This is seriously Microsoft's Windows 7 upgrade chart, and it's ridiculous. It manages to highlight the insanity of shipping multiple OS versions while totally minimizing the good news: most Vista users will be able to upgrade in place to the corresponding 32- or 64-bit version of 7. That should cover the vast majority of people running Vista, but if you're still on XP or you're trying to do anything out of the ordinary you'd better get ready for some pain: all those ominous blue boxes require you to back up, wipe your drive, and reinstall a totally clean copy of 7. You heard that right -- the Windows 7 installer won't even try to retain your data and programs if you're not updating from the corresponding version of Vista. Pretty lame move, considering Microsoft is currently selling millions of copies of XP on netbooks and will
sell XP downgrades until 2011 -- sure, we get that most netbook owners aren't going to spring for 7, but it's insane that you can't just pop in a disc and upgrade. Of course, now that 7's been
released to manufacturing and the
final bits are available there's not much to be done, so let's all just take a moment to contemplate the fact that Ed Bott at
ZDNet managed to totally outdo Redmond's infographics people with a much friendlier chart with "about an hour" of work -- check it below.
Read - Original chart at AllThingsD
Read - Ed Bott's revised chart
posted Aug 6th 2009 4:29PM
What's so ridiculous about it? Locate your current version of Vista on the left, and read to the right to see which versions of Windows 7 you can upgrade to.
What's the big deal?
MANUFACTURED OUTRAGE
The fact that most people do not know if they are running the 32 or 64 bit version of Vista. Or the fact they need a chart that basically say, if you run XP and want to upgrade to 7, be prepared to lose everything and start over.
With choice, comes responsibility, and the need to do adult things. Like look to see what you have, find it on the chart, and see what your options are, and choosing them.
Control Panel, System. Gives you the version right there. It's also printed on the Windows sticker that comes on PCs with Windows pre-installed.
So it's not exactly difficult to find out.
The difficulty comes when you have XP or say you want to upgrade Windows Vista Ultimate to Windows 7 Home Premium. The chart says "Custom Install". What the h-e-double-hockey-sticks does that mean? Can you upgrade or not? And are you really defending a chart for an OS upgrade that has 66 possible outcomes? Really?
All I want to know is, can I put my windows 7 x64 upgrade dvd into the drive and do a clean install of windows 7 without first having vista installed? The chart seems to say YES.
Also they mention Windows Easy Transfer (and how great it is), but does it backup my media center settings, guide data and scheduled recording data?
I do not understand what the big deal is. For 1 thing, i prolly re-format my hard drive once ever 5-6 months... just to keep it running fast and clean. There aren't many things that feel better than a fresh install.
Furthermore, why is everyone freaking out about having to "Backup" all of your data? If you work on a day to day basis on your comp and dont keep things backed up anyway, than you are an idiot... you are just asking for something bad to happen.
And even furthermore, with all of the different products out there that specialize in keeping your machine backed up, and the low price of todays external hard drives, this should not be a problem. If someone doesnt already have a backup hard drive that they use, then they obviously dont have enough stuff to back-up, so they should be able to get their hands on a jump drive at the very least to back-up important files before the installation.
This is being blown way out of proportion.
It's a big deal when you compare it to the same chart for the Mac release coming (Snow Leopard). Any version of Leopard (of which there is only one) can upgrade to any version of Snow Leopard (of which there is only one), just like every previous Mac release.
The fact that you actually *need* a chart like that is what is ridiculous.
Jon, they just want to have something to write about.
I also do not see the big problem. I will do a custom install with all of my systems anyways. Most people that complain about slow computers just need a clean wipe anyways, so this will be good for them. Engadget makes it sound like this is the biggest pain in the ass that has ever come out of a set of software.
@ Jon
I am glad I am not the only one who fails to see what is so confusing about this chart. Especially since the 32 bit and 64 bit versions of Win7 both come on the same DVD so its not even like a consumer would have to choose the right one there.
Besides, the chart just makes sense. You can upgrade from your version of Vista to the corresponding version of Win 7 or you can upgrade to Win 7 Ultimate. Its not rocket science folks.
A custom install, for bioadam and the other willfully ignorant is helpfully described right below the chart on the image above:
"A custom (clean) installation gives you the option to either completely replace your current operating system or install Windows on a specific drive or partition that you select."
Jebus.
Here's the problem, you are computer savvy and most people are not. I just had to show a guy at work how to change his desktop background. He's used the same computer for 4 years now and did not know how to do that.
Why do you think XP is still around? When it comes to computing, most people do not know anything beyond opening Word or Outlook and the basic keyboard layout to get their job done. A chart with that much data is too much.
There is an upgrade advisor, which I didn't know about untill I saw the image, that will do this for you. How did you miss it?
Jesus Christ, Why can't they just make one version on one disk and have everything on it. I mean they could ask the user after they insert the disk questions like " will you be using this for a business " and " do you want the 64bit version or 32biit " why can't they just put it all one one disk and sell it for a reasonable price. Not to be a fanboy or anything but I think Apple has the right idea on this.
Steven K: Microsoft sells different versions for price differentiation. Some people will pay more for software, like businesses and enthusiasts, so they have more expensive versions targeted at those segments. Apple does the same thing, but Apple is a hardware company and only makes a fraction of their income on software. So when Apple does price differentiation, it's based on hardware... like when Apple removed Firewire from 'consumer-level' laptops to push 'professional' users into a more expensive product line. Or the fact that Apple doesn't sell anything between entry-level Mac Mini/iMac and the ridiculous Mac Pro.
@Shenanigans >> "Here's the problem, you are computer savvy and most people are not. I just had to show a guy at work how to change his desktop background. He's used the same computer for 4 years now and did not know how to do that."
Why would a non-computer-savvy person even bother upgrading their OS ?
Won't they just use their current computer until they get a new computer?
>>The fact that most people do not know if they are running the 32 or 64 bit version of Vista.
"Most people" never install and OS. They get the OS their computer came with. Joe Sixpack will never use this chart. Anymore lame excuses?
@ bioadam "And are you really defending a chart for an OS upgrade that has 66 possible outcomes? Really?" Like others (including the writer) you're just being childish for the sake of being childish. Unless you're the guy from the movie Memento with no memory people usually know where they're starting and where they're going. How many options does that leave? Here's a hint -- it's between 0 and 2.
@Michael Scrip: That type of logic is not welcome here.
"Here's the problem, you are computer savvy and most people are not. I just had to show a guy at work how to change his desktop background. He's used the same computer for 4 years now and did not know how to do that."
I see someone already made the point for me, but computer savvy people will be the ones who *might* consult the chart (I am and I won't because I always do clean OS installs). People like my mum and dad will continue to use "Windows" (whatever version that may be, they don't care at all) until they have to buy a new PC, and then they won't have to do any upgrading. People like my sister who know how to use computers to browse Facebook won't give a crap about a new version of Windows either because they don't worry about that kind of thing.
So really, yeah, its a ridiculous chart, but who exactly is it for aside from controversy loving blog sites? I don't think any savvy person worth his salt would bother with an upgrade as opposed to a clean install.
Oh actually, I just figured out who this chart might be for. Not savvy enough to be au fait with the concept of clean installs? Savvy enough to know that an upgrade is needed? Daft enough to need to consult a chart to help you with this? Congratulations! You're the IT admin for a small to medium business enterprise!
Most people don't have the time/patience to find a chart on the internets, and see what they can upgrade to.
@MatthewJ
If we are to go by what you said, then this chart is less confusing and shows how ridiculous the article is. If you are a Vista user, you do not need to worry about upgrading from Vista Business as if you are a business you have a system admin who is much more knowledgable then the non-savvy user. So that eliminates one row and one column.
If you have Vista Ultimate, then you know what you bought being you paid an extra, according to Dell, $150 extra. If you paid that much extra, then chances are you would remember. So you can eliminate another row and column.
Unless you paid the extra, all computers ship with XP, Vista Home Basic or Home Premium. If you are upgrading to Win7 from Vista, the only question is if you are running 32 or 64 bit versions. If you keep the bitness the same, then there is no issue in upgrading at all. Since the box includes both 32 and 64 bits, Microsoft puts a simple piece of paper in the box saying "Click the Windows button, right click on Computer, and click Properties. If it says 32 bit, insert the 32 bit disk. If it says 64 bit, insert the 64 bit disk". If a non-computer savvy person cannot do that, then I doubt they are computer savvy enough to even know there is a new version of the OS available.
If they expect the average person to be able to upgrade the firmware on a Blu-Ray player to watch a new disk by going to (using my recent experience in upgrading my Sony player) Sony.com, clicking Service And Support, Drivers And Software, look up the model number on the back of the player, enter that number, select an operating system (why does the OS of my computer make a difference? And how do they know that if they cannot upgrade an OS?). Click "Firmare - 1 file", click firmware update, click download now, accept the license agreement, download the software, extract the software, find, download, and install an ISO burning program, burn a DVD, insert the disk into the player, start the player, then wait for the software to install.
All these steps are suppopsed to be done by the average user, but picking from a chart with a couple columns (and as I showed above, only one question is needed - which can be determined with 3 clicks) is impossible?
@theJoKell
Yeah, that's because Mac OS runs on just 5 to 7 different hardware combination by just one manufacturer. Windows can run on 1000s of different hardware combination by 100s of different manufacturer.
So yeah, it cool to hear Bertrand Serlet dissing dlls and registries using his cool French accent, its these dlls and registries which makes Windows run on different machines.
Wait, aren't there like 20 different versions of Win 7?
I'm sure I read that on Engadget half a dozen times or so.
I only see three versions here.
There were never 20 versions of Windows 7 to choose from. For a consumer there are only 3, each available in 32 or 64 bit. One is for average people, one is for people connecting to a domain server and the other has allt he features Win 7 has to offer. Enterprise and Starter aren't available to consumers as install discs. Starter is an OEM only and only availble in 32bit from what I can tell, and Enterprise is only for... well enterprises. Essentially its Professional with Bit Locker encryption.
Ok, so so far I make that 9 versions. If you wan't to go all out, there will be the N versions for Europe without Media Player, so that'll be 18, and when MS were going to do a version without IE, that would have been 27 I suppose.
Anything to make it sound confusing.
Sure, microsoft shoot themselves in the foot with these options, but to say a consumer has to choose between a dizzying array of choices when in fact its only 3 (in the majority of cases the 32 or 64 bit comes down to if you want more of less than 4gb ram, but if you but a version your license will work on 32 or 64 bit, so while you may not get the media, you to get both versions).
If they just sold Ultimate to everyone, sure it'd make life simpler. They can't switch to just 64bit yet, because there are still lazy sods out there whose software still won't run in a 64bit environment, even though 64bit Windows has been around for what, 6+ years now? Sure, only 3 since it went 'mainstream' with Vista.
Apple and the various Linux people out there don't have the same ecosystem to deal with that MS do. Few (if any?) large corporations exclusivley use Apple of linux systems. MIcrosofts 90% share of the desktop market means they sell what their clients want. Idiot CFOs and CIOs want to feel special, so there is an Enterprise version. SMBs want to feel special so there's Professional. Uber gamers and geeks want everything, so there's Ultimate, everybody else gets Premium or Starter if the machine is never going to do much more than be used to watch youtube all day.
One thing apple certainly got right and microsoft should learn... just tell the customer what they want, don't give them what they think they want. That's why apple can release just one version ;)
End of pointless rant.
Except the revised chart has mistakes and is misleading...
It is ridiculous because it doesn't have to, nor should it be this complicated. All previous versions should be "In-Place" upgradable, even going from 32-64bit is doable without "custom install"... There is no reason why it should be this confusing for consumers... In fact, there should only be one Windows 7 version that is middle of the road priced and fully functional for both consumers and businesses MS is promoting the ignorance and frustration of the end-user, just like our politicians promote the ignorance and frustration of their constituency. This is truly shameful and ridiculous marketing hype and blatant fleecing of the consumer!
I agree that the chart is pretty simple. The basic idea behind a chart is not lost on most people, and if they're confused about which version they have or want to upgrade to, there are other resources available.
"I don't think any savvy person worth his salt would bother with an upgrade as opposed to a clean install."
Well, I consider myself savvy and I'm looking only to go the upgrade route - because I'm poor. I managed to get a free technet subscription a while back (which was revoked - apparently the free promotion wasn't supposed to be advertised) and downloaded a lot of normally very expensive software. The advantage in upgrading is that I will still have all of this very expensive software without paying for it.
@Saitir
That was supposed to be a crack about how many articles Engadget has posted complaining about how many versions of Windows 7 are available.
Guess I wasn't over the top enough.
I happen to think that having more than one version of Windows is a good thing.
Why bother with the chart? I wouldn't even use it because I will probably reformat my whole drive and do a fresh install. Only a computer savvy person would attempt to upgrade his OS and not the ordinary guy who just uses a computer for Facebook. Seriously, those people with Windows XP didn't even install that OS on their machines. There are billions and billions of Windows users out there so this chart is necessary.
@theJoKell
Unless you have a PowerPC Mac, in which case you are SOL.
Upgrade is dumb. Clean formats with zeroed drives ftw. Slave drives for the bulk of your storage, with mainly only applications on the OS drive makes formats a breeze for me.
Squeaky clean!
What's ridiculous is the idea that the chart is complicated.
Its ridiculous because the average person isn't an Engadget reader. Most people use their computer to write documents, watch movies, listen to music…normal people activities. If the average person wants to upgrade their computer, they likely won't realize the seemingly subtle differences between them, won't bother to back up their files, and will curse the hell out of Microsoft when their files are lost.
@ Kobioshi
Why do I want to pay for features found in the Business version of Windows when it's my gaming rig? Why would a business want to pay extra for Media Center when they will turn around and just disable it? Why would someone buying a Netbook, looking for the absolute lowest price, want to pay for Media Center or business capabilities? They just want an inexpensive OS.
What you want is a full blown OS, offered at a rock bottom price. Good luck with that.
PC users aren't like Mac customers. We appreciate choice and selection. Being able to evaluate our needs in making hardware and software purchases is fundamental to being a PC person. Mac folks want EXTREMELY limited choices, don't want to think about custom solutions for their needs, and are happy with whatever is pumped out of Apple land. That's fine and all. It's just a totally different approach for a totally different consumer segment.
Also - this isn't an absurd chart by any stretch. If you are going to do something as fundamental as installing a new OS you had better be able to tell which version of Vista you already have installed. As others have pointed out, 90% of folks with Windows will NEVER touch their OS. Even if they have to reinstall or upgrade, those folks will call on a friend to help them.
Look, forget about whether the chart is functional. The chart is a marketing document. And it makes Microsoft look bad. The high percentage of blue squares implies an incompatibility problem, whether or not one actually exists for most users.
Good marketing documents *sell* you on how easy your upgrade will be. Your first glance at this says "probably not fun". More blue squares than green. Why? Why not highlight the awesome? or the, ahem, "wow" of saying goodbye to vista.
If MS had created just one version of Windows 7 you would not need to go through all this shit.
Well, Nilay wrote the article.
Seriously, when I read the article headline, I thought "I bet Patel wrote this". I've yet to be wrong.
It's ridiculous because it is already complex, and this is without even SHOWING pricing, which would make the chart horrifyingly complex with. Both upgrade and full copy options for each upgrade path. Remember, this is for the tech ilitterate and lazy general public who need a lot of handholding.
Contrast that insanity to Apple, where you have one client version of OSX and when a newer version is released, u either buy the upgrade or the full version depending on if u are running the latest version or not. Not to mention it is cheap and available in 5 computer family packs.
The fact you need a chart to figure this out is much more ridiculous.
Here Microsoft, I fixed your chart...
http://screencast.com/t/z9tSqMQ6
I agree the revised one is much much better
Much cleaner, but the first time I looked over it I didn't see the distinction for 32-bit to 64-bit. Might just need a simple rewording or a highlight to make Ed's chart better in every way.
"hour's work" though, hour eh, I wonder what OS he did it on.
Lucky I never got Vista. Up yours Micro.
Just buy new copy of 7 if I need for I'm ok.