Upgrading to XP from W2K - advantages?

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

I have got the opportunity to upgrade my PC from W2K Pro to XP Pro.

What are the advantages to wiping the slate clean (HD wise) and
installing XP Pro in place of W2K Pro?

I currently use the PC for gaming, with some Office2K work, the PC
shares a home network via a router with the other PCs still running W2KPro.

tia

Ginga
13 answers Last reply
More about upgrading advantages
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    Gingangooli wrote:
    > I have got the opportunity to upgrade my PC from W2K Pro to XP Pro.
    >
    > What are the advantages to wiping the slate clean (HD wise) and
    > installing XP Pro in place of W2K Pro?
    >
    > I currently use the PC for gaming, with some Office2K work, the PC
    > shares a home network via a router with the other PCs still running W2KPro.
    >
    > tia
    >
    > Ginga

    BTW...Ive read:
    http://www.microsoft.com/uk/windows/editions/xp-pro/chart.mspx

    But Im looking for user-type feedback, positive and negative.

    Ginga
  2. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    Upgrade first. There is no reason to do a clean install unless you have
    problems afterwards. This is especially true of laptops because laptops
    usually have special device drivers that you do not want to blow away.

    Back up the system first and scan for spyware and viruses.

    The next step should be to boot into W2k, insert the XP Pro cd, and then run
    the upgrade advisor. That will identify incompatible programs that need to
    be removed or updated and device drivers that need to be updated to their XP
    versions.

    Check the computer manufacturer's website for information about XP
    compatibility.

    --
    Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
    (Reply to the group only unless otherwise requested)
    "Gingangooli" <aintusingemail@thisplace.net> wrote in message
    news:eahQcZiCFHA.3652@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    > Gingangooli wrote:
    >> I have got the opportunity to upgrade my PC from W2K Pro to XP Pro.
    >>
    >> What are the advantages to wiping the slate clean (HD wise) and
    >> installing XP Pro in place of W2K Pro?
    >>
    >> I currently use the PC for gaming, with some Office2K work, the PC shares
    >> a home network via a router with the other PCs still running W2KPro.
    >>
    >> tia
    >>
    >> Ginga
    >
    > BTW...Ive read:
    > http://www.microsoft.com/uk/windows/editions/xp-pro/chart.mspx
    >
    > But Im looking for user-type feedback, positive and negative.
    >
    > Ginga
  3. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    You're not upgrading. Per post text, you're doing a "clean" install. Doing
    compatability checks is essential, but "clean" install formats HD
    automatically, all progs will have to be re-installed. Set aside a full day
    to do this exercise, 'cos it takes 2 hours to install XP, another 2 hours or
    more to d/l and install SP2 and later updates - before you even load any
    progs!
    Good Luck! Len.
    "Gingangooli" <aintusingemail@thisplace.net> wrote in message
    news:eahQcZiCFHA.3652@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    > Gingangooli wrote:
    >> I have got the opportunity to upgrade my PC from W2K Pro to XP Pro.
    >>
    >> What are the advantages to wiping the slate clean (HD wise) and
    >> installing XP Pro in place of W2K Pro?
    >>
    >> I currently use the PC for gaming, with some Office2K work, the PC shares
    >> a home network via a router with the other PCs still running W2KPro.
    >>
    >> tia
    >>
    >> Ginga
    >
    > BTW...Ive read:
    > http://www.microsoft.com/uk/windows/editions/xp-pro/chart.mspx
    >
    > But Im looking for user-type feedback, positive and negative.
    >
    > Ginga
  4. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    Hi, Ginga.

    I've never regretted upgrading from Win2K to WinXP Pro on the day it came
    out in 2001! ;<) But I do very little gaming and don't have a network or
    other users on my computer.

    If your WinXP CD-ROM is a current version, it will have SP2 integrated into
    it and the whole process should take no more than an hour or two, including
    formatting your HD. It's a good idea to unplug unnecessary peripherals
    before you begin. Especially any HD with an Active (bootable) primary
    partition on it; if Setup detects an Active partition on any HD, it will let
    that keep drive letter C:, assigning another letter (G:?) to your System
    (and Boot?) volume - and that can't be changed without starting over.

    If you upgrade from Win2K, your boot folder will inherit the prior name
    (\WinNT?), rather than WinXP's default, \Windows. Neither the boot folder
    name nor the drive letter will matter to WinXP, but it will almost certainly
    confuse you - and all the applications you will install that expect to put
    their files on Drive C:.

    Upgrades from Win2K to WinXP usually go smoothly, since they both are on the
    NT platform, as opposed to upgrades from Win9x/ME, which require all new
    drivers and sometimes new versions of software. But a clean install,
    including a reformat, clears out the accumulated deadwood and garbage,
    making it worth the time to reinstall apps and restore data, in many cases.

    RC
    --
    R. C. White, CPA
    San Marcos, TX
    rc@corridor.net
    Microsoft Windows MVP

    "Gingangooli" <aintusingemail@thisplace.net> wrote in message
    news:eLrWeViCFHA.868@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    >I have got the opportunity to upgrade my PC from W2K Pro to XP Pro.
    >
    > What are the advantages to wiping the slate clean (HD wise) and installing
    > XP Pro in place of W2K Pro?
    >
    > I currently use the PC for gaming, with some Office2K work, the PC shares
    > a home network via a router with the other PCs still running W2KPro.
    >
    > tia
    >
    > Ginga
  5. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    R. C. White wrote:
    > Hi, Ginga.
    >
    > I've never regretted upgrading from Win2K to WinXP Pro on the day it
    > came out in 2001! ;<) But I do very little gaming and don't have a
    > network or other users on my computer.
    >
    > If your WinXP CD-ROM is a current version, it will have SP2 integrated
    > into it and the whole process should take no more than an hour or two,
    > including formatting your HD. It's a good idea to unplug unnecessary
    > peripherals before you begin. Especially any HD with an Active
    > (bootable) primary partition on it; if Setup detects an Active partition
    > on any HD, it will let that keep drive letter C:, assigning another
    > letter (G:?) to your System (and Boot?) volume - and that can't be
    > changed without starting over.
    >
    > If you upgrade from Win2K, your boot folder will inherit the prior name
    > (\WinNT?), rather than WinXP's default, \Windows. Neither the boot
    > folder name nor the drive letter will matter to WinXP, but it will
    > almost certainly confuse you - and all the applications you will install
    > that expect to put their files on Drive C:.
    >
    > Upgrades from Win2K to WinXP usually go smoothly, since they both are on
    > the NT platform, as opposed to upgrades from Win9x/ME, which require all
    > new drivers and sometimes new versions of software. But a clean
    > install, including a reformat, clears out the accumulated deadwood and
    > garbage, making it worth the time to reinstall apps and restore data, in
    > many cases.
    >
    > RC
    Thanks for the replies guys.

    I will probably go for a clean install, reformatting both my HDs, just
    to (as RC said) to clean out all the deadwood.

    I have XP SP2 on CD anyway (free with a games mag).. so Im ready for
    that bit. Also I would want to stick SP2 on before ANYTHING else.

    One last question.... With W2K installation you had the option to set up
    the HD as FAT32 or NTFS. I assume that option is also the case with XP?
    So which one is better? FAT32 or NTFS?

    tia Ginga
  6. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    NTFS
    Len
    "Gingangooli" <aintusingemail@thisplace.net> wrote in message
    news:%23F2SDt5CFHA.2608@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    > R. C. White wrote:
    >> Hi, Ginga.
    >>
    >> I've never regretted upgrading from Win2K to WinXP Pro on the day it came
    >> out in 2001! ;<) But I do very little gaming and don't have a network
    >> or other users on my computer.
    >>
    >> If your WinXP CD-ROM is a current version, it will have SP2 integrated
    >> into it and the whole process should take no more than an hour or two,
    >> including formatting your HD. It's a good idea to unplug unnecessary
    >> peripherals before you begin. Especially any HD with an Active
    >> (bootable) primary partition on it; if Setup detects an Active partition
    >> on any HD, it will let that keep drive letter C:, assigning another
    >> letter (G:?) to your System (and Boot?) volume - and that can't be
    >> changed without starting over.
    >>
    >> If you upgrade from Win2K, your boot folder will inherit the prior name
    >> (\WinNT?), rather than WinXP's default, \Windows. Neither the boot
    >> folder name nor the drive letter will matter to WinXP, but it will almost
    >> certainly confuse you - and all the applications you will install that
    >> expect to put their files on Drive C:.
    >>
    >> Upgrades from Win2K to WinXP usually go smoothly, since they both are on
    >> the NT platform, as opposed to upgrades from Win9x/ME, which require all
    >> new drivers and sometimes new versions of software. But a clean install,
    >> including a reformat, clears out the accumulated deadwood and garbage,
    >> making it worth the time to reinstall apps and restore data, in many
    >> cases.
    >>
    >> RC
    > Thanks for the replies guys.
    >
    > I will probably go for a clean install, reformatting both my HDs, just to
    > (as RC said) to clean out all the deadwood.
    >
    > I have XP SP2 on CD anyway (free with a games mag).. so Im ready for that
    > bit. Also I would want to stick SP2 on before ANYTHING else.
    >
    > One last question.... With W2K installation you had the option to set up
    > the HD as FAT32 or NTFS. I assume that option is also the case with XP?
    > So which one is better? FAT32 or NTFS?
    >
    > tia Ginga
  7. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    Yabbadoo wrote:
    > NTFS
    > Len
    > "Gingangooli" <aintusingemail@thisplace.net> wrote in message
    > news:%23F2SDt5CFHA.2608@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    >
    >>R. C. White wrote:
    >>
    >>>Hi, Ginga.
    >>>
    >>>I've never regretted upgrading from Win2K to WinXP Pro on the day it came
    >>>out in 2001! ;<) But I do very little gaming and don't have a network
    >>>or other users on my computer.
    >>>
    >>>If your WinXP CD-ROM is a current version, it will have SP2 integrated
    >>>into it and the whole process should take no more than an hour or two,
    >>>including formatting your HD. It's a good idea to unplug unnecessary
    >>>peripherals before you begin. Especially any HD with an Active
    >>>(bootable) primary partition on it; if Setup detects an Active partition
    >>>on any HD, it will let that keep drive letter C:, assigning another
    >>>letter (G:?) to your System (and Boot?) volume - and that can't be
    >>>changed without starting over.
    >>>
    >>>If you upgrade from Win2K, your boot folder will inherit the prior name
    >>>(\WinNT?), rather than WinXP's default, \Windows. Neither the boot
    >>>folder name nor the drive letter will matter to WinXP, but it will almost
    >>>certainly confuse you - and all the applications you will install that
    >>>expect to put their files on Drive C:.
    >>>
    >>>Upgrades from Win2K to WinXP usually go smoothly, since they both are on
    >>>the NT platform, as opposed to upgrades from Win9x/ME, which require all
    >>>new drivers and sometimes new versions of software. But a clean install,
    >>>including a reformat, clears out the accumulated deadwood and garbage,
    >>>making it worth the time to reinstall apps and restore data, in many
    >>>cases.
    >>>
    >>>RC
    >>
    >>Thanks for the replies guys.
    >>
    >>I will probably go for a clean install, reformatting both my HDs, just to
    >>(as RC said) to clean out all the deadwood.
    >>
    >>I have XP SP2 on CD anyway (free with a games mag).. so Im ready for that
    >>bit. Also I would want to stick SP2 on before ANYTHING else.
    >>
    >>One last question.... With W2K installation you had the option to set up
    >>the HD as FAT32 or NTFS. I assume that option is also the case with XP?
    >>So which one is better? FAT32 or NTFS?
    >>
    >>tia Ginga
    >
    >
    >
    Awwwww...cummon Yabbadoo...dont do that !!! you gotta say why!!! ;-)
  8. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    Gingangooli wrote:
    > Yabbadoo wrote:
    >
    >> NTFS

    > Awwwww...cummon Yabbadoo...dont do that !!! you gotta say why!!! ;-)


    Personally, I wouldn't even consider using FAT32 when NTFS is an
    option. FAT32 has no security capabilities, no compression
    capabilities, no fault tolerance, and a lot of wasted hard drive space
    on volumes larger than 8 Gb in size. But your computing needs may
    vary, and there is no hard and fast answer.

    To answer your questions without getting too technical is
    difficult, but has been handled quite well by Alex Nichol in the
    article here:

    FAT & NTFS File Systems in Windows XP
    http://www.aumha.org/a/ntfs.htm

    Somewhat more technical information is here:

    Limitations of the FAT32 File System in Windows XP
    http://support.microsoft.com/directory/article.asp?ID=kb;en-us;Q314463

    Choosing Between File Systems
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/TechNet/prodtechnol/winntas/tips/techrep/filesyst.asp

    NTFS file system
    http://www.digit-life.com/articles/ntfs/

    --

    Bruce Chambers

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

    You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having
    both at once. - RAH
  9. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    Hi, Ginga.

    The only reason I can think of to use FAT (any version) anymore is if you
    plan to install MS-DOS or Win3.x/9x/ME on this computer (dual-booting,
    perhaps). Otherwise, it's NTFS all the way - for all the reasons Bruce
    gave. NTFS is much more secure, both in the sense of secure from
    unauthorized access, and in the sense of secure from loss of time and data
    from file system glitches.

    RC
    --
    R. C. White, CPA
    San Marcos, TX
    rc@corridor.net
    Microsoft Windows MVP

    "Gingangooli" <aintusingemail@thisplace.net> wrote in message
    news:%23F2SDt5CFHA.2608@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    > R. C. White wrote:
    >> Hi, Ginga.
    >>
    >> I've never regretted upgrading from Win2K to WinXP Pro on the day it came
    >> out in 2001! ;<) But I do very little gaming and don't have a network
    >> or other users on my computer.
    >>
    >> If your WinXP CD-ROM is a current version, it will have SP2 integrated
    >> into it and the whole process should take no more than an hour or two,
    >> including formatting your HD. It's a good idea to unplug unnecessary
    >> peripherals before you begin. Especially any HD with an Active
    >> (bootable) primary partition on it; if Setup detects an Active partition
    >> on any HD, it will let that keep drive letter C:, assigning another
    >> letter (G:?) to your System (and Boot?) volume - and that can't be
    >> changed without starting over.
    >>
    >> If you upgrade from Win2K, your boot folder will inherit the prior name
    >> (\WinNT?), rather than WinXP's default, \Windows. Neither the boot
    >> folder name nor the drive letter will matter to WinXP, but it will almost
    >> certainly confuse you - and all the applications you will install that
    >> expect to put their files on Drive C:.
    >>
    >> Upgrades from Win2K to WinXP usually go smoothly, since they both are on
    >> the NT platform, as opposed to upgrades from Win9x/ME, which require all
    >> new drivers and sometimes new versions of software. But a clean install,
    >> including a reformat, clears out the accumulated deadwood and garbage,
    >> making it worth the time to reinstall apps and restore data, in many
    >> cases.
    >>
    >> RC
    > Thanks for the replies guys.
    >
    > I will probably go for a clean install, reformatting both my HDs, just to
    > (as RC said) to clean out all the deadwood.
    >
    > I have XP SP2 on CD anyway (free with a games mag).. so Im ready for that
    > bit. Also I would want to stick SP2 on before ANYTHING else.
    >
    > One last question.... With W2K installation you had the option to set up
    > the HD as FAT32 or NTFS. I assume that option is also the case with XP?
    > So which one is better? FAT32 or NTFS?
    >
    > tia Ginga
  10. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    These days the desire to run DOS and earlier versions of Windows can be met
    by running Virtual PC 2004. No partitioning and no reboots required. It is
    much easier to maintain and the guest operating system runs in a virtual
    computer as a window on the XP desktop. Almost any x86 operating system
    works.

    --
    Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
    (Reply to the group only unless otherwise requested)
    "R. C. White" <rc@corridor.net> wrote in message
    news:OmQ3Cq9CFHA.4052@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > Hi, Ginga.
    >
    > The only reason I can think of to use FAT (any version) anymore is if you
    > plan to install MS-DOS or Win3.x/9x/ME on this computer (dual-booting,
    > perhaps). Otherwise, it's NTFS all the way - for all the reasons Bruce
    > gave. NTFS is much more secure, both in the sense of secure from
    > unauthorized access, and in the sense of secure from loss of time and data
    > from file system glitches.
    >
    > RC
    > --
    > R. C. White, CPA
    > San Marcos, TX
    > rc@corridor.net
    > Microsoft Windows MVP
    >
    > "Gingangooli" <aintusingemail@thisplace.net> wrote in message
    > news:%23F2SDt5CFHA.2608@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    >> R. C. White wrote:
    >>> Hi, Ginga.
    >>>
    >>> I've never regretted upgrading from Win2K to WinXP Pro on the day it
    >>> came out in 2001! ;<) But I do very little gaming and don't have a
    >>> network or other users on my computer.
    >>>
    >>> If your WinXP CD-ROM is a current version, it will have SP2 integrated
    >>> into it and the whole process should take no more than an hour or two,
    >>> including formatting your HD. It's a good idea to unplug unnecessary
    >>> peripherals before you begin. Especially any HD with an Active
    >>> (bootable) primary partition on it; if Setup detects an Active partition
    >>> on any HD, it will let that keep drive letter C:, assigning another
    >>> letter (G:?) to your System (and Boot?) volume - and that can't be
    >>> changed without starting over.
    >>>
    >>> If you upgrade from Win2K, your boot folder will inherit the prior name
    >>> (\WinNT?), rather than WinXP's default, \Windows. Neither the boot
    >>> folder name nor the drive letter will matter to WinXP, but it will
    >>> almost certainly confuse you - and all the applications you will install
    >>> that expect to put their files on Drive C:.
    >>>
    >>> Upgrades from Win2K to WinXP usually go smoothly, since they both are on
    >>> the NT platform, as opposed to upgrades from Win9x/ME, which require all
    >>> new drivers and sometimes new versions of software. But a clean
    >>> install, including a reformat, clears out the accumulated deadwood and
    >>> garbage, making it worth the time to reinstall apps and restore data, in
    >>> many cases.
    >>>
    >>> RC
    >> Thanks for the replies guys.
    >>
    >> I will probably go for a clean install, reformatting both my HDs, just to
    >> (as RC said) to clean out all the deadwood.
    >>
    >> I have XP SP2 on CD anyway (free with a games mag).. so Im ready for that
    >> bit. Also I would want to stick SP2 on before ANYTHING else.
    >>
    >> One last question.... With W2K installation you had the option to set up
    >> the HD as FAT32 or NTFS. I assume that option is also the case with XP?
    >> So which one is better? FAT32 or NTFS?
    >>
    >> tia Ginga
    >
  11. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    You asked a straight question, I gave you a straight answer.
    Bruce has now given the comprehensive reasons why.
    ( But you hadn't asked for reasons, just for an answer!) (g)

    Sincerely, Len
    "Gingangooli" <aintusingemail@thisplace.net> wrote in message
    news:u8zpfH6CFHA.1296@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    > Yabbadoo wrote:
    >> NTFS
    >> Len
    >> "Gingangooli" <aintusingemail@thisplace.net> wrote in message
    >> news:%23F2SDt5CFHA.2608@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    >>
    >>>R. C. White wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Hi, Ginga.
    >>>>
    >>>>I've never regretted upgrading from Win2K to WinXP Pro on the day it
    >>>>came out in 2001! ;<) But I do very little gaming and don't have a
    >>>>network or other users on my computer.
    >>>>
    >>>>If your WinXP CD-ROM is a current version, it will have SP2 integrated
    >>>>into it and the whole process should take no more than an hour or two,
    >>>>including formatting your HD. It's a good idea to unplug unnecessary
    >>>>peripherals before you begin. Especially any HD with an Active
    >>>>(bootable) primary partition on it; if Setup detects an Active partition
    >>>>on any HD, it will let that keep drive letter C:, assigning another
    >>>>letter (G:?) to your System (and Boot?) volume - and that can't be
    >>>>changed without starting over.
    >>>>
    >>>>If you upgrade from Win2K, your boot folder will inherit the prior name
    >>>>(\WinNT?), rather than WinXP's default, \Windows. Neither the boot
    >>>>folder name nor the drive letter will matter to WinXP, but it will
    >>>>almost certainly confuse you - and all the applications you will install
    >>>>that expect to put their files on Drive C:.
    >>>>
    >>>>Upgrades from Win2K to WinXP usually go smoothly, since they both are on
    >>>>the NT platform, as opposed to upgrades from Win9x/ME, which require all
    >>>>new drivers and sometimes new versions of software. But a clean
    >>>>install, including a reformat, clears out the accumulated deadwood and
    >>>>garbage, making it worth the time to reinstall apps and restore data, in
    >>>>many cases.
    >>>>
    >>>>RC
    >>>
    >>>Thanks for the replies guys.
    >>>
    >>>I will probably go for a clean install, reformatting both my HDs, just to
    >>>(as RC said) to clean out all the deadwood.
    >>>
    >>>I have XP SP2 on CD anyway (free with a games mag).. so Im ready for that
    >>>bit. Also I would want to stick SP2 on before ANYTHING else.
    >>>
    >>>One last question.... With W2K installation you had the option to set up
    >>>the HD as FAT32 or NTFS. I assume that option is also the case with XP?
    >>>So which one is better? FAT32 or NTFS?
    >>>
    >>>tia Ginga
    >>
    >>
    >>
    > Awwwww...cummon Yabbadoo...dont do that !!! you gotta say why!!! ;-)
  12. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    Bruce Chambers wrote:
    > Gingangooli wrote:
    >
    >> Yabbadoo wrote:
    >>
    >>> NTFS
    >
    >
    >> Awwwww...cummon Yabbadoo...dont do that !!! you gotta say why!!! ;-)
    >
    >
    >
    > Personally, I wouldn't even consider using FAT32 when NTFS is an
    > option. FAT32 has no security capabilities, no compression
    > capabilities, no fault tolerance, and a lot of wasted hard drive space
    > on volumes larger than 8 Gb in size. But your computing needs may
    > vary, and there is no hard and fast answer.
    >
    > To answer your questions without getting too technical is
    > difficult, but has been handled quite well by Alex Nichol in the
    > article here:
    >
    > FAT & NTFS File Systems in Windows XP
    > http://www.aumha.org/a/ntfs.htm
    >
    > Somewhat more technical information is here:
    >
    > Limitations of the FAT32 File System in Windows XP
    > http://support.microsoft.com/directory/article.asp?ID=kb;en-us;Q314463
    >
    > Choosing Between File Systems
    > http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?url=/TechNet/prodtechnol/winntas/tips/techrep/filesyst.asp
    >
    >
    > NTFS file system
    > http://www.digit-life.com/articles/ntfs/
    >
    Thank you Bruce.
  13. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics (More info?)

    Gingangooli wrote:
    >
    >>
    > Thank you Bruce.


    You're welcome.

    --

    Bruce Chambers

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

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

Read More

Microsoft Windows XP