Clean installs do not require a parition wipe

This seems to have been a disturbing myth since the dawn of time.

For as long as I can remember, when you choose a partition with an existing Windows installation during Setup, Windows Setup will rename the old installation folder to Windows.old and proceed to install Windows as normal.

This has been a quick and easy way to reinstall your operating system. However, people seem to believe this will provide you with a Windows installation that is different than if you choose to go down the wipe the partition method.

While I personally haven't done a file for file comparison, I can stand firm and say the two installations will be the same.

I have heard many counters to my views so I'll address them here.

The old programs are still there

Yes, the old program files directory is still there. But since their link to the Windows Registry has been severed, they need to be reinstalled. On Vista/7 The Program Files directory is now consolidated with the User folder in the Windows.old folder.

This is an upgrade

The button you clicked says Custom Install, not upgrade. Case closed.

Old malware can infect your computer

If the old boot loader was infected, guess what? Setup overwrites it with a new boot loader. Case closed.

Any other malware will have its link to the OS files severed. So they are just floating wreckage. Again, case closed.

 

So its the same, the other method just requires more work.

*HIGHFIVE*

 

well quite true this is what i have done myself too.
though i still prefer the wipe out method

 

If you don't like 'clean installs' then don't do them

But don't try to redefine what a clean install really is to suit your needs.

An upgrade or migration install is what you're advocating.

 

There is no point what-so-ever not to just format the partition and then press install.. its not hard work AT ALL, plus you wont have old files junk everywhere and perhaps (im not certain at all) the install goes faster because there is no old files to mess around with..

I dont get it surfasb, i really dont.

 

Preferences are valid.

I am addressing the idea that a Custom install without a format leaves you a different Windows folder compared to a Custom install with a format.

Redefine? This is exactly what I'm talking about. Both will leave you with the same resultant Windows folder.

You will get a brand new Windows installation whether you choose to format the partition or if you choose not to format the partition. The remaining files if you don't wipe the partition are just floating wrecking. Dust in the wind that can be safely deleted. Or even better if it is old data that can be recovered.

No point?

How about if there is valuable data still left over? How about the time saved when you can move your old data from Windows.old to your Users folder vs transferring it at 5MB/s over a USB connection?

How about the time saved if somehow missed a file? The possibility we are human and that we make a mistake?

Even better. If you do backup your data, you have not one, but two copies of your valuable data.

If I got a nickel for every time I heard a story about how a backup failed....



This is the stubborn and narrow minded advice I'm addressing. Very rarely do situations posted on this forum require a scorched earth. Often, a brand new Windows folder is all they need. Most of that time, the "junk" is their valuable data that is irreplaceable no matter how much money you throw at it.

 

You should still backup your files in case something goes awry in the process. It would be stupid to rely on Windows making that Windows.old folder.

It's a cleaner process if you just wipe the partition.

 

"Cleaner"

This is where I disagree. Both methods will benchmark the same.

 

What's better, one copy of your data or two copies?

Besides, the time savings alone is worth it. Moving data within a partition takes like 2 seconds. The data is merely relinked.

Moving data from an external device to your laptop takes.... who knows how long.

 

Im never in that situation since im smart enough to device my HDD into two.

 

Well, I guess our definitions of cleanliness differ. I prefer to backup all my files to external media and then restore them on my new clean install.

 

They are both "plain jane" installs. What ever is in the rest of the partition is unaffected and does not affect the install. If we benchmark two systems.......

 

So thats what 'clean' is about? Benchmarks..

Okay, didnt knew that now it all makes sense

 

Why else would you want a "clean" install? Obviously for performance. Snappiness, organization, etc.

If a clean install didn't bring about performance increases there would be no point in executing them. Come to think of it, if something didn't come with a performance increase, what is the point of the act anyways.


So ya, benchmarks are what "clean" installs are for. Or more specifically, performance increases are what "clean" installs are for.

If they perform the same, they are the same installation for all practical purposes. But because of illusory "theorycraft", there is a myth that performance increases are gained from wiping the MFT????

 

Ive never done anything but clean installs, because thats the whole point in formatting if you ask me.. To get rid of the bad OS and get a clean new one without any useless junk, which there will be if you dont press that format button.

 

Surfasb, I have a great deal of respect for your posts and mostly agree with you, and while I still basically agree, you're making a blanket statement that situations might dictate otherwise.

I was already typing this before your last post, and I come back and you've already touched on the one reason you are wrong. Metadata. the MFT and all the componants that make it up--if left intact--can lead to performance degradation.

It's not that I am disagreeing with your premise. I almost always do exactly as you say--simple reinstalling over a current volume, though I will often rename windows, program files, and documents and settings folders.

There is, however, some truth to the idea that fragmented metadata will lead to performance loss. Furthermore, I've experienced, now twice, cases where the process you support COULD result in subtle mft corruption where Windows cannot quite determine where certain important duplicated files exist. Not so much that it causes a problem, but that it causes a curious behavior.

More on point, I ran into a machine where the MFT was fragmented into 500+ fragments. Granted, this is extraordinary, but the process you outline actually in inadequate in such extreme cases.

(It also does not work whent he drive is nearly full but that is another case altogether).

As you are aware, the MFT does not shrink when files are removed from your drive (once you have copied or removed the extra folders)--it simply leaves the space empty to be filled later). Having two files of each on your computer, even temporarily, can result in a larger, or fragmented MFT. While some programs claim to defragment the MFT, they all in my experience have varying degrees of success.

 

This is certainly a useful thing for Windows Vista and 7 users to keep in mind. As best I recall this wasn't available until Vista.

I wouldn't be too concerned about carrying over malware. As pointed out many of the threats will be orphaned in the process. However, it would be wise to install an anti-virus program, fully update it, and perform a full-system scan before accessing the folder. Fully updated it should catch a lot of what may have been previously missed in your old install.

After finding the files you wish to save, copy them to a different directory on your hard drive. Then you can use Disk Cleanup to remove the Windows.old folder. This will free your hard drive space as well as further eliminate potential for malicious files floating around waiting to run. Here are the instructions for doing so. They should be the same in Windows 7.

That said, I'm accustomed to formatting and likely always will do it. Even though the threat of contamination from old files is likely nonexistent, it soothes my paranoia. Whether I sift through my files before or after the install doesn't matter much to me. Though using the method the OP described is adequate for people without external storage.

Edit: Interesting Gerry. I'll change my statement of "ideal" to "adequate".

 

I thought about those instances and I do readily agree there are instances where a format is warranted. Those cases, like you said, are extreme, far, and few. It can often be the case where the time you spend wiping the partition will outweight the time you actually saved in this performance increase.

Like you said, the cases are probably extreme. But then I look at past threads and the vast vast majority of responses have been "wipe the partition," with those advising a "Custom install without a wipe" being in the extreme minority.

My post isn't a case against wiping. It is a case against the current trend. It is a case for greater education.

Currently, much time and effort can be saved when the problem can be solved without an entire wipe of the boot partition.

It was available under previous Windows editions. But the functionality was slightly different. Before Vista, only the Windows directory would be renamed.

The paranoia, while real, is based on preference. My post was to point out that many fears associated with a Custom Install without a wipe are based on faulty reasoning.

If you choose to continue wiping, then go for it. Free country.

My post asks that everyone though has the obligation to provide better advice, and save people some time, regardless of personal preferences.



I posted a thread about shutdown, sleep, and hibernation earlier that addresses a similar issue. Years of nuances and habits have ingrained coworkers and we often forget to reevaluate our own actions. When we do try to reevaluate procedures and change them, we are often confronted with the same road blocks presented in this very thread.

 

Again, I agree with most of what you say--indeed, educating is what I am doing. You made a statement that I mostly agree with, but felt it needed a little amplification.

By all means, we should stamp out bad information wherever we can find it. There are hundreds of bad "tips" floating around out there that have been dragged kicking and screaming from old operating systems and practices that I find myself cringing at all the time.

 

For me ...

Deleting the partition and letting Windows do the rest with the unallocated space is quicker and easier. Like "REB!" already mentioned, the install goes much quicker when there are no files to scan through. Plus I think it does a "quick format"(Correct me if I'm wrong), cause it starts the copying process in no time.

As far as the old windows files goes. If I'm installing over a virus or malware ridden Windows partition I rather not have any of it left over in a new install. I bet that directory is indexed too, if you do a search you can easily click on something from old windows.

 

Windows.old isn't indexed by default.