
> those
> | critical of Microsoft and particularly Windows Product
> Activation.
> |
> | --
> | Jupiter Jones [MVP]
> | http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/
> |
> |
> | "Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote
> in message
> | news:uy6ZvaNLEHA.1272@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> | > One reason for this is the WPA (Windows Product
> Activation)
> | > which is new beginning with XP. Major changes look like
> you
> | > are installing a pirated copy of XP.
> | >
> | > --
> | > The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
> | > But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | > "root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
> | > news:OWbhf9MLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> | > | I'd like to ask some questions about
> replacing/changing a
> | > mobo in an XP pro
> | > | system. I've done some research on this issue and have
> | > come to the following
> | > | conclusions.
> | > |
> | > | XP is not quite as Plug & Play as 98[SE] was in this
> | > regard. One can not
> | > | just take the OS HD and put it in another box and
> expect
> | > it to boot and
> | > | re-find everything and install all the appropriate
> drivers
> | > etc. like it
> | > | would in 98SE.
> | > |
> | > | The limitations appear to be in two areas. The first
> is
> | > the HAL which is a
> | > | function of the CPU and number thereof and
> | > presence/absence of ACPI mobo
> | > | BIOS. The second is the HD drivers.
> | > |
> | > | I've found all sorts of site/articles regarding how to
> do
> | > this and fix these
> | > | issues for the mobo ATA controller case. Other HD
> cases
> | > seem to be
> | > | tractable using the F6 install drivers(SCSI
> technique).
> | > One that seems to
> | > | be similar to many others regarding the mobo ATA HD
> issue
> | > is:
> | > | www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
> | > |
> | > | My conclusion is that one should make the registry and
> | > file additions on any
> | > | XP system so that failure recovery on new hardware is
> more
> | > convenient at a
> | > | later time. Am I missing something here or is that
> about
> | > right.
> | > |
> | > | The second issue is that HAL. If the old and new
> systems
> | > are single CPU
> | > | ACPI mobos then everything works. It makes no
> difference
> | > is one is a VIA
> | > | chipset and Athlon and the other an Intel chipset and
> an
> | > Intel CPU. Do I
> | > | have this right so far?
> | > |
> | > | If one is going from a single CPU case to a new P4
> | > supporting HT then one
> | > | must force in a new HAL for multiprocessor ACPI.
> | > Apparently that can be
> | > | done in Recovery console or by putting the HD in
> another
> | > system where files
> | > | may be manipulated before attempting a boot on the new
> | > mobo. Right so far?
> | > |
> | > | Are the above the only two issues? Will all the other
> | > gadgets and chipsets
> | > | etc. be redetected and appropriate drivers installed?
> | > Will one be able to
> | > | boot and move forward in most all cases if the above
> two
> | > issues are dealt
> | > | with?
> | > |
> | > |
> | >
> | >
> |
> |
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Greetings --

Normally, and assuming a retail license (many OEM licenses are not
transferable to a new motherboard), unless your motherboard is
virtually identical (same chipset, same IDE controllers, same BIOS
version, etc.) to the one on which the other WinXP installation was
originally performed, you'll need to perform a repair (a.k.a. in-place
upgrade) installation, at the very least:

How to Perform an In-Place Upgrade of Windows XP
http://support.microsoft.com/directory/article.asp?ID=KB;EN-US;Q315341

As always when undertaking such a significant change, back up any
important data before starting.

This will also require re-activation, unless you have a Volume
Licensed version of WinXP Pro installed. If it's been more than 120
days since you last activated that specific Product Key, you'll most
likely be able to activate via the internet without problem. If it's
been less, you might have to make a 5 minute phone call.


Bruce Chambers

--
Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html


You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH


"root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
news:OWbhf9MLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I'd like to ask some questions about replacing/changing a mobo in an
> XP pro
> system. I've done some research on this issue and have come to the
> following
> conclusions.
>
> XP is not quite as Plug & Play as 98[SE] was in this regard. One
> can not
> just take the OS HD and put it in another box and expect it to boot
> and
> re-find everything and install all the appropriate drivers etc. like
> it
> would in 98SE.
>
> The limitations appear to be in two areas. The first is the HAL
> which is a
> function of the CPU and number thereof and presence/absence of ACPI
> mobo
> BIOS. The second is the HD drivers.
>
> I've found all sorts of site/articles regarding how to do this and
> fix these
> issues for the mobo ATA controller case. Other HD cases seem to be
> tractable using the F6 install drivers(SCSI technique). One that
> seems to
> be similar to many others regarding the mobo ATA HD issue is:
> www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
>
> My conclusion is that one should make the registry and file
> additions on any
> XP system so that failure recovery on new hardware is more
> convenient at a
> later time. Am I missing something here or is that about right.
>
> The second issue is that HAL. If the old and new systems are single
> CPU
> ACPI mobos then everything works. It makes no difference is one is
> a VIA
> chipset and Athlon and the other an Intel chipset and an Intel CPU.
> Do I
> have this right so far?
>
> If one is going from a single CPU case to a new P4 supporting HT
> then one
> must force in a new HAL for multiprocessor ACPI. Apparently that
> can be
> done in Recovery console or by putting the HD in another system
> where files
> may be manipulated before attempting a boot on the new mobo. Right
> so far?
>
> Are the above the only two issues? Will all the other gadgets and
> chipsets
> etc. be redetected and appropriate drivers installed? Will one be
> able to
> boot and move forward in most all cases if the above two issues are
> dealt
> with?
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

"Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@nospamcableone.net> wrote in message
news:ejgwWMYLEHA.3944@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Greetings --
>
> Normally, and assuming a retail license (many OEM licenses are not
> transferable to a new motherboard), unless your motherboard is
> virtually identical (same chipset, same IDE controllers, same BIOS
> version, etc.) to the one on which the other WinXP installation was
> originally performed,

Significant research suggests that the above assertion is false.

> you'll need to perform a repair (a.k.a. in-place
> upgrade) installation, at the very least:

Not true.

If the HAL is the same and the BIOS can find the boot partition and the OS
boot code can read the HD then it all seems to work. Checkout the URL I
cited in my opening thread. Checkout the post by Gary R. in this thread.
That's the reality of the situation. I'd like to see some folks post to
this thread who have actual experience and knows how this works in detail
and not just a repitition of the stale mostly fictious party line.

Read all of MS articles on Sysprep and ignore the parts about how closely
the systems must be similar and spot all the places where it suggests that
the systems can actually be rather dissimilar. What do you think all the
articles about HALs and their selection and replacement and forcing are all
about? Do you think that only applies to situations where "motherboard is
virtually identical (same chipset, same IDE controllers, same BIOS version,
etc.)"......I don't think so.

As near as I can tell Gary R. was right when he said "To my surprise, the
hardware was recognized and installed just as it usually is in ME or 98."
Apparently that's exactly what XP does save the HAL and disk driver issue.

If anyone can cite any additional information or good resources regarding
this issue I'd really appreciate it.

> How to Perform an In-Place Upgrade of Windows XP
> http://support.microsoft.com/directory/article.asp?ID=KB;EN-US;Q315341

Takes too long along with WinUp if it can be avoided.

> As always when undertaking such a significant change, back up any
> important data before starting.
>
> This will also require re-activation, unless you have a Volume
> Licensed version of WinXP Pro installed. If it's been more than 120
> days since you last activated that specific Product Key, you'll most
> likely be able to activate via the internet without problem. If it's
> been less, you might have to make a 5 minute phone call.
>
>
> Bruce Chambers

> "root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
> news:OWbhf9MLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > I'd like to ask some questions about replacing/changing a mobo in an
> > XP pro
> > system. I've done some research on this issue and have come to the
> > following
> > conclusions.
> >
> > XP is not quite as Plug & Play as 98[SE] was in this regard. One
> > can not
> > just take the OS HD and put it in another box and expect it to boot
> > and
> > re-find everything and install all the appropriate drivers etc. like
> > it
> > would in 98SE.
> >
> > The limitations appear to be in two areas. The first is the HAL
> > which is a
> > function of the CPU and number thereof and presence/absence of ACPI
> > mobo
> > BIOS. The second is the HD drivers.
> >
> > I've found all sorts of site/articles regarding how to do this and
> > fix these
> > issues for the mobo ATA controller case. Other HD cases seem to be
> > tractable using the F6 install drivers(SCSI technique). One that
> > seems to
> > be similar to many others regarding the mobo ATA HD issue is:
> > www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
> >
> > My conclusion is that one should make the registry and file
> > additions on any
> > XP system so that failure recovery on new hardware is more
> > convenient at a
> > later time. Am I missing something here or is that about right.
> >
> > The second issue is that HAL. If the old and new systems are single
> > CPU
> > ACPI mobos then everything works. It makes no difference is one is
> > a VIA
> > chipset and Athlon and the other an Intel chipset and an Intel CPU.
> > Do I
> > have this right so far?
> >
> > If one is going from a single CPU case to a new P4 supporting HT
> > then one
> > must force in a new HAL for multiprocessor ACPI. Apparently that
> > can be
> > done in Recovery console or by putting the HD in another system
> > where files
> > may be manipulated before attempting a boot on the new mobo. Right
> > so far?
> >
> > Are the above the only two issues? Will all the other gadgets and
> > chipsets
> > etc. be redetected and appropriate drivers installed? Will one be
> > able to
> > boot and move forward in most all cases if the above two issues are
> > dealt
> > with?
> >
> >
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Greetings --

Well, I think I'll just trust my years of hands-on experience
instead of your "significant research." But you go right ahead and
try it your way.


Bruce Chambers

--
Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html


You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH


"root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
news:eVpoEoYLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>
> Significant research suggests that the above assertion is false.
>
>> you'll need to perform a repair (a.k.a. in-place
>> upgrade) installation, at the very least:
>
> Not true.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

"Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@nospamcableone.net> wrote in message
news:On66a0YLEHA.2660@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Greetings --
>
> Well, I think I'll just trust my years of hands-on experience
> instead of your "significant research." But you go right ahead and
> try it your way.

Well let's see some real citations from you rather than unsubstantiated
claims. I can provide a host of citations about how to switch HW in XP and
that it works. Nowhere have I been able to find anyone treating the subject
exhaustively and that's what I'm trying to do. You simply say it can't be
done and I've clearly debunked that as has another poster in this thread.

> "root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
> news:eVpoEoYLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> >
> > Significant research suggests that the above assertion is false.
> >
> >> you'll need to perform a repair (a.k.a. in-place
> >> upgrade) installation, at the very least:
> >
> > Not true.
> >
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

1.) Bruce prefaced his statement with "normally" -- he did not preclude
miracles. For instance: "Normally, people who jump off of the Golden Gate
Bridge die." The fact that on occasion a jumper lives does not mean that
everyone should try it. Even the other poster you cite, Gary R., says "To
my surprise, ..."

2.) Bruce has been assisting people in these ngs for years; he has an
established track record.

steve

"root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
news:%23UKmgDZLEHA.3292@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>
> "Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@nospamcableone.net> wrote in message
> news:On66a0YLEHA.2660@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > Greetings --
> >
> > Well, I think I'll just trust my years of hands-on experience
> > instead of your "significant research." But you go right ahead and
> > try it your way.
>
> Well let's see some real citations from you rather than unsubstantiated
> claims. I can provide a host of citations about how to switch HW in XP
and
> that it works. Nowhere have I been able to find anyone treating the
subject
> exhaustively and that's what I'm trying to do. You simply say it can't be
> done and I've clearly debunked that as has another poster in this thread.
>
> > "root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
> > news:eVpoEoYLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > >
> > > Significant research suggests that the above assertion is false.
> > >
> > >> you'll need to perform a repair (a.k.a. in-place
> > >> upgrade) installation, at the very least:
> > >
> > > Not true.
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

"joust in jest" <joust in jest@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:udGrYVZLEHA.3944@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> 1.) Bruce prefaced his statement with "normally" -- he did not preclude
> miracles. For instance: "Normally, people who jump off of the Golden Gate
> Bridge die." The fact that on occasion a jumper lives does not mean that
> everyone should try it. Even the other poster you cite, Gary R., says "To
> my surprise, ..."


That's because a bunch of old foggers have been passing bull on the issue
for awhile now. I also was surprised to find that HW swapping mostly works
in XP because I'd been told by these folks that it couldn't be done. It CAN
be done and there are many how to articles...Google is neat.

> 2.) Bruce has been assisting people in these ngs for years; he has an
> established track record.

Which has now just been challenged and I can back it up on this issue.

Now let's get someone who really knows the in-s and out-s of the issue
contributing rather than someone who spends all his time posting here and
sayin it can't be done.

> "root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
> news:%23UKmgDZLEHA.3292@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> >
> > "Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@nospamcableone.net> wrote in message
> > news:On66a0YLEHA.2660@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> > > Greetings --
> > >
> > > Well, I think I'll just trust my years of hands-on experience
> > > instead of your "significant research." But you go right ahead and
> > > try it your way.
> >
> > Well let's see some real citations from you rather than unsubstantiated
> > claims. I can provide a host of citations about how to switch HW in XP
> and
> > that it works. Nowhere have I been able to find anyone treating the
> subject
> > exhaustively and that's what I'm trying to do. You simply say it can't
be
> > done and I've clearly debunked that as has another poster in this
thread.
> >
> > > "root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
> > > news:eVpoEoYLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > > >
> > > > Significant research suggests that the above assertion is false.
> > > >
> > > >> you'll need to perform a repair (a.k.a. in-place
> > > >> upgrade) installation, at the very least:
> > > >
> > > > Not true.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Greetings --

I've no need to justify my observations to you. I know what I've
actually experienced and don't much care whether you can find
"documentation" to the contrary or not. I can find plenty of
literature documenting the existence of fairies, dragons, and elves,
but I'll continue to base my opinions about such things upon my own
experiences, rather than the claims of others. (Which doesn't mean
that no one can move WinXP to new hardware without trouble, just that
it's a very rare occurrence, in _my_ experience. Your experience, and
that of others, may vary.)


Bruce Chambers

--
Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html


You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH


"root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
news:%23UKmgDZLEHA.3292@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>
> "Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@nospamcableone.net> wrote in message
> news:On66a0YLEHA.2660@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> Greetings --
>>
>> Well, I think I'll just trust my years of hands-on experience
>> instead of your "significant research." But you go right ahead and
>> try it your way.
>
> Well let's see some real citations from you rather than
> unsubstantiated
> claims. I can provide a host of citations about how to switch HW in
> XP and
> that it works. Nowhere have I been able to find anyone treating the
> subject
> exhaustively and that's what I'm trying to do. You simply say it
> can't be
> done and I've clearly debunked that as has another poster in this
> thread.
>
>> "root" <postmaster@buchanangc.com> wrote in message
>> news:eVpoEoYLEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> >
>> > Significant research suggests that the above assertion is false.
>> >
>> >> you'll need to perform a repair (a.k.a. in-place
>> >> upgrade) installation, at the very least:
>> >
>> > Not true.
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Bruce Chambers, after spending 3 minutes figuring out which end of the pen to
use, wrote:

> Greetings --
>
> I've no need to justify my observations to you. I know what I've
> actually experienced and don't much care whether you can find
> "documentation" to the contrary or not. I can find plenty of
> literature documenting the existence of fairies, dragons, and elves,
> but I'll continue to base my opinions about such things upon my own
> experiences, rather than the claims of others. (Which doesn't mean
> that no one can move WinXP to new hardware without trouble, just that
> it's a very rare occurrence, in _my_ experience. Your experience, and
> that of others, may vary.)
>
>
> Bruce Chambers

What a maroon!

Joh N.
--
Linux 2.4.20-4GB-athlon
8:34am up 1 day 8:15, 2 users, load average: 0.01, 0.03, 0.14