There is a well known Windows Vista Upgrade secret in the IT community. In this article I talk about it and the possible legal implications! Please take this article "as-is" I provide no warranty of any kind by providing this information. Well to be honest it is no big secret as you can find this information anywhere online and many Microsoft staff must also know about it as they created this process! The "secret" is that the setup program (setup.exe) in Windows Vista's upgrade version will accept an installed copy of XP, W2K, or an un-activated copy of Vista itself as evidence of a previous installation.
...and it is this last option that enables you to perform a "clean install" of an upgrade version of Windows Vista to any formatted or unformatted hard drive! Basically you are installing Windows Vista twice to take advantage of this trick.
Is This Windows Vista Upgrade Secret Legal? Probably not. I am no legal expert but I am guessing this will violate some part of the Windows Vista EULA (End User Licence Agreement.) BUT Microsoft have created this process.... It is not something you have to try and crack in their software or run a third party application to perform this process... Their development team created it. Which kind of begs the question WHY?
Link: Undocumented Upgrade Option @ Instant Vista
...and it is this last option that enables you to perform a "clean install" of an upgrade version of Windows Vista to any formatted or unformatted hard drive! Basically you are installing Windows Vista twice to take advantage of this trick.
Is This Windows Vista Upgrade Secret Legal? Probably not. I am no legal expert but I am guessing this will violate some part of the Windows Vista EULA (End User Licence Agreement.) BUT Microsoft have created this process.... It is not something you have to try and crack in their software or run a third party application to perform this process... Their development team created it. Which kind of begs the question WHY?
Link: Undocumented Upgrade Option @ Instant Vista
Link to some more reputable sources:
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvi...grade_clean.asp
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=5932
Neowin is becoming notorious for horrible sources...
Exactly. We should hear some words from Microsoft but using some brain... this should be the obvious scenario.
were using which, at the time was legit, was to have the windows 98 cd nearby, boot from the XP cd, and at some
point in the install, it would ask for the previous OS cd to verify that you were installing the upgrade, is not a valid
way to do it this time. It says that you MUST have a legit working copy of XP on the computer, BEFORE you can
upgrade.
I've tried this method described here and it works like it is suppose to, but, I think technically, it is against the
EULA.
Personally, I'm sticking with XP until at least mid summer, or when the SP1 comes out, if they include some of the
features removed. There were a couple of features they couldn't get to work/compatible 100% that I would like to
see.
Where in the world do people keep getting the misinformation about keys?
Installing Vista DOES NOT invalidate your XP key.
Your XP key is YOUR key, NOT Microsofts.
You OWN that key.
Installing Vista DOES NOT invalidate your XP key.
Your XP key is YOUR key, NOT Microsofts.
You OWN that key.
Microsoft does not electronically monitor and enforce (to my knowledge) this invalidation of your XP key.
The XP key is not "yours". I don't know why you made up this hogwash, but you certainly didn't read the EULA. The piece of paper it is on is yours. The right to use it to legally install Windows belongs solely to Microsoft. They key does not belong to you.
Source?
Source?
Microsoft EULA is the source. I stated that when I questioned if the poster had read the EULA.
Seems pretty clear to me!
Source?
Microsoft EULA is the source. I stated that when I questioned if the poster had read the EULA.
WRONG WRONG WRONG!
You can turn that EULA item upside down, inside out, backwards, whatever. It doesn't say ANYWHERE that it invalidates your XP key! If it does, please highlight it! It says you may no longer use the XP that you upgraded from. It doesn't say ANYWHERE that it invalidates your XP key! It doesn't say ANYWHERE that it invalidates your XP key!
Source?
Microsoft EULA is the source. I stated that when I questioned if the poster had read the EULA.
WRONG WRONG WRONG!
You can turn that EULA item upside down, inside out, backwards, whatever. It doesn't say ANYWHERE that it invalidates your XP key! If it does, please highlight it! It says you may no longer use the XP that you upgraded from. It doesn't say ANYWHERE that it invalidates your XP key! It doesn't say ANYWHERE that it invalidates your XP key!
Holy christ.
Look up at this quote and READ! He didn't say it electronically invalidated your key. It legally invalidates it.
You can turn that EULA item upside down, inside out, backwards, whatever. It doesn't say ANYWHERE that it invalidates your XP key! If it does, please highlight it! It says you may no longer use the XP that you upgraded from. It doesn't say ANYWHERE that it invalidates your XP key! It doesn't say ANYWHERE that it invalidates your XP key!
Once you upgrade to Vista, your XP key is no longer valid to use to keep an XP install. It is no longer "valid". If you remove Vista (because of some odd hardware compatibility issue or whatever) that "upgrade" provision no longer holds, as you have NOT upgraded at that point. You would be free (legally) to reinstall your XP using your XP key.
It seems you can read the words of your EULA, but have problems understanding them? Or perhaps you just mis-read what I was saying, while thinking I supported the notion of a Microsoft "Big Brother" that flags keys as invalid as soon as users upgrade.
No tinfoil hats in this thread.
The option is there to let upgrade users that have already installed vista to make a clean install of it in case they want or need to format their systems.
The most likely answer is that when you register, Microsoft first checks the serial number to see if it was an upgrade or a retail purchase. They have all of that information in their databases, so that's not where the problem exists. The problem is if it flags as an upgrade, how does Microsoft check to see if it really was upgraded?
The answer is probably simple and trivial. Look for a file that exists under Windows XP but doesn't under Windows Vista in the system32 directory. If it's there, then it's likely a true upgrade. If it's not, then it's likely that you're using this 'hack' (which isn't quite a true hack) to install over a previous version of Windows Vista. I wouldn't be surprised if someone at Microsoft is thinking along these lines, and the Windows Genuine Advantage checker is modified to do just such a check sometime in the near future.
Microsoft is not going to simply allow folks to purchase upgrades to install as clean installs for long, and it's just a matter of time before they do figure out something along those lines to block it.
That sounds good if you're a private user who will be never subjected to federal inspections. The thing dramatically changes if you are in doubt when upgrading you office's PCs. I would think twice before buying an upgrade while still not knowing exactly what you're doing
for the upgrade. Upon upgrade, this agreement takes the place of the agreement for the software
you upgraded from. After you upgrade, you may no longer use the software you upgraded from.
So you need to have the license, not necessarily have it installed. Also note that it says that you can no longer use the software that you upgraded from, but you have the license to the old software. This means you are still licensed to possess the software, but you just waived you right to still use it (for work or for upgrade); But the license itself is still there so you are always eligible to perform an Upgrade.
Last edited by Quick Reply on 15 Feb 2007 - 13:21
While we were already talking about (and probably using) this method, News sites were just learning what Vista really was!
.... Okay sarcasm aside, why has it taken this long to show up?
Gotta love all the loopholes.
But after 3 months you should do something. Remove it? Buy it? Go back to XP? That said, I guess Vista would be much more appreciated (and installed) if online comparisons between XP and Vista weren't so bad (speaking of performances, I mean). I was really interested in this product but after playing a couple of hours with Aero... I should really think about possible incompatibilities and small bugs. It's ok at home, I can "geek" to have fun. But at work... Brrrr!
But after 3 months you should do something. Remove it? Buy it? Go back to XP? That said, I guess Vista would be much more appreciated (and installed) if online comparisons between XP and Vista weren't so bad (speaking of performances, I mean). I was really interested in this product but after playing a couple of hours with Aero... I should really think about possible incompatibilities and small bugs. It's ok at home, I can "geek" to have fun. But at work... Brrrr!
I feel like the UI is in fact faster but my games perform worse. This is to be expected to some degree, but it seems that ATI has been on the ball here more lately while nVidia's drivers for Vista have been dismal at best. I have a 7950GX2 running in no SLI mode for Vista. Talk about taking a performance hit... I can't wait to see what ATI unveils here in the near future.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.