XP to W7 update on Laptop

[Rob]

Can one update XP to W7 on a Toshiba laptop over writing and installing
W7? As not to loose all the old files?

I was intending to buy a new W7 disc and install from that is it
necessary to reformat and then install W7

thanks

 

[Bob Hatch]

Can one update XP to W7 on a Toshiba laptop over writing and installing
W7? As not to loose all the old files?

I was intending to buy a new W7 disc and install from that is it
necessary to reformat and then install W7

thanks

You will be told it can't be done, but it can.

Use this software:

http://www.laplink.com/pcmover/pcmoverupgradeassistant.html

Prior to starting the process, clone your drive so if something goes
wrong you can be back where you started in a matter of minutes.

I upgraded my desktop form XP-Pro to Win-7 Pro 64 bit and it's worked
since I installed Win 7 in October of 2009.


--
--

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure,
the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy,
its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.."
- Winston Churchill
http://www.bobhatch.com
http://www.tdsrvresort.com

 

[Stan Brown]

Can one update XP to W7 on a Toshiba laptop over writing and installing
W7? As not to loose all the old files?

The word is "lose", and the answer is No. Installing Windows 7 over
Windows XP requires a reformat of the drive.

It would be good advice anyway to back up your data filed before any
major change. In this situation it's absolutely essential.

I was intending to buy a new W7 disc and install from that is it
necessary to reformat and then install W7

Yes, but you don't have to reformat as a separate step because the
Windows 7 installer will insist on doing it for you.

 

[Paul]

Can one update XP to W7 on a Toshiba laptop over writing and installing
W7? As not to loose all the old files?

I was intending to buy a new W7 disc and install from that is it
necessary to reformat and then install W7

thanks

You could try a dual boot configuration. (I'm hoping the Windows 7
doesn't absolutely insist on deleting everything in its path, and
I don't think that's the case. Start looking for recipes...)

http://lifehacker.com/5126781/how-to-dual-boot-windows-7-with-xp-or-vista

Basically, the idea is, you resize the WinXP C: drive, to make room for
the new Windows 7 C:. So they can both co-exist on the same hard drive,
each in its own partition (files not mixed together).

Your Windows 7 DVD can do two things. If you boot it, all it presents
at first, is an "install" interface, with three lines on the screen.
Humor the DVD and click "Next". On the next page, there are some options
in the lower left corner, to do things other than install. Perhaps
one of those will be to "repair" something.

Once you get into the repair menu, the bottom option is
to open a "Command Prompt". This looks like an MSDOS box
once you get it open.

There is a tool called DiskPart, which is command line based.
You "list disks", "select disk 0", "list partitions",
"select partition 3" and so on. One of the options in there,
should be "shrink", once you've done the selecting steps and
selected a particular partition. (To do some advanced
preparation for this, you can use Disk Management in WinXP,
and look at your setup and make notes. In your case, with
only one hard drive in the laptop, I expect you won't have
a problem selecting the partition.)

What I can't tell you off hand, is whether "shrink" works for
both FAT32 and NTFS partitions or not. I've only used the
Windows 7 "shrink" on an NTFS partition. I've not tried it
on FAT32. Note that Windows 7 has a preference for NTFS, and
it won't actually install on a FAT32 partition. Windows 7
uses too many NTFS file system features, to be loaded onto
anything else.

The "shrink" function offered by Windows 7 is new, and I don't
think the diskpart in WinXP has that function. It can
shrink down a partition to half the original size, which
should be sufficient for your install. If you only had
a 60GB drive, I suppose you could make WinXP 20GB and
Windows 7 40GB or so, but that might be hard to arrange
with the diskpart shrink function, because it could only
shrink the 60GB main partition down to 30GB, and not down
to 20GB. The reason it can't shrink more, is because some
metadata on C: cannot be moved by diskpart (but third party
tools can do it). If your hard drive is 80GB or more, then
the percentage of shrink needed should not be a problem.

Once you've shrunk it, now come some additional decisions.
If you buy a Dell/HP/etc. laptop, chances are it came
with three partitions already defined. Recovery, Windows, and
Data partitions. Windows 7 will either install with one partition
or with two partitions. The reason for using two partitions,
is for versions of Windows 7 that support BitLocker encryption.
BitLocker is available with the higher end SKUs of Windows 7.
If you only had one primary partition left, you could always
install both the boot and system files in the one partition,
but then that would prevent wholesale encryption of the new
Windows 7 C:. I don't consider that a big deal, because there
are other third party encryptors if you need them.

You could consolidate your WinXP C: and the larger data partition
(squash 'em together) into one partition, but that too is an
advanced topic.

In any case, I think you could install both OSes. And because
you're installing the later OS, after the older OS has been
installed, the Windows 7 BCD based boot manager will automatically
recognize and add WinXP to the boot menu. After the install is
finished, you'll be presented with a menu with both OSes in it.
And you can then choose to boot one or the other.

If you need help, there are plenty of good recipes around to
help you. The forums over at sevenforums, are full of good
recipes. This is unlike a topic I'm working on right now,
which is just horrible in terms of information quality
(that's making multiboot USB keys).

Have fun, and before you do anything else, back up (image)
your entire laptop hard drive. You can store it on an external
USB hard drive for example.

If you have any questions about backups/cloning/imaging,
plenty of the people in this group can help with that.
You should be able to get an answer on doing backups, just
about any time of the day. What you want in a backup, is
to make sure you get the Recovery, WinXP C: and your Data,
all backed up. Some day, you're going to need that Recovery
partition, when your WinXP is attacked by a virus and you
want to reinstall WinXP, so it's imperative to back it up now.
Also, if you develop a plan along the way, to just delete the
recovery (to free up a primary partition), again, back up
everything, and you've be able to bail yourself out without
too much trouble later.

Paul

 

[Rob]

You could try a dual boot configuration. (I'm hoping the Windows 7
doesn't absolutely insist on deleting everything in its path, and
I don't think that's the case. Start looking for recipes...)

Snipped

I do not want to dual boot.

thanks

 

[BillW50]

In

You could try a dual boot configuration. (I'm hoping the Windows 7
doesn't absolutely insist on deleting everything in its path, and
I don't think that's the case... [...]
If you have any questions about backups/cloning/imaging,
plenty of the people in this group can help with that.
You should be able to get an answer on doing backups, just
about any time of the day. What you want in a backup, is
to make sure you get the Recovery, WinXP C: and your Data,
all backed up. Some day, you're going to need that Recovery
partition, when your WinXP is attacked by a virus and you
want to reinstall WinXP, so it's imperative to back it up now.
Also, if you develop a plan along the way, to just delete the
recovery (to free up a primary partition), again, back up
everything, and you've be able to bail yourself out without
too much trouble later.

I am so sorry I ever put XP and Windows 7 RC dualboot configuration on
this very computer once. Sure I have used dualboot configurations in the
past. But it has never been this bad before and I will probably never
setup another dualboot configuration ever again.

Acronis taught me a sad lesson that you have to actually test out every
backup to see if it actually restores correctly. As Acronis fails with
some USB controllers when it comes to restoring. So Acronis is basically
useless to me unless you are using a non-USB drives for archiving.

Paragon was working great until this dualboot configuration came along.
You see, I removed Windows 7 later. Deleted the Boot folder and a
handful of files that Windows 7 places on the XP system root. Then I had
to repair the MBR and XP boot files to make it bootable by XP once
again.

So if I restore using Paragon, it thinks it is doing me a great service
by disabling the XP boot system and making it bootable by Windows 7 that
isn't there anymore. So every time I restore this system from a Paragon
restore, I have to repair the XP boot system. Which means pulling out
the Windows XP install disc, having the SATA drivers on a floppy drive,
and doing some legwork. Just a PIA!

Paragon even knows what Windows 7 build was on this machine when you
view its log file. So obviously some sort of trace of Windows 7 is still
on my XP drive somewhere. All of these problems because I made the dumb
mistake of installing a dualboot configuration on this computer once.
:-(

Nowadays I have so many computers that dualbooting just doesn't make any
sense for me anymore. Plus all of my computers (except for one EeePC
that has the SSD soldered on the motherboard) I can swap out drives very
easy (usually under 5 seconds). So this method is far better for me than
using dualbooting anyway.

 

[Philip Herlihy]

Can one update XP to W7 on a Toshiba laptop over writing and installing
W7? As not to loose all the old files?

I was intending to buy a new W7 disc and install from that is it
necessary to reformat and then install W7

thanks

Those who have directly compared W7 and Vista on the same hardware seem
to be saying that W7 runs faster, but you may find W7 is a lot slower
than XP. XP can run reasonably well with 768MB of memory, but most
people say you need 2GB or more to run W7 well, for example.

 

[BillW50]

In

Those who have directly compared W7 and Vista on the same hardware
seem to be saying that W7 runs faster, but you may find W7 is a lot
slower than XP. XP can run reasonably well with 768MB of memory, but
most people say you need 2GB or more to run W7 well, for example.

I agree with all of the above, but one thing. When I run Windows 7, it
needs the same amount of RAM as my XP machines do. And I only have 1.5GB
on my Windows 7 machine and all of my XP machines have 2GB (no, I never
use all of it either on either OS). I only run x32 OS here, so x64 is
totally different story.

So my Windows 7 memory usage is far less than others I have heard about.
The only thing that I can think of is that I don't have much stuff
installed on my Windows 7 machine. Pretty much stock except for AverTV,
VLC, Thunderbird, and a handful of small utilities.

Something you didn't mention per se, is that I never was satisfied with
Windows 7 performance on any single core CPU yet. And I almost never
hear anybody else ever mention this.

 

[Dominique]

Stan Brown <[email protected]> écrivait

Yes, but you don't have to reformat as a separate step because the
Windows 7 installer will insist on doing it for you.

When using an "Upgrade" DVD, you must NOT reformat the drive because the
upgrade installer must check for a valid previous version of Windows. If
the disk is reformatted, Windows won't activate.

The way to do it with an "Upgrade" disk is to use "Custom install", it will
check for the validity and if OK, it will wipe the old installation put it
in a Windows.old folder and proceed with a new installation. This will
erase everything but will not reformat the drive.

If the drive is reformatted (or brand new), you must do a clean install
without entering the key and without checking for updates, then you upgrade
this installation with itself (the same disk) this time entering the key
and you may check for updates. The first installation will be seen as the
older version.

 

[Wolf K]

On 03/03/2012 8:52 AM, BillW50 wrote:
[....]

FYI:
I checked the headers on BillW50's posts. He has very carefully removed
several ,ines: From, Subject and Date being the most obvious. That makes
it difficult to killfile him. He has shown himself to be short-tempered
and abusive in the past.

HTH,
Wolf K.

 

[DanS]

On 03/03/2012 8:52 AM, BillW50 wrote:
[....]

FYI:
I checked the headers on BillW50's posts. He has very
carefully removed several ,ines: From, Subject and Date
being the most obvious. That makes it difficult to killfile
him. He has shown himself to be short-tempered and abusive
in the past.

HTH,
Wolf K.

Uh....these are the headers I see........

(...which has no relation what-so-ever to being or not being short-tempered and
abusive.)

Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!
eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-
september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail

From: "BillW50" <[email protected]>

Newsgroups: alt.windows7.general

Subject: Re: XP to W7 update on Laptop

Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 07:52:27 -0600

Organization: A noiseless patient Spider

Lines: 28

Message-ID: <[email protected]>

References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>

Injection-Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 13:52:29 +0000 (UTC)

Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-
host="jKpGK8BNyLOXjdtS2JYNGQ"; logging-data="4339"; mail-complaints-
to="(e-mail address removed)"; posting-
account="U2FsdGVkX1/44xF316/9mJZIbyfIMPGS"

X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157

X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original

X-Antivirus-Status: Clean

X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931

X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 120303-0, 03/03/2012), Outbound message
Cancel-Lock: sha1:HIblSSF+Hxlf4ZkGaRb/35c2GeQ=

X-Priority: 3

X-MSMail-Priority: Normal

Bytes: 2409

Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.windows7.general:70320

 

[BillW50]

On 03/03/2012 8:52 AM, BillW50 wrote:
[....]

FYI:
I checked the headers on BillW50's posts. He has very carefully removed
several ,ines: From, Subject and Date being the most obvious. That makes
it difficult to killfile him. He has shown himself to be short-tempered
and abusive in the past.

I do no such thing. I have dozens of computers and I use the same name
and email address on every single one of them. Even on my Palm III. And
I could careless if somebody wants to killfile me or not.

If I seem short tempered and abusive, it is because it is from clowns
who makes up crap that isn't so at all. Like claiming that I am
modifying my headers from being killfiled. Which isn't true of course.

You don't stop there either. You made the claim that I am often wrong.
And I called your bluff and asked what some of them were. You refuse to
show any evidence to your claims at all.

So what excuse do you have for this nonsense besides the obvious by
simply being too dumb to have a valid opinion about anything at all?
IMHO it is people like you who are short-tempered and abusive. As it is
beneath me to lie and slander about other people (and I wouldn't be able
to sleep at night if I did). But it is no problem for people like you,
now is it?

 

[Wolf K]

On 03/03/2012 8:52 AM, BillW50 wrote:
[....]

FYI:
I checked the headers on BillW50's posts. He has very carefully removed
several ,ines: From, Subject and Date being the most obvious. That makes
it difficult to killfile him. He has shown himself to be short-tempered
and abusive in the past.

I do no such thing.

[...]

True, and I apologise. Should've looked at Message Source, where you
revealed in all your glory.

Wolf K.

 

[Stan Brown]

On 03/03/2012 8:52 AM, BillW50 wrote:
[....]

FYI:
I checked the headers on BillW50's posts. He has very carefully removed
several ,ines: From, Subject and Date being the most obvious.

What nonsense. The very article you're following up contains all
those headers. I don't know if it's even possible to have a Usenet
article without them, but in any case he is guiltless of the crime of
which you accuse him.

 

[DanS]

You don't stop there either. You made the claim that I am
often wrong.

Well.........since you seem to be in the 2% group.......

 

[BillW50]

Well.........since you seem to be in the 2% group.......

Which is common with truth for those above the curve, is it not?

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second,
it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."
~ Arthur Schopenhauer -- German philosopher (1788 - 1860)

 

[BillW50]

On 03/03/2012 8:52 AM, BillW50 wrote:
[....]

FYI:
I checked the headers on BillW50's posts. He has very carefully removed
several ,ines: From, Subject and Date being the most obvious.

What nonsense. The very article you're following up contains all
those headers. I don't know if it's even possible to have a Usenet
article without them, but in any case he is guiltless of the crime of
which you accuse him.

Like I did with Wolf, I'm calling your bluff. This ought to be
interesting. As almost everybody backs out of that one. ;-)

 

[Yousuf Khan]

Can one update XP to W7 on a Toshiba laptop over writing and installing
W7? As not to loose all the old files?

I was intending to buy a new W7 disc and install from that is it
necessary to reformat and then install W7

thanks

Yes, there is, somewhat. If you're only interested in not losing your
old files, then you can do what's called a "Custom Install" of Windows
7. What this does is it transfers all of your "\Windows", "\Program
Files", and "\Documents & Settings" directories to new subdirectory
hierarchy called "\Windows.old". This is just a backup of all of these
old files, and you won't lose any of the files, but you will lose all of
your settings for them, as the registry will be brand new.

Hopefully, your drive or partition will be large enough to contain both
Windows XP and Windows 7 files on the same drive. When Windows 7 is
done, you will have a newly installed Windows installation, with no
settings carried over from the previous Windows. Then you will have to
reinstall your apps under the new Windows 7, one at a time. You can
refer back to the "Windows.old" directory to figure out which
applications you previously had installed.

You, at some point, also start transferring all of your old XP data
files in My Documents, My Pictures, My Music, etc. to their equivalents
under Windows 7. This is a simple copy/move and paste operation using
Explorer, no special utilities required.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Ken Blake]

Those who have directly compared W7 and Vista on the same hardware seem
to be saying that W7 runs faster, but you may find W7 is a lot slower
than XP. XP can run reasonably well with 768MB of memory, but most
people say you need 2GB or more to run W7 well, for example.

How much RAM you need for *any* version of Windows depends on what
apps you run, but most people running a typical range of business
applications Windows 7 need at least 2GB. On the other hand, if you do
little more than e-mail, 1GB could be fine. My netbook is an example
of that. It runs Windows 7 Ultimate with 1GB; it's slow but adequate
for my needs, which are just doing e-mail while traveling with it.

 

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

In message <[email protected]>, Ken Blake

How much RAM you need for *any* version of Windows depends on what
apps you run, but most people running a typical range of business
applications Windows 7 need at least 2GB. On the other hand, if you do
little more than e-mail, 1GB could be fine. My netbook is an example
of that. It runs Windows 7 Ultimate with 1GB; it's slow but adequate
for my needs, which are just doing e-mail while traveling with it.

If that's all you're doing with it, wouldn't it run _better_ (single
processor I assume, 1G) with XP? Or is it that the answer is yes, but
for the amount you use it the effort of going back to XP is more than
the benefit you'd get?