Our company only uses Windows XP Pro. We have no need to 'upgrade' to Vista.
In fact our proprietary software provider will not support Vista. 140,000 end users of the product apparently have trouble with Vista and it is too much of a headache for them.
Which brings us to a a good question...
Why upgrade to Vista?
1) Is it upgrading merely for the sake of 'upgrading'.
2) Is this another case of 'forced obsolescence' by a company trying to generate income with a new and unnecessary product?
3) Is there some function in Vista that will improve my work product that XP currently does not offer?
For our situation, XP is a stable, reliable product whereas the experience with Vista has been less than 'ready for prime-time'.
windows Vista still has major bugs and compatibilities problems. so many devices are covered up to xp. windows has an effect on hardware as well as licensing.
I think MS just needs to face the facts...let Vista die.
Very few people are happy with it. Most people who aren't forced to use it remain on XP. You just released SP3 which will inevtiably prolong that sentiment in people, and you plan to release Windows 7 in 2010. You've bungled the whole scheme up, lost the HD format wars, and just barely stay in the game console race.
So yes, continue to offer XP. Cut the losses and move on.
I must say, the crash recovery of Vista is awesome. When a program is causing problems that would normally lock up an XP box, Vista maintains and allows you to still manage (close, continue, etc) that program without affecting the entire system. I work on the computer 8 to 12 hours a day, and have not crashed my Vista 64bit system yet. But the quad core extreme my be contributing ;0
@frontpage (surely a MS fan with that username?) - I would say option 2 in your list is the one. It's also a joint plan with Intel and others to force consumers to upgrade their PCs, just to be able to run Vista. I even bought a graphics card with 256Mb RAM a few years ago to be ready for Vista. Guess I won't need it now I'm sticking with XP for a bit longer.
I use Win XP Pro on many boxes and won't upgrade for at least 2-3 years - it might be officially "end of life", but Microsoft will have to be producing security patches for a long time to come.
if consumers show they want it? he's got to be kidding right? lol
XP == Botnet
Please get rid of it as soon as possible. Any company that tied themselves to XP should have known to expect this and all consumers are dirty pirates and they need the DRM protection in case they try to copy something that they shouldn't.
Its not like there are not alternatives these days.
What do customers have to do? Sing: "Tell me what cha want, what cha really, really want..." until Ballmer does a Howard Dean scream & a back flip?
|until Ballmer does a Howard Dean scream & a back flip? |
developers! ha. this reminded me I hadn't seen a funny Ballmer vid in a while, so I just watched a couple on youtube.
I have seen no valid business reasons or benefits to switch to Windows Vista so far.
I upgraded to Vista and then backed down again, because of the cost and impossibility of upgrading all my software to work on the new OS.
It was just like when I bought a Mac, which I loved, but which I just couldnt get as much software for.
All those little useful shareware utilities, thats what I cant do without.
this reminds me of the time they said they were going to stop making salad cream.
everyone kicked up a fuss, they got acres and acres of pages in the press about it, and lo and behold it came back.
Thankfully companies like MS realize there is always resistance to change. If they didn't we'd be using Window 3.1.5021.
Give me a good reason to 'upgrade' to Vista and I would do so in a minute. But so far, there is no compelling reason for me to change. Vista offers nothing that will help improve my customer service, sales volumes, business processes, or most important of all - my bottom line.
It would be much better if software crafters who make money from the software would get liability for damages caused by their faulty products.
Perhaps then they'd care to fix problems before giving it to their customers, and if faced with problems perhaps then they'd fix the problems instead of making yet a new version that's going to be living next to the old buggy version. (e.g. IE6, IE7, IE8(beta), ... and none of them do CSS properly).
Now with the monkey boy dancing CEO shouting "developers, developers, developers", it'll be a long way till he starts to think "customers customer, customer" and change his tune to the effect of what's really important.
So, I'd join some others in recommending a crossgrade/upgrade to something not windows (apple, linux, *BSD, solaris, ... plenty of fish out there) and let the entire windows product line die a slow death cause of lack of innovation -erm, not true: they did implement the most draconic DRM in existence ... but I'll never pay a cent for Vista due to that DRM.
Someone needs to tell Ballmer that Microsoft says's he's wrong.
Comments by Steve Ballmer at a press conference in Europe today have led to speculation that Microsoft is reconsidering its June 30 deadline to stop selling most new Windows XP licenses. A spokeswoman from Microsoft's public relations firm said Thursday that there is no plan for a change in deadline, however.
"Our plan for Windows XP availability is unchanged. We're confident that's the right thing to do based on the feedback we've heard from our customers and partners," the spokeswoman said, reading from a Microsoft statement.
Ballmer's comments at a press conference at Louvain-la-Neuve University in Belgium led to a flurry of reports that Microsoft may be considering an extension of its deadline...
The spokeswoman said Microsoft is aware that some customers are pushing for an extension to the deadline -- more than 160,000 people have signed a "Save XP" petition launched by Infoworld magazine, for example. But the company has also done its own research among partners and customers, and feels that "the dates are right," she said, speaking on behalf of Microsoft.
"We feel we've made the right accommodations for customers in certain segments who may need more time to transition to Windows Vista," she said. "But as Steve noted, we maintain a constant stance of listening to our customers and our partners. That's what is guiding our plan, and will continue to guide us going forward."
|If they didn't we'd be using Window 3.1.5021. |
People changed to Windows 95 on their own free will because it was a much better OS - there was that much resistance in it, and even NT series were done in parallel to old Windows core so people could upgrade in their own time - Microsoft managed this transition very well. They are also doing a fairly good job with 32/64 bit transition - you can also choose the OS that suits you most - Vista is really an exception to this fairly good Microsoft practice over many years - that's why it brings up so much resentment now.
why not just sell windows, then sell service packs based on what you're using it for? so you buy 1 os, and patch it according to needs.
If vista is so great why havent I bought more than one box? Since Vista was released I wasn't able to use 3/4 of the hardware I had - so I bought a consumer linux based box - it worked with everything. I bought macs tiger and leopard versions, they worked with everything, I bought xp pro boxes they still work with everything...
I am now off to Medina, WA (think Redmond) to work on a former Microsoft Execs Vista Ultimate desktop because it won't print to a new printer - I mean seriously. How many signs do you need? I buy all the cool toys before or as soon as they come out... Vista was not and still is not useful for business use.
Here is one petition to sign for Saving XP:
Infoworld.com's Save XP Petition [weblog.infoworld.com]
Perhaps it's time for a "windows just go away" petition [or something a bit more strongly worded] , it'd be interesting how many would sign it.
Since he was in Belgium a pity he didn't get a pie (in his face) like his predecessor CEO of MSFT.
I'm not sure any online petition would get attention, no matter how many filled it in unless it would be "controlled" by Microsoft's marketing and guaranteed to give the result they want to have.
My main complaint about ANY OS is why can't they just work with the hardware vendors better and make the driver install and upgrade process as simple as the OS upgrades /updates processes.
I have my beliefs on that one, some or all of those focus on substantial money from the hardware vendors. I think the OS company that realizes that allowing vendors hardware to be easily updated by the vendors when they need to will be the dominant OS on the market.
Seriously the current state of the market for updating drivers (for hardware the OS is supposed to support) is just plain weak. As an admin it is pure waste of my valuable time to constantly keep a updated list of drivers around. When I could be writing scripts, fixing bad content or other possible ways to make me and my clients more profitable.
And yes, I am aware of third party app$ that do this, I don't believe that is the correct way to support and gain support of hardware partners that obviously are needed by any major OS.
>>I wasn't able to use 3/4 of the hardware I had...
Wow, you must have very old hardware because it worked with everything I had (which is 2.5 years old and newer).
Anyway, I noticed my XP machine wouldn't go to sleep and when I checked Task Manager, PowerPoint was somehow hanging one of the CPUs and running it flat out. I had to kill the applicaiton from Task Manager and rebooted the machine for good measure.
My Vista machine hasn't been booted for weeks now - not since SP1.
>>Wow, you must have very old hardware
Yes, so old I don't remember when I bought most of it. But if it works I pretty much don't replace it, much like most SME's who are on tight tech budgets in an odd market. I still have my Atari clone too. I like it cause it works even if the internet is down.
Again for one or two new users Vista may be ok. In fact I have one user who absolutely loves Vista and Office 08, but they have never really used computers till last year in school and couldn't afford a Mac.
So, I ask where is the business ROI for a Vista upgrade (including all incidental hardware and user training) provable to the SME's?