Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Installing older XP onto Bootcamp partition
- Thread starter vjaaan
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Generally, no. Restore discs should not be used for Boot Camp. many ehonhave tried have managed to wipe out OS X while doing so and if SP2 is not already installed you will have issues.
you have two main options, both leading to a virtual install.
1) use vmware converter of it's parallels equivalent to make a VM from your running Toshiba laptop.
2) try using the restore disc in a VM.
B
Then you either need to move your video work to OS X or buy a copy of Windows that is supported for install on your Mac.
Get used to the fact that unless you buy a retail copy of Windows (aka full package product) you do not have the right to transfer your Windows license willy nilly. So stay way from OEM/System Builder "bargains".
B
My current video work is on OS X. I used to work on Pinnacle, on Windows. Now with the new MacBook Pro, I plan on using iMovie for some things and Final Cut Pro for others. But I've been told that running Windows in that parallel fashion always is sucking memory resources, no matter what I am working on.
I only need Windows for my WordPerfect, which is still the best WP program out there. Word is awful, and Pages will not do what I need. There are still some things I must do on WordPerfect, hence the need for the Windows option.
I have tried other options (like Open Office) to work around my WP needs, but they come up short.
So, if I cannot find any other solution, I will just buy a new copy of Windows.
I was just hoping the ones I already had could work.
Thanks for all the input. I do appreciate the help.
I only need Windows for my WordPerfect, which is still the best WP program out there. Word is awful, and Pages will not do what I need. There are still some things I must do on WordPerfect, hence the need for the Windows option.
I have tried other options (like Open Office) to work around my WP needs, but they come up short.
So, if I cannot find any other solution, I will just buy a new copy of Windows.
I was just hoping the ones I already had could work.
Thanks for all the input. I do appreciate the help.
You sound like a candidate for Crossover Office.
http://www.codeweavers.com/compatibility/browse/cat?app_id=656
B
That is not generally true. At least in the European Union System builder editions are legally entitled to unlimited transfer to as many computers you want as long as you use it only on one computer at a time. The EU legislation has disabled all Microsoft bundling restrictions. It is not legal here to restrict an operating system to one computer. The user has the right to transfer or sell it. I do not know what the legal status is in the US and other areas but I suspect that Microsoft isn't able to stop you transferring systems although they make silly noises in their EULAs.
Most MR users are still in the US and this licensing situation has not been challenged here. I should have prefaced this that way.
Microsoft can't stop you from transferring it (installing on another PC, selling the disc), but they can and sometimes do stop you from activating it which is effectively the same thing. Sometimes you get lucky and they will let you activate, but the point is that there are no guarantees. At least in the US.
Especially in cases where the OEM/System Builder's license is bundled with the computer as is the case with the OP's Toshiba you do not have a generic Windows installer, but some kind of heavily customized "restore disc". For these it is rarely worth it to even try and transfer the license except to a VM.
The System Builder License is quite explicit in what you need to do to accept the license. The kicker is that you must resell the system to a non-related third party to enable the EULA. If you don't you are effectively in the same boat as those who install OS X on non-Mac hardware.... Operating outside the licenses.
That's not to say it won't work, especially if the OP just wants a license to use on their Mac, but it is far from the portable license of Windows the OP seemed to want.
EDIT: Here's a useful link to the murkiness of the situation in the US. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/is-it-ok-to-use-oem-windows-on-your-own-pc-dont-ask-microsoft/1561
B
There is a distinct difference between a recovery disk and a System builder edition. The recovery disk is technically modified and will not use the COA that is published with the disk. The system builder edition is technically absolutely identical with a full license except you are not entitled to free 90 days of support which is immaterial to most people anyway who still use XP. I have never failed to transfer a System builder edition because Microsoft is forced to use a telephone activation system which works at least everywhere in the EU. You just have to go through the hassle of reading out and inputting all those numbers. I have no idea if Microsoft checks where you are in the world when you select the national number. I only know it has worked for XP, XP64, Vista and Vista64 system builder editions in the EU for me for many years without a single fail. I have even used my right to purchase a 64 bit Vista install DVD for $15. This has enabled me to upgrade the 32-bit Vista Business to 64-bit on my Mac Pro and my uMBP. I could simply use my 32-bit COA and it worked flawlessly. Of course I have two separate COAs for my two machines but both were initially purchased with 32-bit option.
NOTE: In the US at least, during the XP days there were plenty of loopholes in the license that made it seem OK to buy System Builder for home use (see the Ed Bott artlce I linked). I myself did so during that time and advocated doing so. Around the release of Vista SP1 the license was rewritten to include the language I am referring to that requires you to resell the system to an unrelated third party in order to accept the license. This seems designed to close the earlier loopholes. (Previously many of the license restrictions of the license only kicked in upon resale of the system.)
This is often said, but is simply not true.
There are subtle differences between retail and System Builder/OEM keys, e.g.: you cannot use the System Builder disc to perform an upgrade install (say in-place from Vista 32 to 7 32), System Builder requires you to do a clean install. If you reinstall retail on new hardware it will usually activate online just fine while OEM will force you to the phone system.
The sheer number of permutations and complications involved with the fine details of Windows licensing (at least in the US) aren't (IMHO) worth the hassle.
If you can't afford a full packaged product copy of Windows, but are willing to ignore the license restrictions that come with OEM/System Builder to get a cheaper price, why not just ignore the license restrictions of the retail upgrade version instead? (which at least is designed for licensing by end users directly and is often available for a similar price as the OEM/System Builder version) You can work around the limitations of the installer that "requires" a previous install pretty trivially following any one of the guides around the 'net. The license you get is equally functional and valid as the SB/OEM one.
So what is the ultimate appeal of System Builder/OEM editions for the home user in the US? I just don't get it. OEM places restrictions on you that are not imposed by the retail upgrade version and sometimes you can even get retail upgrades cheaper than OEM.
In the OP's case, one could easily rationalize that (if the laptop is really to be retired), that license could be used to qualify for the retail upgrade pricing and the new W7 license clean installed on the Mac.
B
This is often said, but is simply not true.
There are subtle differences between retail and System Builder/OEM keys, e.g.: you cannot use the System Builder disc to perform an upgrade install (say in-place from Vista 32 to 7 32), System Builder requires you to do a clean install. If you reinstall retail on new hardware it will usually activate online just fine while OEM will force you to the phone system.
The sheer number of permutations and complications involved with the fine details of Windows licensing (at least in the US) aren't (IMHO) worth the hassle.
If you can't afford a full packaged product copy of Windows, but are willing to ignore the license restrictions that come with OEM/System Builder to get a cheaper price, why not just ignore the license restrictions of the retail upgrade version instead? (which at least is designed for licensing by end users directly and is often available for a similar price as the OEM/System Builder version) You can work around the limitations of the installer that "requires" a previous install pretty trivially following any one of the guides around the 'net. The license you get is equally functional and valid as the SB/OEM one.
So what is the ultimate appeal of System Builder/OEM editions for the home user in the US? I just don't get it. OEM places restrictions on you that are not imposed by the retail upgrade version and sometimes you can even get retail upgrades cheaper than OEM.
In the OP's case, one could easily rationalize that (if the laptop is really to be retired), that license could be used to qualify for the retail upgrade pricing and the new W7 license clean installed on the Mac.
B