If I use transporter, do I do it instead of installing XP?

[forbiddendonut]

This may seem like a dumb question, but here goes:

If I am considering using the Transporter, do I run this utility after I already have installed Windows XP on my Mac, or do I run the Transporter first, which then will install XP on the Mac through the Transporter process?

I actually have a separate copy of the XP software that I plan to use for the Mac. If the install key for the copy on the current PC to be Transported is different, when will I input the separate install key to make sure that MS knows that I am using a separate copy of the software?

Also, I have read that it is better to do a clean install of the XP software anyway, for a variety of reasons. should I just do a clean XP install and then use Transporter for data files?

Thanks for your thoughts!

 

[Ken Cunningham]

If reinstalling from scratch makes sense for you, that's no doubt the best way to go.

If you have made a big investment of time or money in configuring your existing PC software, as I did, you might try transporter. If it works for you, you've saved yourself a lot of headache. I had some custom software on my PC that was installed by an IT company who was contracted by a company I do business for; there was a boatload of background server stuff, an encryption layer of some sort, a custom email server using non-typical ports, etc, etc, etc. It took the guy most of a day to get it installed, configured, and working, and when I decided to try moving to Parallels, I was dreading going through all that again.

But my oh my, the whole enchilada moved over without a hitch, and "just worked" under parallels without a second of trouble.

If I had nothing much on the PC in the first place, I'd just reinstall from scratch.

If you do use Transporter, you'll still need a few things from the original XP disc (a few drivers), and a new key of course, but that's the sum of it. You can be up and running in much less time.