Replace Mobo in XP??

Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,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?
55 answers Last reply
More about replace mobo
  1. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote in message
    news:1090sn6ptvjgjb4@corp.supernews.com...
    > 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?
    >

    Why not back up your data and reinstall on the new setup?
    If the old MB is bad, install your drive as a slave in another PC then
    backup.

    --
    I saw Elvis. He sat between
    me and Bigfoot on the UFO.
  2. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "one_red_eye" <someone@your.house> wrote in message
    news:1090t555l5umie5@corp.supernews.com...
    > "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote in message
    > news:1090sn6ptvjgjb4@corp.supernews.com...
    > > 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?
    > >
    >
    > Why not back up your data and reinstall on the new setup?

    Vastly less convenient and it takes too long and many of one's XP
    configurations settings are lost.

    > If the old MB is bad, install your drive as a slave in another PC then
    > backup.

    I didn't ask for alternatives but how best to make this technique work.
  3. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:5d4301c42d9f$ea12ff20$a001280a@phx.gbl...
    > I have some experience with HD cloning.
    > W98 worked fine. W2K almost never - systems had to be
    > identical. Even swapping a HD caused Blue Screen.
    >
    > If the only purpose is to change a MB in your home PC,
    > then fresh install seams to be the most optimal and
    > painless solution.

    No, the most painless solution is the one I described in my opening post if
    all the details can be worked out.

    I'm looking for folks who might want to contribute to fully describing that
    solutions as it appears to be nearly at hand.
  4. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    one_red_eye wrote:

    > "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote in message
    > news:1090sn6ptvjgjb4@corp.supernews.com...
    >
    >>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?
    >>
    >
    >
    > Why not back up your data and reinstall on the new setup?
    > If the old MB is bad, install your drive as a slave in another PC then
    > backup.
    >
    I agree-why all the extra headache when you could just either back
    up or install it as a slave or partition it first and dual boot?...
  5. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "TT" <tt@noburn.net> wrote in message
    news:Y9ydnTpgJvsP4Q3dRVn-iQ@wideopenwest.com...
    > one_red_eye wrote:
    >
    > > "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote in message
    > > news:1090sn6ptvjgjb4@corp.supernews.com...
    > >
    > >>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?
    > >>
    > >
    > >
    > > Why not back up your data and reinstall on the new setup?
    > > If the old MB is bad, install your drive as a slave in another PC then
    > > backup.
    > >
    > I agree-why all the extra headache

    You missed the point of my post. I'm looking for a way to fully minimize
    headache.

    >when you could just either back
    > up or install it as a slave or partition it first and dual boot?...

    That's a headache.
  6. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote in message
    news:1091467ifolt34@corp.supernews.com...
    > <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    > news:5d4301c42d9f$ea12ff20$a001280a@phx.gbl...
    > > I have some experience with HD cloning.
    > > W98 worked fine. W2K almost never - systems had to be
    > > identical. Even swapping a HD caused Blue Screen.
    > >
    > > If the only purpose is to change a MB in your home PC,
    > > then fresh install seams to be the most optimal and
    > > painless solution.
    >
    > No, the most painless solution is the one I described in my opening post
    if
    > all the details can be worked out.
    >
    > I'm looking for folks who might want to contribute to fully describing
    that
    > solutions as it appears to be nearly at hand.
    >
    >

    Says Bob:

    You may also want to look into running a repair installation after switching
    to the new hardware. This will allow you to keep programs and settings
    while getting around the driver issue.
    Bob


    That seems to be the easiest solution.
    --
    I saw Elvis. He sat between
    me and Bigfoot on the UFO.
  7. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Answers inline...

    jim wrote:
    > 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.

    Yes - XP is not as "Ghost/Clone friendly" as its predecessors. You could
    take all Windows OS's before it (Windows 95, 98, ME, NT, 2000) and usually
    put it on a different set of hardware and with minimal muss/fuss, you could
    get it going. You could even then make an image with the additional
    drivers/HAL information added and now the image would function on multiple
    machines without a problem. With the advent of WIndows XP, this simplicity
    and grace went away, a more forceful approach (or actually using tools like
    sysprep) became necessary in order to clone the software to another set of
    hardware than that it was originally installed upon.

    > 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 concerns with your conclusion is that you know when the failure is going
    to occur and what hardware you will be moving it to before that failure
    occurs. Not only that, this is Windows XP - not that important of an OS in
    the scheme of things - certainly not a server-level catastrophic failure
    event. If it is, then you have not thought out your network/user
    environment well, or in the case of a single-user environment, you were dumb
    enough not to make backups.

    Assuming this has nothing to do with JUST failure recovery, but just ease of
    movement to a new set of hardware or even, as is done in many university
    type environments, ghosting to diverse lab machines - then some of your
    assumptions are correct. I know of a group that uses one image (clone) to
    ghost several different sets of hardware (vastly different) by ripping out a
    large section of the registry and replacing that chunk with the proper chunk
    before the first GUI boot after applying a cloned image. XP fought them
    tooth and nail on doing the older style they were used to with Windows 2000
    and before of just adding additional hardware information so that
    application to another set of hardware components were built in - it seemed
    to clean itself up in other words - the new drivers needed took out the old
    drivers instead of just being added - thus their new methodology.

    > 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?

    No. You are not. Try it. Get two systems, identical in everything but
    chipset and swap hard drives. I don't mean two different versions of a VIA
    chipset or something lame, but one Intel, one via. My experience says
    Windows XP will freak - to put it in layman's terms.

    > 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?

    This is true. With some manipulation (as mentioned above earlier, before
    booting in the new system) you can accomplishing some pretty cool things.

    > 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?

    I think I covered this above. YES, it is possible to do what you are
    suggesting in some ways. Practical, no - possible, yes. If your purpose is
    disaster recovery, as implied - not only is it impractical, but impossible
    to predict when the failure will occur and what hardware (chipset, drives,
    video cards, network cards, etc) will be in the replacement system, or if
    the data on the drive will even be in a state to do this recovery.

    You state "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." To me, that is the true failure of this whole
    discussion. If your conclusion had been "My conclusion is that one could
    make the registry and file removals/changes on an XP system so that cloning
    on new hardware is possible." Then you would have me agreeing 100% - but
    you said recovery. If you are using XP as a server or even as a personal
    system and something fails - I don't care if it is as simple as the
    motherboard and all data is recoverable - it is easier, faster and more
    practical in the worse case scenario (or just simple fact you consider
    hardware failure an opportunity to upgrade power/speed) of all hardware/not
    data replacement to do a repair installation and move on with life. You
    cannot predict in a failure scenario what hardware you will be moving to.
    And if it is not a failure scenario - again - yes - I agree, there are
    things you can do to move without doing an actual repair installation, but
    unless doing it on a grander scale than the casual home user - it seems like
    a worthless endeavor...

    UNLESS, and here is my other conclusion (possible scenario actually) from
    your persistence in this matter - you are trying to come up with some
    programmatic way of transferring the system so you can create a product to
    do exactly what you are discussing here - in which case you have made a bad
    business decision in discussing it here, as people who are doing it now may
    decide, "Not only is it possible and I am doing it now, but I can create a
    product and get it to market now and this guy made me realize it." -- They
    may thank you...

    Otherwise, in my years of cloning thousands of systems every 3-5 months with
    100+ applications installed upon each system working together and thousands
    of roaming profile users all with different needs/wants - it seems only
    practical and worthwhile to someone like me - who would have figured out
    other methods are usually faster, making sure that the users data is never
    stored on the local machine anyway and if it is, tough luck, they should
    back it up.

    That's my spill/take on it.

    --
    <- Shenan ->
    --
  8. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote in message
    news:1090sn6ptvjgjb4@corp.supernews.com...
    > 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?

    You may also want to look into running a repair installation after switching
    to the new hardware. This will allow you to keep programs and settings
    while getting around the driver issue.
    Bob
  9. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "Bob Roberts" <samsamjeh@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:M__jc.730$eH1.301919@newssvr28.news.prodigy.com...
    > "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote in message
    > news:1090sn6ptvjgjb4@corp.supernews.com...
    > > 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?
    >
    > You may also want to look into running a repair installation after
    switching
    > to the new hardware. This will allow you to keep programs and settings
    > while getting around the driver issue.

    Right but again that takes awhile(slow) with WinUp and all.

    I want to figure out how to make what I proposed in my opening post work
    robustly.
  10. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote in message
    news:10913se7g01ih38@corp.supernews.com...
    >
    > "Bob Roberts" <samsamjeh@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:M__jc.730$eH1.301919@newssvr28.news.prodigy.com...
    > > "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote in message
    > > news:1090sn6ptvjgjb4@corp.supernews.com...
    > > > 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?
    > >
    > > You may also want to look into running a repair installation after
    > switching
    > > to the new hardware. This will allow you to keep programs and settings
    > > while getting around the driver issue.
    >
    > Right but again that takes awhile(slow) with WinUp and all.
    >
    > I want to figure out how to make what I proposed in my opening post work
    > robustly.
    >
    >

    Do you intend to do this on many computers?

    --
    I saw Elvis. He sat between
    me and Bigfoot on the UFO.
  11. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    > You may also want to look into running a repair installation after
    switching
    > to the new hardware. This will allow you to keep programs and settings
    > while getting around the driver issue.
    > Bob
    >
    >
    > That seems to be the easiest solution.


    I agree, the repair installtion only takes a few minutes...
    and all you need do afterwards is re-apply the updates
  12. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote in message
    news:1090sn6ptvjgjb4@corp.supernews.com...
    > 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?
    >
    >
    >
  13. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    jim wrote:

    > No, the most painless solution is the one I described in my opening post if
    > all the details can be worked out.
    >
    > I'm looking for folks who might want to contribute to fully describing that
    > solutions as it appears to be nearly at hand.

    Maybe you should take some suggestions from some folks who know what
    they're doing. You keep saying /your/ solution is the easiest, 'most
    painless' solution, when it obviously isn't.

    First, you mention swapping out the mobo, then you go on to explain that
    you're really interested in putting the harddrive in a completely
    different PC. Not the same thing is it?

    You've been given some pretty painless solutions by the nice folks in
    this group. Quit being ingrateful.

    --
    I'm not a racist - I hate everybody EQUALLY!
  14. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "one_red_eye" <someone@your.house> wrote in message


    > Do you intend to do this on many computers?


    Yep, as a general maintenance/recovery/upgrade technique.
  15. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "Shenan Stanley" <news_helper@hushmail.com> wrote in message
    news:u78UaqbLEHA.1644@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    > Answers inline...
    >
    > jim wrote:
    > > 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.
    >
    > Yes - XP is not as "Ghost/Clone friendly" as its predecessors. You could
    > take all Windows OS's before it (Windows 95, 98, ME, NT, 2000) and usually
    > put it on a different set of hardware and with minimal muss/fuss, you
    could
    > get it going. You could even then make an image with the additional
    > drivers/HAL information added and now the image would function on multiple
    > machines without a problem. With the advent of WIndows XP, this
    simplicity
    > and grace went away,

    Some of it went away but apparently alot of the same functionality is still
    there in XP as I described in my opening post.

    > a more forceful approach (or actually using tools like
    > sysprep) became necessary in order to clone the software to another set of
    > hardware than that it was originally installed upon.
    >
    > > 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 concerns with your conclusion is that you know when the failure is
    going
    > to occur and what hardware you will be moving it to before that failure
    > occurs.

    I don't follow. No precognition is necessary regarding time or target.

    > Not only that, this is Windows XP - not that important of an OS in
    > the scheme of things - certainly not a server-level catastrophic failure
    > event. If it is, then you have not thought out your network/user
    > environment well, or in the case of a single-user environment, you were
    dumb
    > enough not to make backups.

    Huh? You gone off on some magical mystery tour outside the scope on my post
    and intentions. Thius is not a backup issue.

    > Assuming this has nothing to do with JUST failure recovery,

    This has everything to do with FAST failure recovery and also just hardware
    upgrades unassociated with any failure.

    > but just ease of
    > movement to a new set of hardware or even, as is done in many university
    > type environments, ghosting to diverse lab machines - then some of your
    > assumptions are correct.

    Right.

    > I know of a group that uses one image (clone) to
    > ghost several different sets of hardware (vastly different) by ripping out
    a
    > large section of the registry and replacing that chunk with the proper
    chunk
    > before the first GUI boot after applying a cloned image.


    Right there are a number of places on the web describing such registry mods.

    > XP fought them
    > tooth and nail on doing the older style they were used to with Windows
    2000
    > and before of just adding additional hardware information so that
    > application to another set of hardware components were built in - it
    seemed
    > to clean itself up in other words - the new drivers needed took out the
    old
    > drivers instead of just being added - thus their new methodology.

    XP is removing stuff? Can you cite any sources on that, please. That's
    one of the issue I'm actively researching: Why not put all that stuff in
    the registry up front in preparationfor any later potential HW change? The
    question is will XP let it stay there gracefully.

    > > 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?
    >
    > No. You are not. Try it. Get two systems, identical in everything but
    > chipset and swap hard drives. I don't mean two different versions of a
    VIA
    > chipset or something lame, but one Intel, one via. My experience says
    > Windows XP will freak - to put it in layman's terms.


    Actually I am right in at least some cases. The question is how right am I
    across many different cases. Where do any problems arise. See the post
    using the same subject yesterday in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general from
    Gary R. :
    "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. "

    This DOES WORK the issue is the HAL and the IDE[disk] drivers. If you get
    the HAL right and the disk is readable then things work. The question is
    how robust is the "DOES WORK"?

    > > 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?
    >
    > This is true. With some manipulation (as mentioned above earlier, before
    > booting in the new system) you can accomplishing some pretty cool things.
    >
    > > 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?
    >
    > I think I covered this above. YES, it is possible to do what you are
    > suggesting in some ways. Practical, no - possible, yes. If your purpose
    is
    > disaster recovery, as implied - not only is it impractical, but impossible
    > to predict when the failure will occur and what hardware (chipset, drives,
    > video cards, network cards, etc) will be in the replacement system, or if
    > the data on the drive will even be in a state to do this recovery.

    Well no. All of my postings on this issue have obviously been predicated
    on the assumption that the HW failure was a non-HD and non-HD corrupting
    failure. If there was a HD or HD corrupting failure then one must go to a
    backup. Some of us were smart enough to figure out that the best backups
    are full HD image backups(aka Ghost etc.). So if you want to view this
    thread from another angle then re-title if "How to quickly recover from any
    HW failure using your HD image backup"

    > You state "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." To me, that is the true failure of this
    whole
    > discussion. If your conclusion had been "My conclusion is that one could
    > make the registry and file removals/changes on an XP system so that
    cloning
    > on new hardware is possible." Then you would have me agreeing 100% - but
    > you said recovery.


    As I've already describe the two issues are the same issue.

    > If you are using XP as a server or even as a personal
    > system and something fails - I don't care if it is as simple as the
    > motherboard and all data is recoverable - it is easier, faster and more
    > practical in the worse case scenario (or just simple fact you consider
    > hardware failure an opportunity to upgrade power/speed) of all
    hardware/not
    > data replacement to do a repair installation and move on with life.

    Simply wrong as described above.

    > You
    > cannot predict in a failure scenario what hardware you will be moving to.

    Don't need to.

    > And if it is not a failure scenario - again - yes - I agree, there are
    > things you can do to move without doing an actual repair installation, but
    > unless doing it on a grander scale than the casual home user - it seems
    like
    > a worthless endeavor...

    Huh? Catch up.

    > UNLESS, and here is my other conclusion (possible scenario actually) from
    > your persistence in this matter - you are trying to come up with some
    > programmatic way of transferring the system so you can create a product to
    > do exactly what you are discussing here - in which case you have made a
    bad
    > business decision in discussing it here, as people who are doing it now
    may
    > decide, "Not only is it possible and I am doing it now, but I can create a
    > product and get it to market now and this guy made me realize it." -- They
    > may thank you...
    >
    > Otherwise, in my years of cloning thousands of systems every 3-5 months
    with
    > 100+ applications installed upon each system working together and
    thousands
    > of roaming profile users all with different needs/wants - it seems only
    > practical and worthwhile to someone like me - who would have figured out
    > other methods are usually faster, making sure that the users data is never
    > stored on the local machine anyway and if it is, tough luck, they should
    > back it up.
  16. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "philo" <philo@privacy.net> wrote in message
    news:1091ofsgumkltd4@corp.supernews.com...
    >
    >
    > > You may also want to look into running a repair installation after
    > switching
    > > to the new hardware. This will allow you to keep programs and settings
    > > while getting around the driver issue.
    > > Bob
    > >
    > >
    > > That seems to be the easiest solution.
    >
    >
    >
    > I agree, the repair installtion only takes a few minutes...
    > and all you need do afterwards is re-apply the updates

    No, the two together take at least an hour.
  17. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    news:8L5kc.3126$4p.2927@news01.roc.ny...
    > jim wrote:
    >
    > > No, the most painless solution is the one I described in my opening
    post if
    > > all the details can be worked out.
    > >
    > > I'm looking for folks who might want to contribute to fully describing
    that
    > > solutions as it appears to be nearly at hand.
    >
    > Maybe you should take some suggestions from some folks who know what
    > they're doing.

    I do know what I'm doing. I'm trying to find some real experts on the
    issue. There seems to be a paucity of those here.

    >You keep saying /your/ solution is the easiest, 'most
    > painless' solution, when it obviously isn't.

    Cluelessness abounds.

    > First, you mention swapping out the mobo, then you go on to explain that
    > you're really interested in putting the harddrive in a completely
    > different PC. Not the same thing is it?

    WRONG, they are nearly equivalent operations logically.

    > You've been given some pretty painless solutions by the nice folks in
    > this group.

    I invite anyone to read the whole thread.
  18. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Thanks for the interesting insight Eileen!
  19. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Really?

    I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.

    When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed (or
    asked for) any new drivers that were needed.

    Never had a problem...


    On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 20:14:04 -0700, "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote:

    >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?
    >
    >
  20. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "Zknb" <dfklghdrt@ksjfglkjr.fgdfnhoth.htesdfh.yjiukuik.sdrtjeopr.com> wrote
    in message
    news:ct3390pp8kdvbpgrng4o5oa5tgm6iqt5tl@news.comcast.giganews.com...
    > Really?
    >
    > I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.
    >
    > When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed (or
    > asked for) any new drivers that were needed.
    >
    > Never had a problem...

    Yep, that's what many report even when the mobos use different chipsets.
    If the multiprocessor and/or ACPI situation chnages then things aren't quite
    that easy but still tractable.

    I'm trying to gather more information from folks on exactly what works
    transparently and what needs a like help with respect to HW changes. What
    were the characteristics of the old and new mobos in the cases you've tried?


    > On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 20:14:04 -0700, "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote:
    >
    > >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?
    > >
    > >
    >
  21. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote:

    >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.
    >

    Not true. Windows 95/98/Me required specific detailed steps in order
    to *successfully* replace a motherboard. Usually this involved at
    least manually deleting all relevant items from Device Manager or
    (even better) deleting the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Enum key from the
    registry. Otherwise there would be a proliferation of obsolete and
    duplicated items in Device Manager which could adversely affect
    performance.


    >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?
    >

    Nope. Totally wrong. Can you fix a Ford with Chev parts?

    >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?

    See http://michaelstevenstech.com/moving_xp.html for factual
    information about how to do this in Windows XP.


    Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
    --
    Microsoft MVP
    On-Line Help Computer Service
    http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

    "The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."
  22. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "Ron Martell" <ron@onlinehelp.bc.ca> wrote in message
    news:oif2909v48vmo2riifeqo0euiallqdmmn5@4ax.com...
    > "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote:
    >
    > >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.
    > >
    >
    > Not true. Windows 95/98/Me required specific detailed steps in order
    > to *successfully* replace a motherboard.

    Not true as so many posters have confirmed.

    > Usually this involved at
    > least manually deleting all relevant items from Device Manager or
    > (even better) deleting the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Enum key from the
    > registry. Otherwise there would be a proliferation of obsolete and
    > duplicated items in Device Manager which could adversely affect
    > performance.

    Might so affect? The fact is that the move generally works.

    > >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?
    > >
    >
    > Nope. Totally wrong. Can you fix a Ford with Chev parts?

    Clueless. I did the research.

    > >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?
    >
    > See http://michaelstevenstech.com/moving_xp.html for factual
    > information about how to do this in Windows XP.

    That page is by one of the old foggie "can't be done" set. The article
    impeaches itself early on with "Since the repair install in my opinion is an
    absolute necessity when changing a motherboard or moving a hard drive with
    XP installed, "

    Check the URL in my opening post here by someone who is actually working the
    issue I'm interested in:
    www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
  23. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    jim wrote:

    Here's a thought, you arrogant halfwit, place the HDD up your ass
    sideways. Don't come here asking for people to help you "on your terms".
    You most certainly seem to know everything already anyway!

    --
    I'm not a racist - I hate everybody EQUALLY!
  24. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    news:aMckc.3201$Ci1.2244@news01.roc.ny...
    > jim wrote:
    >
    > Here's a thought, you arrogant halfwit, place the HDD up your ass
    > sideways. Don't come here asking for people to help you "on your terms".
    > You most certainly seem to know everything already anyway!

    There's always a few trolls that can't let go of the old wive's tales
    floating around.
  25. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    jim wrote:

    > There's always a few trolls that can't let go of the old wive's tales
    > floating around.

    What's this got to do with your old lady? There's nothing floating
    around here except your ego.

    --
    I'm not a racist - I hate everybody EQUALLY!
  26. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote:


    >That page is by one of the old foggie "can't be done" set. The article
    >impeaches itself early on with "Since the repair install in my opinion is an
    >absolute necessity when changing a motherboard or moving a hard drive with
    >XP installed, "
    >
    >Check the URL in my opening post here by someone who is actually working the
    >issue I'm interested in:
    >www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
    >
    >

    You are of course free to do whatever you want with your own computer.

    However postings in these newsgroups also serve as advice to others
    regarding the issues discussed and I for one am not about to advocate
    high risk procedures where safer alternatives exist.

    The simple fact is that the approach you advocate will in many cases
    result in computers being crashed/smashed/trashed because of the
    hardware changes.

    The "Repair Install" approach is well proven and is safe.


    Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
    --
    Microsoft MVP
    On-Line Help Computer Service
    http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

    "The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."
  27. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "Ron Martell" <ron@onlinehelp.bc.ca> wrote in message
    news:2pm290hjlc0lgh182atffvu3t2hs1r2ivf@4ax.com...
    > "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote:
    >
    >
    > >That page is by one of the old foggie "can't be done" set. The article
    > >impeaches itself early on with "Since the repair install in my opinion is
    an
    > >absolute necessity when changing a motherboard or moving a hard drive
    with
    > >XP installed, "
    > >
    > >Check the URL in my opening post here by someone who is actually working
    the
    > >issue I'm interested in:
    > >www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
    > >
    > >
    >
    > You are of course free to do whatever you want with your own computer.
    >
    > However postings in these newsgroups also serve as advice to others
    > regarding the issues discussed and I for one am not about to advocate
    > high risk procedures where safer alternatives exist.
    >
    > The simple fact is that the approach you advocate will in many cases
    > result in computers being crashed/smashed/trashed because of the
    > hardware changes.

    Utter nonsense. What's being discussed trashes nothing. It work or it
    doesn't. There are and have been a bunch of wackos running around saying
    "it doesn't work so don't dare try it". The real message from these folks
    is "I tried it once and couldn't make it work so don't dare show that it can
    be done and expose for my short comings".

    > The "Repair Install" approach is well proven and is safe.

    AND SLOW.
  28. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    jim wrote:
    > "philo" <philo@privacy.net> wrote in message
    > news:1091ofsgumkltd4@corp.supernews.com...
    >>
    >>
    >>> You may also want to look into running a repair installation after
    >>> switching to the new hardware. This will allow you to keep
    >>> programs and settings while getting around the driver issue.
    >>> Bob
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> That seems to be the easiest solution.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> I agree, the repair installtion only takes a few minutes...
    >> and all you need do afterwards is re-apply the updates
    >
    > No, the two together take at least an hour.

    Not for someone who knows how.
    --
    - relic -
    Don't take life too seriously, You won't get out alive.
  29. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "relic" <nospam@relic2.cjb.net> wrote in message
    news:Dedkc.9861$IO6.9355@twister.socal.rr.com...
    > jim wrote:
    > > "philo" <philo@privacy.net> wrote in message
    > > news:1091ofsgumkltd4@corp.supernews.com...
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>> You may also want to look into running a repair installation after
    > >>> switching to the new hardware. This will allow you to keep
    > >>> programs and settings while getting around the driver issue.
    > >>> Bob
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>> That seems to be the easiest solution.
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> I agree, the repair installtion only takes a few minutes...
    > >> and all you need do afterwards is re-apply the updates
    > >
    > > No, the two together take at least an hour.
    >
    > Not for someone who knows how.

    Wrong.

    Why don't you contribute by having a look here and commenting:
    www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html
  30. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    jim wrote:
    > "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    > news:aMckc.3201$Ci1.2244@news01.roc.ny...
    >> jim wrote:
    >>
    >> Here's a thought, you arrogant halfwit, place the HDD up your ass
    >> sideways. Don't come here asking for people to help you "on your
    >> terms". You most certainly seem to know everything already anyway!
    >
    > There's always a few trolls that can't let go of the old wive's tales
    > floating around.

    But he does have good advice for you. Why don't you take it?

    --
    - relic -
    Don't take life too seriously, You won't get out alive.
  31. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    jim spewed forth with the following drivel:

    > "relic" <nospam@relic2.cjb.net> wrote in message
    > news:Dedkc.9861$IO6.9355@twister.socal.rr.com...
    >> jim wrote:
    >>> "philo" <philo@privacy.net> wrote in message
    >>> news:1091ofsgumkltd4@corp.supernews.com...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> You may also want to look into running a repair installation after
    >>>>> switching to the new hardware. This will allow you to keep
    >>>>> programs and settings while getting around the driver issue.
    >>>>> Bob
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> That seems to be the easiest solution.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> I agree, the repair installtion only takes a few minutes...
    >>>> and all you need do afterwards is re-apply the updates
    >>>
    >>> No, the two together take at least an hour.
    >>
    >> Not for someone who knows how.
    >
    > Wrong.
    >
    > Why don't you contribute by having a look here and commenting:
    > www.mostlycreativeworkshop.com/article11.html

    No YOU are wrong. Do you really think your little webpage will prove WE
    can't do what we say we can?
    Only morons cannot do as Relic suggests. I guess that makes you a moron.

    You are a nitwit and a poor loser. Now slink away.

    --
    Buster

    Gatekeeper: alt.os.windows-xp
  32. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    jim wrote:

    > Wrong.
    bwahahahahahahahahahah, what a tool!

    --
    I'm not a racist - I hate everybody EQUALLY!
  33. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Zknb wrote:

    > Really?
    >
    > I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.
    >
    > When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed (or
    > asked for) any new drivers that were needed.
    >
    > Never had a problem...

    And if it doesn't work (it doesn't always work), you resort to the
    "repair install" method. That's what we're all trying to tell the guy!


    --
    I'm not a racist - I hate everybody EQUALLY!
  34. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    news:7Hqkc.3255$oW2.397@news01.roc.ny...
    > Zknb wrote:
    >
    >> Really? I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.
    >>
    >> When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed (or
    >> asked for) any new drivers that were needed.
    >>
    >> Never had a problem...
    >
    > And if it doesn't work (it doesn't always work), you resort to the "repair
    > install" method. That's what we're all trying to tell the guy!
    >
    >
    > --
    > I'm not a racist - I hate everybody EQUALLY!

    I hadn't bothered posting to this one because the guy obviously doesn't want
    to listen but just for kicks I'll put my vote in as well.
    Repair install is the easiest least painful way to do a Mobo change unless
    you get lucky and XP see's the Mobo on it's own.
    There thats what like 20 votes for a epair install now? lol
  35. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    wojo wrote:
    > "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    > news:7Hqkc.3255$oW2.397@news01.roc.ny...
    >> Zknb wrote:
    >>
    >>> Really? I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.
    >>>
    >>> When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed (or
    >>> asked for) any new drivers that were needed.
    >>>
    >>> Never had a problem...
    >>
    >> And if it doesn't work (it doesn't always work), you resort to the
    >> "repair install" method. That's what we're all trying to tell the
    >> guy!
    >>
    >>
    >> --
    >> I'm not a racist - I hate everybody EQUALLY!
    >
    > I hadn't bothered posting to this one because the guy obviously
    > doesn't want to listen but just for kicks I'll put my vote in as well.
    > Repair install is the easiest least painful way to do a Mobo change
    > unless you get lucky and XP see's the Mobo on it's own.
    > There thats what like 20 votes for a epair install now? lol

    That's just 20 who are wrong. Ask jim.

    (Wait.... you don't mean it the other way around, do you?)

    --
    - relic -
    Don't take life too seriously, You won't get out alive.
  36. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "relic" <nospam@relic2.cjb.net> wrote in message
    news:fVukc.10726$IO6.981@twister.socal.rr.com...
    > wojo wrote:
    >> "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    >> news:7Hqkc.3255$oW2.397@news01.roc.ny...
    >>> Zknb wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Really? I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.
    >>>>
    >>>> When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed (or
    >>>> asked for) any new drivers that were needed.
    >>>>
    >>>> Never had a problem...
    >>>
    >>> And if it doesn't work (it doesn't always work), you resort to the
    >>> "repair install" method. That's what we're all trying to tell the
    >>> guy!
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>> I'm not a racist - I hate everybody EQUALLY!
    >>
    >> I hadn't bothered posting to this one because the guy obviously
    >> doesn't want to listen but just for kicks I'll put my vote in as well.
    >> Repair install is the easiest least painful way to do a Mobo change
    >> unless you get lucky and XP see's the Mobo on it's own.
    >> There thats what like 20 votes for a epair install now? lol
    >
    > That's just 20 who are wrong. Ask jim.
    >
    > (Wait.... you don't mean it the other way around, do you?)
    >
    > --
    > - relic -
    > Don't take life too seriously, You won't get out alive.
    >

    yup, 20 who are wrong and Jim all by his little lonesome as the only right
    one CHAWhatever
    lol
  37. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    news:7Hqkc.3255$oW2.397@news01.roc.ny...
    > Zknb wrote:
    >
    > > Really?
    > >
    > > I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.
    > >
    > > When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed (or
    > > asked for) any new drivers that were needed.
    > >
    > > Never had a problem...
    >
    > And if it doesn't work (it doesn't always work), you resort to the
    > "repair install" method. That's what we're all trying to tell the guy!

    Not all but just a few wackos unable to deal with the fact that an
    alternative does exist.
  38. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "wojo" <kwoyach[SPAM]53954@yahoo[SPAM].com> wrote in message
    news:svskc.61117$G_.26774@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
    >
    > "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    > news:7Hqkc.3255$oW2.397@news01.roc.ny...
    > > Zknb wrote:
    > >
    > >> Really? I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.
    > >>
    > >> When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed (or
    > >> asked for) any new drivers that were needed.
    > >>
    > >> Never had a problem...
    > >
    > > And if it doesn't work (it doesn't always work), you resort to the
    "repair
    > > install" method. That's what we're all trying to tell the guy!
    > >
    > >
    > > --
    > > I'm not a racist - I hate everybody EQUALLY!
    >
    > I hadn't bothered posting to this one because the guy obviously doesn't
    want
    > to listen but just for kicks I'll put my vote in as well.
    > Repair install is the easiest least painful way to do a Mobo change unless
    > you get lucky and XP see's the Mobo on it's own.
    > There thats what like 20 votes for a epair install now? lol

    The web is full of votes and "how to-s" otherwise as I've cited. The
    accumulation of fogger trolls here has no meaning.
  39. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    wojo wrote:
    >
    > > And if it doesn't work (it doesn't always work), you resort to the "repair
    > > install" method. That's what we're all trying to tell the guy!
    > >
    > I hadn't bothered posting to this one because the guy obviously doesn't want
    > to listen but just for kicks I'll put my vote in as well.
    > Repair install is the easiest least painful way to do a Mobo change unless
    > you get lucky and XP see's the Mobo on it's own.
    > There thats what like 20 votes for a epair install now? lol

    An XP repair install is like deleting the HKEY LM | Enum branch in w9x
    after installing a new mobo. Of course, it may not be needed if XP, or
    in the past, if win9X found all the new resources and had no problem
    "ignoring" the old resources. So I guess I agree. Oh, I also recommend
    snipping the troll NG if you notice it in the crosspost.


    --
    http://www.bootdisk.com/
  40. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    jim wrote:
    > "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    > news:7Hqkc.3255$oW2.397@news01.roc.ny...
    >> Zknb wrote:
    >>
    >>> Really?
    >>>
    >>> I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.
    >>>
    >>> When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed (or
    >>> asked for) any new drivers that were needed.
    >>>
    >>> Never had a problem...
    >>
    >> And if it doesn't work (it doesn't always work), you resort to the
    >> "repair install" method. That's what we're all trying to tell the
    >> guy!
    >
    > Not all but just a few wackos unable to deal with the fact that an
    > alternative does exist.

    Yes, I see all of your believers supporting you.

    Have you considered holding your breath and stomping your feet until someone
    agrees with you?

    --
    Diogenes
  41. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "Diogenes" <diogenes@sinope.gr> wrote in message
    news:3479f356ee04335cbf602bf6afa80995@news.teranews.com...
    > jim wrote:
    >> "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    >> news:7Hqkc.3255$oW2.397@news01.roc.ny...
    >>> Zknb wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Really?
    >>>>
    >>>> I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.
    >>>>
    >>>> When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed (or
    >>>> asked for) any new drivers that were needed.
    >>>>
    >>>> Never had a problem...
    >>>
    >>> And if it doesn't work (it doesn't always work), you resort to the
    >>> "repair install" method. That's what we're all trying to tell the
    >>> guy!
    >>
    >> Not all but just a few wackos unable to deal with the fact that an
    >> alternative does exist.
    >
    > Yes, I see all of your believers supporting you.
    >
    > Have you considered holding your breath and stomping your feet until
    > someone
    > agrees with you?
    >
    > --
    > Diogenes
    >
    What do you think will happen 1st?
    He'll pass out. Or his feet will get too sore to continue stomping.
  42. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    wojo wrote:
    > "Diogenes" <diogenes@sinope.gr> wrote in message
    > news:3479f356ee04335cbf602bf6afa80995@news.teranews.com...
    >> jim wrote:
    >>> "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    >>> news:7Hqkc.3255$oW2.397@news01.roc.ny...
    >>>> Zknb wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Really?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed
    >>>>> (or asked for) any new drivers that were needed.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Never had a problem...
    >>>>
    >>>> And if it doesn't work (it doesn't always work), you resort to the
    >>>> "repair install" method. That's what we're all trying to tell the
    >>>> guy!
    >>>
    >>> Not all but just a few wackos unable to deal with the fact that an
    >>> alternative does exist.
    >>
    >> Yes, I see all of your believers supporting you.
    >>
    >> Have you considered holding your breath and stomping your feet until
    >> someone
    >> agrees with you?
    >>
    >>
    > What do you think will happen 1st?
    > He'll pass out. Or his feet will get too sore to continue stomping.

    To him, it has become a Holy Grail. Surely his flock of followers will save
    him... before he loses consciousness. Let's hope he does in on the rim of
    Kilauea.

    --
    Diogenes
  43. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "Diogenes" <diogenes@sinope.gr> wrote in message
    news:cd7700bfdcc45edf40c916cc0baf18a1@news.teranews.com...
    > wojo wrote:
    >> "Diogenes" <diogenes@sinope.gr> wrote in message
    >> news:3479f356ee04335cbf602bf6afa80995@news.teranews.com...
    >>> jim wrote:
    >>>> "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    >>>> news:7Hqkc.3255$oW2.397@news01.roc.ny...
    >>>>> Zknb wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Really?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed
    >>>>>> (or asked for) any new drivers that were needed.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Never had a problem...
    >>>>>
    >>>>> And if it doesn't work (it doesn't always work), you resort to the
    >>>>> "repair install" method. That's what we're all trying to tell the
    >>>>> guy!
    >>>>
    >>>> Not all but just a few wackos unable to deal with the fact that an
    >>>> alternative does exist.
    >>>
    >>> Yes, I see all of your believers supporting you.
    >>>
    >>> Have you considered holding your breath and stomping your feet until
    >>> someone
    >>> agrees with you?
    >>>
    >>>
    >> What do you think will happen 1st?
    >> He'll pass out. Or his feet will get too sore to continue stomping.
    >
    > To him, it has become a Holy Grail. Surely his flock of followers will
    > save
    > him... before he loses consciousness. Let's hope he does in on the rim of
    > Kilauea.
    >
    > --
    > Diogenes
    >

    Except so far I haven't seen any followers
  44. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "wojo" <kwoyach[SPAM]53954@yahoo[SPAM].com> wrote in message
    news:xlDkc.64083$G_.53835@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
    >
    > "Diogenes" <diogenes@sinope.gr> wrote in message
    > news:cd7700bfdcc45edf40c916cc0baf18a1@news.teranews.com...
    > > wojo wrote:
    > >> "Diogenes" <diogenes@sinope.gr> wrote in message
    > >> news:3479f356ee04335cbf602bf6afa80995@news.teranews.com...
    > >>> jim wrote:
    > >>>> "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    > >>>> news:7Hqkc.3255$oW2.397@news01.roc.ny...
    > >>>>> Zknb wrote:
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>> Really?
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>> I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>> When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed
    > >>>>>> (or asked for) any new drivers that were needed.
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>> Never had a problem...
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>> And if it doesn't work (it doesn't always work), you resort to the
    > >>>>> "repair install" method. That's what we're all trying to tell the
    > >>>>> guy!
    > >>>>
    > >>>> Not all but just a few wackos unable to deal with the fact that an
    > >>>> alternative does exist.
    > >>>
    > >>> Yes, I see all of your believers supporting you.
    > >>>
    > >>> Have you considered holding your breath and stomping your feet until
    > >>> someone
    > >>> agrees with you?
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >> What do you think will happen 1st?
    > >> He'll pass out. Or his feet will get too sore to continue stomping.
    > >
    > > To him, it has become a Holy Grail. Surely his flock of followers will
    > > save
    > > him... before he loses consciousness. Let's hope he does in on the rim
    of
    > > Kilauea.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Diogenes
    > >
    >
    > Except so far I haven't seen any followers

    Except for the folks who report it works here for them and the web is full
    of more such folks and the "how to-s" so associated. Just the local fogger
    trolls are troubled and that's not surprising as they been telling folks
    that it can't be done. Such folks always go crackers when they are shown to
    have been blowing frags for sometime. Such trolls always attack the poster
    rather than cite any real support for their debunked assertions.

    Notice how they form up into little troll packs. If one views their posting
    history in Google Groups then what they are becomes apparent.
  45. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    wojo wrote:
    > "Diogenes" <diogenes@sinope.gr> wrote in message
    > news:cd7700bfdcc45edf40c916cc0baf18a1@news.teranews.com...
    >> wojo wrote:
    >>> "Diogenes" <diogenes@sinope.gr> wrote in message
    >>> news:3479f356ee04335cbf602bf6afa80995@news.teranews.com...
    >>>> jim wrote:
    >>>>> "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:7Hqkc.3255$oW2.397@news01.roc.ny...
    >>>>>> Zknb wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Really?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed
    >>>>>>> (or asked for) any new drivers that were needed.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Never had a problem...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> And if it doesn't work (it doesn't always work), you resort to
    >>>>>> the "repair install" method. That's what we're all trying to
    >>>>>> tell the guy!
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Not all but just a few wackos unable to deal with the fact that an
    >>>>> alternative does exist.
    >>>>
    >>>> Yes, I see all of your believers supporting you.
    >>>>
    >>>> Have you considered holding your breath and stomping your feet
    >>>> until someone
    >>>> agrees with you?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> What do you think will happen 1st?
    >>> He'll pass out. Or his feet will get too sore to continue stomping.
    >>
    >> To him, it has become a Holy Grail. Surely his flock of followers
    >> will save
    >> him... before he loses consciousness. Let's hope he does in on the
    >> rim of Kilauea.
    >>
    >
    > Except so far I haven't seen any followers

    Well, yes... there _is_ that. But, his last post said that the "wackos" that
    didn't agree were "just a few." I wonder where they are.

    --
    Diogenes
  46. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "Diogenes" <diogenes@sinope.gr> wrote in message
    news:e1b20fbf4c90824eb3c9302548bb856b@news.teranews.com...
    > wojo wrote:
    >> "Diogenes" <diogenes@sinope.gr> wrote in message
    >> news:cd7700bfdcc45edf40c916cc0baf18a1@news.teranews.com...
    >>> wojo wrote:
    >>>> "Diogenes" <diogenes@sinope.gr> wrote in message
    >>>> news:3479f356ee04335cbf602bf6afa80995@news.teranews.com...
    >>>>> jim wrote:
    >>>>>> "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:7Hqkc.3255$oW2.397@news01.roc.ny...
    >>>>>>> Zknb wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Really?
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed
    >>>>>>>> (or asked for) any new drivers that were needed.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Never had a problem...
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> And if it doesn't work (it doesn't always work), you resort to
    >>>>>>> the "repair install" method. That's what we're all trying to
    >>>>>>> tell the guy!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Not all but just a few wackos unable to deal with the fact that an
    >>>>>> alternative does exist.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Yes, I see all of your believers supporting you.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Have you considered holding your breath and stomping your feet
    >>>>> until someone
    >>>>> agrees with you?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>> What do you think will happen 1st?
    >>>> He'll pass out. Or his feet will get too sore to continue stomping.
    >>>
    >>> To him, it has become a Holy Grail. Surely his flock of followers
    >>> will save
    >>> him... before he loses consciousness. Let's hope he does in on the
    >>> rim of Kilauea.
    >>>
    >>
    >> Except so far I haven't seen any followers
    >
    > Well, yes... there _is_ that. But, his last post said that the "wackos"
    > that
    > didn't agree were "just a few." I wonder where they are.
    >
    > --
    > Diogenes
    >
    >

    I haven't been able to figure that one out either.
  47. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Also be careful about not having any encrypted files or folders made
    private. I remember that once I could not access my data after a new install
    because I had password. Or learn how to back up your encryption keys.


    "TT" <tt@noburn.net> wrote in message
    news:Y9ydnTpgJvsP4Q3dRVn-iQ@wideopenwest.com...
    > one_red_eye wrote:
    >
    >> "jim" <jim@nowhere.cam> wrote in message
    >> news:1090sn6ptvjgjb4@corp.supernews.com...
    >>
    >>>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?
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >> Why not back up your data and reinstall on the new setup?
    >> If the old MB is bad, install your drive as a slave in another PC then
    >> backup.
    >>
    > I agree-why all the extra headache when you could just either back up
    > or install it as a slave or partition it first and dual boot?...
  48. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Diogenes wrote:
    > jim wrote:
    >> "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    >> news:7Hqkc.3255$oW2.397@news01.roc.ny...
    >>> Zknb wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Really?
    >>>>
    >>>> I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.
    >>>>
    >>>> When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed
    >>>> (or asked for) any new drivers that were needed.
    >>>>
    >>>> Never had a problem...
    >>>
    >>> And if it doesn't work (it doesn't always work), you resort to the
    >>> "repair install" method. That's what we're all trying to tell the
    >>> guy!
    >>
    >> Not all but just a few wackos unable to deal with the fact that an
    >> alternative does exist.
    >
    > Yes, I see all of your believers supporting you.
    >
    > Have you considered holding your breath and stomping your feet until
    > someone agrees with you?

    Maybe they're all confusing XP with win98. With all the shite those turds
    spout, it' wouldn't be a surprise.

    --
    http://kadaitcha.cx
    Windows XP Problem and Troubleshooting Resources
    <a href="http://kadaitcha.cx"></a>
  49. Archived from groups: 24hoursupport.helpdesk,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Kadaitcha Man wrote:
    > Diogenes wrote:
    >> jim wrote:
    >>> "-Cryogenic-©" <nospam@thank.you> wrote in message
    >>> news:7Hqkc.3255$oW2.397@news01.roc.ny...
    >>>> Zknb wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Really?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I have swapped quite a few motherboards with XP Pro.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> When XP restarted it detected all the new hardware and installed
    >>>>> (or asked for) any new drivers that were needed.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Never had a problem...
    >>>>
    >>>> And if it doesn't work (it doesn't always work), you resort to the
    >>>> "repair install" method. That's what we're all trying to tell the
    >>>> guy!
    >>>
    >>> Not all but just a few wackos unable to deal with the fact that an
    >>> alternative does exist.
    >>
    >> Yes, I see all of your believers supporting you.
    >>
    >> Have you considered holding your breath and stomping your feet until
    >> someone agrees with you?
    >
    > Maybe they're all confusing XP with win98. With all the shite those
    > turds spout, it' wouldn't be a surprise.

    Well, he did cross-post to the microsoft.public groups. Someone there will
    pick up on his thoery and start citing it as if it were bible.

    --
    - relic -
    Don't take life too seriously, You won't get out alive.
Ask a new question

Read More

Microsoft Windows XP