TW> And MS by design went that route knowing that upgrading could cause
 TW> problems.

Hold on with the judgement call, Tom.

Windows 7 is echelons above Windows XP in reliability and performance. 
Trying to compare Windows XP to Windows 7 is like comparing apples and
oranges.  There -is- no comparison.  Think of it like this: you know you
have worn spark plugs in your car.  Instead of replacing them with a fresh
set, you instead use a jeweler's file to clean them up and put them back in.

You know eventually you're going to have to replace them, but it's foolish
to do that when it's easier to replace them with new plugs.

That's how it is with any MS operating system above XP.  You must replace XP
with a brand-new installation of Vista/7/8.  If you try to kludge it, you
will break it and waste your time fixing it again and again.

 TW> Teh MS instructions were written for businesses running Win XP that
 TW> most likely would have minimum problems because theri machines are
 TW> typically not grundged up with every program that comes down the pike
 TW> like a lot of home User machines.

Those instructions were written as a stop-gap measure.

Every business that I've installed Windows 7/8 on had me wipe the drive on
every computer and install the new OS fresh.

Yeah, you can do an upgrade, but sooner or later, you'll be breaking down to
fix it.

Also, a lot of older XP programs simply will not function correctly in
Windows 7 or 8, even using "compatibility mode".  I had a problem
with a lot
of amateur radio software and older games.

(That's why I got tired of Windows and switched to Linux, but that's another
story entirely. :)

Later,
Sean

... Ever notice how fast Windows runs?  Neither did I.
--- MultiMail/Linux