definitive answer on Win7 "upgrades" re:activation

[xnorthx]

So when the big Windows 7 preorder deals were flying around, I jumped on the one newegg was offering and it's still on hold waiting for the October release.

I was wondering if anyone has a concrete answer as to whether or not you actually have to have Vista or XP installed AND ACTIVATED before you're able to use your upgrade CD to install Windows 7.

any info is appreciated

 

[Ocellaris]

So when the big Windows 7 preorder deals were flying around, I jumped on the one newegg was offering and it's still on hold waiting for the October release.

I was wondering if anyone has a concrete answer as to whether or not you actually have to have Vista or XP installed AND ACTIVATED before you're able to use your upgrade CD to install Windows 7.

any info is appreciated

the prior os needs to be activated.
Posted via [H] Mobile Device

 

[Catweazle]

The "concrete answer", xnorthx, is that NOBODY can really know until retail release time, when upgrade key codes are finally available, whether or not the qualifying install needs to be activated. You'll see people, like ocellaris above, making claims about it but the reality is that they don't and can't truly 'KNOW'.


We've seen reports of email messages from 'microsoft insiders' claiming that the qualifying install needs to be activated, but then we saw the same damned thing happen pre-Vista as well. That time, when the upgrade key codes finally became available to journos a day or two prior to retail release date the claims proved to be absolute bullshit. We'll have to wait and see if it's same thing all over again.

It's 'possible'. There are some differences in the install process between Vista and Windows 7, so further differences of this ilk are a possibility. But until we can either test it or we can view a definitive formal press release statement from Microsoft regarding it, we can only really guess. And don't hopld your breath waiting for that definitive press release statement. Microsoft generally only puts out misleading 'spin' instead!

 

[dajet24]

iam gonna bet that the windows vista upgrade trick will work with windows 7 again.. simply wasnt a big enough deal last time around for MS to really be jerks about it this time me thinks.

 

[Surly73]

These threads have come up before.

They usually all bash on the OP for being lazy and not wanting to install multiple times, or trying to be smart and "educating" everyone on cloning.

Despite some attempts to discuss it, every one that I've read has completely ignored a couple of things:

- the Vista "clean install" "upgrade" detailed here, among other places. I've used it when I did my upgrade, and was informed by some [H]ere that there are even more shortcuts to avoid the second "upgrade" in that process.

- the fact that MS has said that x86 and x64 will be included in EVERY box of Win7 - upgrade or full retail - and that transitioning between x86 and x64 ALWAYS requires a clean, full install. "Upgrade" is a licensing term, not just terminology for upgrading-in-place.

Point #2 means that anyone upgrading from any previous x86 windows release to Win7x64 MUST do a full, clean install even though they're using an upgrade SKU of Win7. This obviously means that a method has been included in Win7 for doing an "upgrade" that is actually a clean install.

So, this says to me that its quite likely that the something like the Vista "trick" (or possible no "trick" at all any more) will work with Win7. You may not require ANY prior OS to be installed and/or activated on the target system to do your Win7 "upgrade". If you're going from XPx86 to Win7x64 (which I bet a lot of people are) then you'll have no choice anyways.

I don't know why such a forum that's supposedly as elite as [H] keeps overlooking these points. I also find it inconsistent that a community with some people so format-happy that they do clean installs of windows because they need to update their video drivers would ever want to upgrade-in-place if a clean-install option existed.

As Catweazle says, no one will be 100% sure until the full retail product is out, of course.

 

[GushpinBob]

Wasn't there like one original and unconfirmed source about the Windows 7 upgrade requiring an activated copy of Vista. It was through Engadget IIRC.

 

[Surly73]

Wasn't there like one original and unconfirmed source about the Windows 7 upgrade requiring an activated copy of Vista. It was through Engadget IIRC.

Guys: COME ON!

Microsoft's front page banner for Win7 (right HERE) says:

You qualify for Windows 7 upgrade versions if you are running genuine Windows Vista, Windows XP, or Windows 2000 on your PC.

It also says this little tidbit, which is new to me:

* Currently running Windows XP
* Microsoft designed Windows 7 Upgrade media for Windows Vista. Customers with Windows XP can purchase Windows 7 Upgrade versions but must back up their files, clean install, and then reinstall their applications.

Right there.

Black and white.

XP users may upgrade but need to do a CLEAN INSTALL.

So the only remaining question is the detail about whether the install must be launched from a running, eligible OS, even if doing a blow-away clean install.

 

[Catweazle]

Wasn't there like one original and unconfirmed source about the Windows 7 upgrade requiring an activated copy of Vista. It was through Engadget IIRC.

It was actually an email message sent to Paul Thurrot and mentioned in that fella's blog which sparked it all off. Paul's opinion of the message was a quite clear "I'll believe it when I see it" message, but that opinion wasn't included in subsequent re-reportings of it elsewhere.

Guys: COME ON!

Microsoft's front page banner for Win7 (right HERE) says:

That's an interesting/curious one. Microsoft's PR blurb included there for Windows 7 Upgrade orders includes the term "Genuine Windows", whilst the current PR blurb for the comparable Windows Vista page does not. However, the information provided by Microsoft regarding Windows Vista upgrades USED to include that same term!

Does that mean that this time around there's a genuine mechanism included to determine 'Genuine' status or not? As mentioned above, we'll really have to wait and see. People like to analyse and dissect everything they see in a 'Microsoft' comment, but they tend to forget that such comment is inevitably very carefully crafted to create an impression. There is nothing in any of the mechanisms used and conditions imposed by Microsoft, with respect to any of its products whatsoever, which is truly a mechanism to detect and elinate all misuses and licensing breaches. Instead, the whole shebang of it is intended to be a disincentive to casual piracy, because that's about all that can be realistically achieved. Public comments and information provided are part and parcel of that. Create the impression that people "can't" do something and the reality will be that a helluva lot of people won't try to!


When I finally get my hands on an Upgrade install key for the thing I can assure you that I'LL be trying! For the sake of curiosity, nothing else. I like to know the actual, accurate answers to questions posed, rather than the misconceptions generated by often misleading information or comment. There have been a lot of circumstances over the years where comment from Microsoft has given the impression that something 'cannot' be done, when in fact it actually could be done. Maybe not legitimately, in a legal sense. But practically.


Oh! and another curious little 'fact'.

For a short time, when the 'half price offer' special deal was still current for Windows 7 Upgrade pre-orders, the associated Microsoft FAQ materials included the rather curious information indicating that a Windows 7 RC installation would 'qualify' the Windows 7 Upgrade install! That information did NOT stipulate that Windows 7 RC represented a 'valid qualifying product' in a legal sense. Instead it simply indocated that a Windows 7 RC installation would pass the check for 'qualifying version'. That information also did not stipulate that the Windows 7 RC installation, or any other qualifying installation, would need to be activated.

The half price offer only ran for a short time, and that information is no longer accessible. It's been removed and replaced with information more in keeping with 'corporate policy'. I'm guessing that somebody behind the scenes mighta ended up slapped on the wrist over its publication, to be truthful. But it stands to reason. 'Valid qualifying product' checks are an 'earliest version or better' scenario. A Windows Upgrade install has to be able to be qualified by a 'same version' install, for purposes of reinstallation! And that, in turn, leads us to suspect that the 'dual install' trick should be possible for Windows 7 just as it was for Windows Vista. As said, I'll wait and see, and I won't form a definite stance or opinion until I DO see!

XP users may upgrade but need to do a CLEAN INSTALL.

So the only remaining question is the detail about whether the install must be launched from a running, eligible OS, even if doing a blow-away clean install.

Yep. There's no doubt whatsoever that the qualifying product (valid or otherwise) will need to be installed on the machine. The capacity to use Upgrade media and keys to install to a 'clean' hard drive disappeared along with the appearance of Vista. Can't be done any more. If you have an upgrade install key then the only qualification check is one to detect the presence of a 'qualifying' Windows installation.

'Clean install' for this scenario is NOT an exercise in nuking the drive and installing fresh. Instead it's an exercise of using the 'Custom' install option to either disbale/quarantine the existing install and place a new install on the same partition, or else leave the existing install in place and deploy a new install to a different partition. The end result of an upgrade 'clean install' is either the qualifying install placed into a WINDOWS.OLD folder, or a dual-boot configuration, in other words.

 

[Surly73]

Yep. There's no doubt whatsoever that the qualifying product (valid or otherwise) will need to be installed on the machine. The capacity to use Upgrade media and keys to install to a 'clean' hard drive disappeared along with the appearance of Vista. Can't be done any more. If you have an upgrade install key then the only qualification check is one to detect the presence of a 'qualifying' Windows installation.

This is simply wrong. That's the whole point of the Vista double-install.

I can assure you, I installed my Vista UPGRADE on an empty partition with no previous OS with the double-install "trick". I have qualifying licenses for 2000/XP that I am "upgrading against", so I'm legal, but these instances were not on the platters in question when I did the upgrade. Nor was I asked to insert any CDs, DVDs or other media to "qualify". No one knows if Win7 will "double install" like Vista, or if they've even removed that hoop to jump through and every SKU can "clean install".

Why does this FUD and misinformation keep creeping back in when links to procedures outlining exactly how to do this are only a couple of posts above in this thread?

'Clean install' for this scenario is NOT an exercise in nuking the drive and installing fresh. Instead it's an exercise of using the 'Custom' install option to either disbale/quarantine the existing install and place a new install on the same partition, or else leave the existing install in place and deploy a new install to a different partition. The end result of an upgrade 'clean install' is either the qualifying install placed into a WINDOWS.OLD folder, or a dual-boot configuration, in other words.

Again, not in my direct experience.

An install that goes over top of an existing windows install, leaving a WINDOWS.OLD folder is not a clean install. That's a typical upgrade. This type of "clean install" also doesn't jive with the x86 -> x64 upgrade process Microsoft has documented.

 

[Catweazle]

This is simply wrong. That's the whole point of the Vista double-install.

I can assure you, I installed my Vista UPGRADE on an empty partition with no previous OS with the double-install "trick".

Dude, I'm the fella who wrote the comprehensive FAQ here regarding that 'trick':

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1202605

I'm also the fella who 'broke' news of it in the Australian IT media. The whole 'point' of how and why it works is that you are NOT deploying an upgrade key to a 'clean' hard drive! Instead, you are putting a 'trial' install in place, with no install key assigned to it, in order to be able to USE your upgrade install key. The trial install acts as the 'qualifying product' on the machine. The upgrade install key will be rejected if the drive is 'clean', and that's why the trial install needs to be put in place.

Again, not in my direct experience.

An install that goes over top of an existing windows install, leaving a WINDOWS.OLD folder is not a clean install. That's a typical upgrade.

Incorrect!

The procedure does NOT go 'over the top' of an existing install when the 'Custom clean' install is used. Instead:

• The previous install is bundled into the WINDOWS.OLD folder and its boot loader is eliminated leaving it completely unusable.
• The remaining storage space on that drive is, at this point, effectively 'clean' . That previous install is effectively quarantined, and will not impact on the new install at all.
• The new install is deplotyed 'clean and fresh' to the drive.
• The WINDOWS.OLD folder can be later removed by choosing the 'previous windows versions' option in Disk Cleanup.

It is NOT, in any sense at all, an 'over the top' install! It's understandable enough that you might feel a bit "EEEEWWW!!!!" about the fact that the old install isn't actually deleted before the clean, fresh install is deployed, but you gotta understand that's just a queasiness in your head, not a practical problem. That old install does not impact, in any way whatsoever, on the clean, new install deployed by the 'Custom Clean' procedure.

 

[Gorankar]

I can't wait til it actually comes out and we have a definitive answer.

However unlikely, I'll laugh at all this pre launch angst if all it does is ask for a key or media for Vista/Xp/2k.

 

[bigdogchris]

I'm wondering if there is a way to edit ie.cfg to turn the 7 RTM iso into an upgrade disc.

 

[Catweazle]

I'm still laughing at all the Vista pre-release angst, to be honest. And the XP pre-release angst before it. Anybody here remember all the moanings and wailings from people worried that, a few years down the track, their precious new XP purchase would end up unusable because it'd end up abandoned and not be able to be activated any more?

All the wailings about how using a Vista Upgrade pack would supposedly nuke your old XP install key, and render it practically unusable forever after?


Oh! And I am DEARLY looking forward to seeing how a supposed activation check is gonna determine whether or not a qualifying Windows 2000 install is activated or not!





Edit: @bigdogchris

Upgrade and Full install disks, just like Vista, will be the same thing. It's not an edit to the ISO needed. Instead, it's an actual 'upgrade' install key, from the 'allowable range' of possible keys which pertains to upgrade licenses! The interaction of install code and the installer is what determines whether it is 'Full license' or 'Upgrade license'. Different key ranges make the installer present different options.

 

[Gorankar]

Oh! And I am DEARLY looking forward to seeing how a supposed activation check is gonna determine whether or not a qualifying Windows 2000 install is activated or not!

That one gets me as well, there is no activation. That certain software upgrades for 2k needed wga checks always puzzled me for the same reason. Outside of blacklisted keys it seemed useless.

Providing that a previous install is actually a requirement, I will be free to essentially just restore an image from any 2k install to my target disk prior to booting and installing the upgrade version Win 7 DVD. If that turns out to be the case we will eventually know exactly what file(s) Win 7 upgrade is looking for and simply have to format the target disk and toss those files on there.

All these what if(s) an maybe it will be like this(s) is giving me a headache. See you in October.

 

[xnorthx]

Wow... spent the day away from the house and had all this reading to come back to.

The 50 dollar newegg Win7 Home Premium preorder sitting in my newegg account looks good NOW, but I'll still cancel if I have to install and activate Vista or XP beforehand. My buddy just got Win7 Ultimate thru MSDNAA for "free" and it's making the thought of purchasing Home Premium for 199 even worse.

Thanks for the info guys, but I guess like everyone else, I'll have to wait until October to see for sure.

 

[Ocellaris]

you have to activate xp and vista and installs before doing the 7 upgrade. feel free to not believe anything until some major media outlet posts the information. because media outlets have never been wrong.
Posted via [H] Mobile Device

 

[Catweazle]

.. feel free to not believe anything until some major media outlet posts the information. because media outlets have never been wrong. ..

Considering that the only place such supposed information has yet been pronounced is amidst media gossip/speculation, that post is a comedy gold moment!

 

[Ocellaris]

Considering that the only place such supposed information has yet been pronounced is amidst media gossip/speculation, that post is a comedy gold moment!

not everyone on this forum pumps gas for a living. I can assure you that plenty of people here know exactly how things like this are going to work. they just don't reply because people like you jump all over everything unless they read it on cnet.
Posted via [H] Mobile Device

 

[DeaconFrost]

My buddy just got Win7 Ultimate thru MSDNAA for "free" and it's making the thought of purchasing Home Premium for 199 even worse.

What I'm curious about is....if you were to use his media to install Windows 7, selecting the version of your upgrade, such as Home Premium. Then, within the 30 day period, you'd pop in your key from your upgrade, if it would activate. That also toes the line of legality in several ways, one being the fact he'd be sharing media with a person not part of the program.

 

[Gorankar]

not everyone on this forum pumps gas for a living. I can assure you that plenty of people here know exactly how things like this are going to work. they just don't reply because people like you jump all over everything unless they read it on cnet.
Posted via [H] Mobile Device

So far, an email from a supposed insider that the tech sites took and ran with is the only evidence I have heard that an activated install is required. You don't have to be the distrustful type to wonder at the veracity.

What does pumping gas have to do with it?

 

[Catweazle]

...because people like you jump all over everything unless they read it on cnet

You don't 'get' the fact that my posts were indicating people SHOULDN'T take everything they see on tech sites at face value?

And that YOU are accepting as fact a claim for which the sole supposed 'supporting evidence' all stems from the mentions in this tech blog article?

http://community.winsupersite.com/b...upgrade-media-how-does-that-work-exactly.aspx



Every single 'news' report and every single claim made in every single tech forum about the need for an activated prior install ALL stems from that single report. Go do the checking, like I have. There is no other existing 'source' for the information other than that'n.

 

[Ocellaris]

You don't 'get' the fact that my posts were indicating people SHOULDN'T take everything they see on tech sites at face value?

And that YOU are accepting as fact a claim for which the sole supposed 'supporting evidence' all stems from the mentions in this tech blog article?

http://community.winsupersite.com/b...upgrade-media-how-does-that-work-exactly.aspx



Every single 'news' report and every single claim made in every single tech forum about the need for an activated prior install ALL stems from that single report. Go do the checking, like I have. There is no other existing 'source' for the information other than that'n.

I haven't even seen that report. tons of people know how exactly this is going to work because they work for large oems and will be sending out upgrade discs of various types to customers. they have to support those upgrade discs so they need to know how the activation issue gets handled before their support gets called and such.

this type of thing usually does not get covered, much like how the vista double install upgrade got some press, but no one wanted to make a giant headline that says 'holy shit, full versiong of windows for the upgrade price! ding ding ding! click this article to save yourself money!'
Posted via [H] Mobile Device

 

[Catweazle]

.. tons of people know how exactly this is going to work because they work for large oems and will be sending out upgrade discs of various types to customers.

And you are assuming that some of those people are the ones making definitive claims? Where's the basis for that assumption? Surely at least ONE of those people would've mentioned the source of their 'knowledge', from behind the anonymity of their forum alias?

they have to support those upgrade discs so they need to know how the activation issue gets handled before their support gets called and such.

Incorrect!

OEM support staff only need to know:

• Start up the machine
• Pop the upgrade disk in the drive
• Click on 'Install' and then 'Upgrade'.

The OEM support staff only need to know the procedure for a formal over the top upgrade install, because that's what they support. Workarounds for a clean machine install aren't their domain.

this type of thing usually does not get covered, much like how the vista double install upgrade got some press, but no one wanted to make a giant headline that says 'holy shit, full versiong of windows for the upgrade price! ding ding ding! click this article to save yourself money!'

Ridiculous comment!

The Vista double-install workaround got a HUGE amount of coverage in the tech media. Of COURSE none of it was accompanied by headlines of the sort you describe. Such a headline would be an incitement to breach licensing requirements, and thus would be legally actionable.

 

[Ocellaris]

alright you win, maybe not even anyone at microsoft knows! its a complete mystery, im sure.
Posted via [H] Mobile Device

 

[Catweazle]

It'd be more accurate to say that not even EVERYONE at Microsoft knows. The development team will be well aware. Management will be well aware. But beyond that....

As an example, from the Technet Blog of MS insider Harold Wong recently:

The requirements for using the Windows 7 Upgrade Media seems to not be fully documented and publicized. I received emails from folks who have said a Microsoft representative had told them that an activated copy of Windows must already be installed onto the computer. I had stated that the original media would be required. Since I cannot get a solid answer internally at this point, I’m going to take the egg on my face and say that I may be wrong in my previous statement. I am not sure yet. Since I don’t have access to the Upgrade Media myself, I cannot test it to know for sure so I am waiting for the Windows 7 Team to post an update to their blog that states all the requirements. Just like the rest of you, I will have to wait for further “official” news. I am very sorry for jumping the gun on this one and stating what I heard were the requirements for using the Upgrade Media.