I do not believe that Vista Home Premium retail version confers any
downgrade rights. Therefore, to install Windows XP Pro upgrade version, you
need a qualifying product (QP). This product need not be installed. You will
be instructed to insert the QP CD a some point during the installation of
the upgrade XP Pro. Also, you need the appropriate product key(s).
Tom
MSMVP 1998-2007
"JP" <JP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:AF4E50C3-D1F4-4CAD-985C-9D5038B6BFFF@microsoft.com...
> Can I use an Upgrade edition of Windows XP Pro from Vista Home Premium or
> do
> I have to buy full version?
"Tom Ferguson" <tom.newsgroups@gmail.com> wrote in message news:Ovzj3M0UIHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> I do not believe that Vista Home Premium retail version confers any
> downgrade rights. Therefore, to install Windows XP Pro upgrade version, you
> need a qualifying product (QP). This product need not be installed. You will
> be instructed to insert the QP CD a some point during the installation of
> the upgrade XP Pro. Also, you need the appropriate product key(s).
>
> Tom
> MSMVP 1998-2007
In other words JP, if you've got a legitimate copy of XP, and a legitimate
copy of any previous operating system, you're good to go.
> "JP" <JP@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:AF4E50C3-D1F4-4CAD-985C-9D5038B6BFFF@microsoft.com...
> > Can I use an Upgrade edition of Windows XP Pro from Vista Home Premium or
> > do
> > I have to buy full version?
>
JP wrote:
> Can I use an Upgrade edition of Windows XP Pro from Vista Home Premium or do
> I have to buy full version?
Transitioning from a current OS to an older OS is a *downgrade*, and,
to the best of my knowledge, no one has ever come up with a way to do
that, short of formatting the partition and starting from scratch.
You'll need to obtain a full version of WinXP.
However, there could be a couple possible adverse repercussions of
which you should be aware. First and foremost, if the specific computer
model in question was designed specifically for Vista, there may well be
no WinXP-specific device drivers available to make the computer's
diverse components work properly. Consult the computer's manufacturer
about the availability of device drivers. Secondly, removing an
OEM-installed operating system and replacing it with another will almost
invariably void any and all support agreements and, sometimes, even the
warranty. You would, at the very least, have to re-install Vista before
getting any support from the manufacturer. Again, consult the
computer's manufacturer for specifics. Thirdly, there may be the
additional cost involved in purchasing a WinXP license for this new
computer. (An OEM CD and license from some previous computer will not
do, for legal and usually technical reasons.)
After backing up any data you wish to transfer to the new OS
installation, simply boot from the WinXP installation CD. You'll be
offered the opportunity to delete, create, and format partitions as part
of the installation process. (You may need to re-arrange the order of
boot devices in the PC's BIOS to boot from the CD.)
Then, assuming that the computer can be made to work with WinXP,
the backed up data can be restored and applications (Those that are
WinXP-compatible, that is) re-installed.
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
> "Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote...
>
>> assuming that the computer can be made to work with WinXP,
>
>
> Can you name any currently built PC that will *not* run Windows XP ?
>
> Can you name *any* hardware devices that do not support Windows XP ?
>
>
Specific Makes and models? Not off the top of my head, no. However,
we see posts here every day from people who purchased computers
specifically designed for Vista, and for which the manufacturer has not
provided WinXP device drivers. HP, Sony, Acer, and Toshiba seem to be
the most commonly mentioned brands in these posts, but I haven't
bothered keeping a specific count.
"Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote in message news:OIJzNsLVIHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
> > "Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote...
> >
> >> assuming that the computer can be made to work with WinXP,
> >
> >
> > Can you name any currently built PC that will *not* run Windows XP ?
> >
> > Can you name *any* hardware devices that do not support Windows XP ?
> >
> >
>
>
> Specific Makes and models? Not off the top of my head, no. However,
> we see posts here every day from people who purchased computers
> specifically designed for Vista, and for which the manufacturer has not
> provided WinXP device drivers.
Perhaps they didn't ship with a VISTA computer, but the device mfgr. or
the OEM builder will have them as downloads. I know of NO contemporary
hardware that does not support XP.... most currently provide device driver
compatibility going back to Windows 2K.
Just don't want people to be coerced into keeping an OS they don't
care for based on what could be conversational non-issues with the
box that it came in. If folks are willing to do a wee bit extra homework,
I'm inclined to say that any PC made today will accomodate XP.
Cheers,
DM
> HP, Sony, Acer, and Toshiba seem to be
> the most commonly mentioned brands in these posts, but I haven't
> bothered keeping a specific count.
> --
>
> Bruce Chambers
>
> Help us help you:
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
> They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
> safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin
>
> Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell
>
> The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
> killed a great many philosophers.
> ~ Denis Diderot
>> Specific Makes and models? Not off the top of my head, no. However,
>> we see posts here every day from people who purchased computers
>> specifically designed for Vista, and for which the manufacturer has not
>> provided WinXP device drivers.
>
> Perhaps they didn't ship with a VISTA computer,...
That's pretty much a given, yes. ;-}
> ... but the device mfgr. or
> the OEM builder will have them as downloads.
Some OEMs do provide WinXP drivers, but this is not so in every case.
As I've said, many people have already reported (in this very newsgroup)
being unable to obtain WinXP drivers from the manufacturers of their
hardware. It's not a universal phenomenon, certainly, but it does seem
to happen fairly often. Admittedly, this may sometimes simply be a
result of a poster's inability to find said drivers, rather than the
driver's nonexistence.
> I know of NO contemporary
> hardware that does not support XP....
It's not a matter of *hardware* not being able to support WinXP; it's a
matter of the hardware's manufacturer providing WinXP-specific drivers.
> .... most currently provide device driver
> compatibility going back to Windows 2K.
>
I'd question the use of the word "most," but Win2K is likely to see
longer hardware driver support because those drivers will also work on
Win2K Server, which is still in wide use.
> Just don't want people to be coerced into keeping an OS they don't
> care for based on what could be conversational non-issues with the
> box that it came in.
I agree wholeheartedly, in principle, as it is their computers to do
with as they like. But I also don't want to see people rush blindly
ahead with an OS change without considering all of the potential
problems they may encounter.
> If folks are willing to do a wee bit extra homework,
> I'm inclined to say that any PC made today will accomodate XP.
>
In a great many cases, you're quite probably correct. Unfortunately,
my observations over the years have shown that all too many people have
bought into the various PC/software manufacturers' marketing claims of
"easy" computing. They believe that their computer should be no harder
to use than a toaster oven; they have neither the inclination or desire
to learn how to configure and/or maintain their computers, much less the
desire to search high and low for ways to make them work. As it is,
they rarely put any "homework" into determining if Vista can/will meet
their computing needs or is compatible with their current peripherals
and applications to start with, so how much homework will they be
willing to put into making what is, in effect, a legacy OS work on newly
designed hardware?
"Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote in message
> They believe that their computer should be no harder
> to use than a toaster oven; they have neither the inclination or desire
> to learn how to configure and/or maintain their computers, much less
> the desire to search high and low for ways to make them work.
Oh, how awfully true this is.... a few times a year I have people actually
tell me this - they want to compare a PC to a toaster, and their *serious*!
Personally, I'm inclined to compare it to a race car that must enter and
run a race almost daily.... it needs to be pampered. But then again, if
they actually did that we'd have a lot less work. ;-)
> in effect, a legacy OS work on newly designed hardware?
XP !?! Legacy ?!? Not until the current nightmare ends. The
software department manager at one of the local Fry's Electronics
told me that they sold more retail box and OEM builder copies of
XP Home and Pro in 2007 than they did in 2006.
> Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
>
>
>
>> in effect, a legacy OS work on newly designed hardware?
>
> XP !?! Legacy ?!? Not until the current nightmare ends. The
> software department manager at one of the local Fry's Electronics
> told me that they sold more retail box and OEM builder copies of
> XP Home and Pro in 2007 than they did in 2006.
>
Remember, I did qualify that assessment with the term "in effect." I
think that many of the OEMs would really like to move on from it so that
they have to support only one major OS at a time. There isn't a very
large profit margin, per unit, on PCs, and having to support multiple
operating systems and their respective driver catalogs would increase
the manufacturers' costs and potentially reduce that profit margin. Of
course, this is in fairly complete disregard of what the consumers seem
to want or even need; that's why there are Marketing Departments.
I also think WinXP is more than adequate for just about any computing
purpose extant, and there really was no need for a new desktop OS.
However, Microsoft (and the computer and software manufacturers) is
first and foremost a business, whose primary purpose - like any other
business - is to grow and increase profit. And businesses usually don't
grow and increase profits by continuing to offer the same "old"
products, year after year. This is why Coke and Pepsi keep repackaging
their base products and adding new ones. This is why Ford, GM, and
Chrysler offer new, sometimes redesigned but always slightly different,
model automobiles each year. Try walking through a supermarket without
spotting "New and Improved" blazoned upon dozens of wildly different
sorts of products. I think it'd be awfully unrealistic and downright
naive for anyone not to expect Microsoft and the computer and software
manufacturers to behave in pretty much the same manner.
Windows Vista Home Premium to Windows XP Pro 
Linear Mode
