Upgrade or Full Retail Version?

"relic" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Char Jackson wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 09:10:55 -0600, "R. C. White" <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, Char.
>>>
>>>> I'm assuming your role as an MVP requires that you stand behind the
>>>> position in #2 above,
>>>
>>> Not at all!
>>>
>>> You don't know MVPs very well, do you? We are some of Microsoft's
>>> most vocal critics. Microsoft doesn't tell us what to do - or to
>>> say! If you'd like to know more about MVPs, visit:
>>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/gp/aboutmvp
>>
>> I know almost nothing about MVP's and meant absolutely nothing
>> disparaging to you personally or to MVP's as a group. I just (wrongly)
>> assumed that Microsoft expected you guys to toe a certain company
>> line. I stand corrected and I apologize if my earlier comments sent
>> the wrong message.
>
> Never apologize to an MVP.

Love means never having to apologize. (I just had to)

On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 13:46:54 -0600, "Lord Vetinari"
<> wrote:

>"Char Jackson" <> wrote in message
>news:...
>> On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:52:36 -0600, "R. C. White" <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Hi, Debi.
>>>
>>>There are just two main distinctions between Upgrade and Full Retail
>>>disks.
>>>
>>>1. Upgrade costs less.
>>>
>>>2. Upgrade will insist on seeing a qualifying version of Windows
>>>already
>>>installed. (Ray's suggestion of "just show me the qualifying disk" used
>>>to
>>>work, for WinXP and prior, but now Win7 won't be satisfied with that; it
>>>will want to see your Vista already installed.)
>>>
>>>Once the Upgrade has satisfied itself as to #2, the actual install
>>>procedure
>>>is the same with either disk.
>>
>> I'm assuming your role as an MVP requires that you stand behind the
>> position in #2 above, but since it isn't true it would be nice if you
>> could find a way to tread more lightly around the situation.
>>
>> In short, an upgrade disc works fine by itself, no other qualifying OS
>> is required.
>
>Yes, the upgrade disc accepts the upgrade disc itself...which I find
>hilarious.
>

After all this time, it can't be accidental...

Hi, Char.

> I know almost nothing about MVP's and meant absolutely nothing
> disparaging to you personally or to MVP's as a group. I just (wrongly)
> assumed that Microsoft expected you guys to toe a certain company
> line. I stand corrected and I apologize if my earlier comments sent
> the wrong message.

No apology required. I didn't know much about MVPs either until about 7
years ago when I got an email from a Microsoft employee asking if I'd be
interested in becoming an MVP. I hesitated and said 3 things worried me.
First, adding the initials to my name might make others assume that I know
more than I do, especially since I was not required to take any classes or
pass any tests. He said my reputation would depend on my continuing to
provide advice that was accurate and helpful more often than not. Second,
while I enjoy helping in the newsgroups and fully intend to continue, MVP or
not, I was not willing to commit to any minimum of time or effort. He said
that if Microsoft were to tell me what to do, I would be their employee and
they would have to pay me - and they did not intend to do that! And, third,
that users might think that I speak for Microsoft, which I certainly do not
intend to do, and that I must support - and use - only Microsoft products.
But I insist on forming my own opinions and speaking my own mind, even if
that is critical of Microsoft. He assured me that, as I said earlier, MVPs
are some of Microsoft's toughest critics, both privately and publicly, and
Microsoft appreciates that because the criticism is usually correct and
constructive. And he also said that I would have no authority at all to
speak for Microsoft! Finally, I told him, "OK, I'll try it for a year and
see how it goes." I'm glad that I did!

> Yes, I've done it, but I'm only one person. No need to rely on my
> experiences when others have already described it in detail.

As I said earlier, I've not actually used an upgrade package, so you are
correct that I should have qualified my statement. I was relying on what
I've read in some of the websites as to how the upgrade is supposed to work.
I also have read in newsgroups of others who have done the multi-step
install as you describe, so it seems that many users have learned how to
install an upgrade package onto a blank hard drive. I wanted to correct the
statement that simply "showing" the qualifying disk was sufficient in Win7,
as it had been in Win9x, but I overdid the correction, it seems.

Also, the OP had said:
> I see there's quite a big difference
> between the Full Retail & Upgrade versions (someone told me I could buy
> a OEM version?).

So I wanted to warn the OP that the OEM version has some limitations which
must be considered.

Thank you for adding your experience to this discussion.

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX

Microsoft Windows MVP
Windows Live Mail 2009 (14.0.8089.0726) in Win7 Ultimate x64

"Char Jackson" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 09:10:55 -0600, "R. C. White" <>
> wrote:
>
>>Hi, Char.
>>
>>> I'm assuming your role as an MVP requires that you stand behind the
>>> position in #2 above,
>>
>>Not at all!
>>
>>You don't know MVPs very well, do you? We are some of Microsoft's most
>>vocal critics. Microsoft doesn't tell us what to do - or to say! If
>>you'd
>>like to know more about MVPs, visit:
>>http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/gp/aboutmvp
>
> I know almost nothing about MVP's and meant absolutely nothing
> disparaging to you personally or to MVP's as a group. I just (wrongly)
> assumed that Microsoft expected you guys to toe a certain company
> line. I stand corrected and I apologize if my earlier comments sent
> the wrong message.
>
>>> In short, an upgrade disc works fine by itself, no other qualifying OS
>>> is required.
>>
>>Have you actually done this, Char, or are you relying on hearsay? Can you
>>provide some details?
>
> Yes, I've done it, but I'm only one person. No need to rely on my
> experiences when others have already described it in detail.

relic wrote:
> Char Jackson wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 09:10:55 -0600, "R. C. White" <>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, Char.
>>>
>>>> I'm assuming your role as an MVP requires that you stand behind the
>>>> position in #2 above,
>>> Not at all!
>>>
>>> You don't know MVPs very well, do you? We are some of Microsoft's
>>> most vocal critics. Microsoft doesn't tell us what to do - or to
>>> say! If you'd like to know more about MVPs, visit:
>>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/gp/aboutmvp
>> I know almost nothing about MVP's and meant absolutely nothing
>> disparaging to you personally or to MVP's as a group. I just (wrongly)
>> assumed that Microsoft expected you guys to toe a certain company
>> line. I stand corrected and I apologize if my earlier comments sent
>> the wrong message.
>
> Never apologize to an MVP.
>
>

Hi relic. Say, maybe you can answer a question for me:

What is the differences between Visual Studio 2008 Pro and Standard
editions?
Most of the websites say that the only differences are if you want to
work with MSOffice products or something to that effect.
I need to know some of the finer points.

GreyCloud wrote:
>
> Hi relic. Say, maybe you can answer a question for me:
>
> What is the differences between Visual Studio 2008 Pro and Standard
> editions?
> Most of the websites say that the only differences are if you want to
> work with MSOffice products or something to that effect.
> I need to know some of the finer points.

I've never used it, try these comparison sheet downloads:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...DisplayLang=en

relic wrote:
> GreyCloud wrote:
>> Hi relic. Say, maybe you can answer a question for me:
>>
>> What is the differences between Visual Studio 2008 Pro and Standard
>> editions?
>> Most of the websites say that the only differences are if you want to
>> work with MSOffice products or something to that effect.
>> I need to know some of the finer points.
>
> I've never used it, try these comparison sheet downloads:
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/d...DisplayLang=en
>
>

Thnx! They sure have come a long ways since VS6.0.

R. C. White wrote:
> Hi, Char.
>
>> I'm assuming your role as an MVP requires that you stand behind the
>> position in #2 above,
>
> Not at all!
>
> You don't know MVPs very well, do you? We are some of Microsoft's most
> vocal critics. Microsoft doesn't tell us what to do - or to say! If
> you'd like to know more about MVPs, visit:
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/gp/aboutmvp
>
> If I didn't believe what I wrote, I would not have written it.
>
> That doesn't mean that I'm always right, of course.
>
> Since I have not used an upgrade disk - for Win7 or a prior version of
> Windows - in several years, I can't say from personal experience that
> "Upgrade will insist on seeing a qualifying version of Windows already
> installed." But that is my understanding from what I've read in
> newsgroups and other places. My main reason for saying that was to
> point out that simply inserting a qualifying disk would work for earlier
> version upgrades, but not for Win7. And to distinguish a retail upgrade
> disk from the OEM version that Debi was thinking of buying.
>
>> In short, an upgrade disc works fine by itself, no other qualifying OS
>> is required.
>
> Have you actually done this, Char, or are you relying on hearsay? Can
> you provide some details?
>
> RC

I have actually done this, and there is not just one way, there are
several that you can find online.

The one I used involved doing the install, not entering the product key,
using regedit to change a registry parameter from 1 to 0, slmgr -rearm,
rebooting and then use the activate windows screen to enter the product
key.

But as I said before there are several ways to do it.