Windows

Sanity check: The truth about Windows Vista adoption in 2007

In October, Microsoft reported strong revenue from Windows Vista sales, but in September Microsoft quietly agreed to allow vendors to downgrade Vista PCs to Windows XP. Tech Sanity Check cuts through the mixed messages and spin to uncover the truth of Vista adoption in 2007.

When Microsoft released its earnings report to Wall Street on October 25, it surprised investors and the technology industry by reporting its best rate of revenue growth (27%) for a quarter since 1999. Microsoft credited its revenue growth to strong demand for Windows Vista, Microsoft Office 2007, and Halo 3.

No one was surprised to hear that Office 2007 and Halo 3 were part of the picture. Office 2007 is a strong upgrade that closely integrates with other Microsoft communications and collaboration products, and it features the biggest overhaul of the user interface in almost two decades. As for Halo 3, sales of the latest edition of the Xbox 360 game broke $300 million in its first week.

However, the fact that Microsoft mentioned Vista as part of the revenue boost caused a lot of people to do a double take. The newest Windows operating system has been received coolly by consumers and with icy indifference by most businesses.

Has Vista been getting a bad rap? Is it quietly gaining mainstream momentum? Or is Microsoft spinning the numbers to make Vista look better than the sobering reality? Let's see.

Vista's tepid reception from consumers

On the consumer side, Windows Vista sales are closely tied to new desktop and laptop sales. At retail outlets, Vista is now pre-loaded on 95% of all desktop PCs and 91% of all laptops, according to News.com. In 2007, worldwide PC shipments have grown by 10% and will clear $200 billion for the year, according to Gartner.

For Microsoft's fast-paced first quarter that it just reported on, the clients business unit (featuring Vista) reported $4.14 billion. So it's clear that a lot of Vista's revenue growth is coming from the momentum in PC sales. The question is whether Vista is driving new PC sales or is simply benefiting from growth in new markets and natural upgrade cycles. One thing that is helping Vista's revenue numbers is that a lot of users are opting for the two higher-priced versions of Vista - Home Premium and Ultimate.

Vista has certainly not gotten rave reviews on the consumer version of the OS, but there are some clear benefits for home users, such as improvements to parental controls and better handling of digital photos that at least make it palatable to most users. On the business side, the benefits of upgrading to -- or even using -- Vista are not as clear. In fact, there are even some obstacles.

The business response to Vista

Businesses and IT departments are notoriously slow at adopting new software. The benefits have to clearly justify the resources it takes to deploy the software and retrain staff on how to use it. However, it would be easy to chalk up Vista's slow adoption rate in businesses to IT's natural feet dragging. The truth is that there is a deeper skepticism, which can be seen in the InformationWeek Research survey in May in which 46% of IT professionals stated that Windows Vista fell short of their expectations.

When making the pitch to businesses to upgrade to Vista, Microsoft has been focusing on three areas of improvement:

  • Security -- With User Account Control (UAC), users no longer need to have local Administrator privileges on their machine to run software and do standard functions. Even for those who have admin access, UAC requires direct consent for a lot of higher-level activities to block malware from executing in the background (in theory). There are also important security enhancements to Vista's version of Internet Explorer 7 to block Web-based attacks, which are now among the most common vectors of attack for malware.
  • Manageability -- Vista includes improvements to OS imaging, which IT departments have adopted en mass to simplify the standardization and deployment of new PCs. There are also Group Policy improvements that make it easier to centrally control and manage machines.
  • Mobility -- Microsoft has integrated its Tablet PC software into Vista Business and Vista Ultimate, rather than making a completely separate version of the OS as it was in Windows XP Tablet PC Edition. Vista Business and Ultimate also support Ultra-Mobile PCs (UMPCs). The improved mobility support in Vista can reduce total cost of ownership (TCO) by 14% from an average of $4,407 in XP to $3,802 in Vista, according to a Wipro and GCR study, sponsored by Microsoft and published in September 2007.

Even with a little bit of cost savings, the benefits in manageability and mobility in Windows Vista are still incremental improvements and not enough to drive businesses to upgrade. Most businesses have worked with Windows XP long enough to develop their own tried-and-true manageability and mobility solutions and best practices.

As for security in Windows Vista, it's either the primary factor that makes Vista worth the upgrade or the primary deterrent, depending upon whom you talk to. Former Windows chief Jim Allchin once said, "Safety and security is the overriding feature that most people will want to have Windows Vista for."

ZDNet's Ed Bott recently wrote Vista really is more secure and based his opinion on the lower patch counts for the new OS compared to its predecessor, Windows XP SP2. An Amplitude research study in May stated that half of the companies adopting Vista were doing it for the security.

However, others strongly disagree. Earlier this year, multiple experts rejected the idea of buying Vista for the security. Many IT administrators have avoided Vista because of the flurry of UAC confirmation Windows, which many of them believe users will eventually just click through without reading.

John Pironti, Chief Information Risk Strategist for Getronics, agrees and he believes that UAC goes overboard. "The best security is transparent to users," he said. Microsoft has simply tried to transfer culpability to users for letting malware into a system, according to Pironti. If users click through a bunch of Windows they don't understand and activate malware, is it the fault of the users or of Windows for letting it in?

One of the signs that a significant number of IT administrators are resisting Vista upgrades is the news in September 2007 that Microsoft agreed to allow PC manufacturers to downgrade Vista PCs to Windows XP. This is especially significant for small and medium businesses. Large enterprises generally buy their systems without an OS installed and apply their corporate desktop image to all of their machines.

Sanity check

I can't conclude this discussion of Windows Vista adoption without briefly addressing the issue of Vista's user interface (UI) problems. Vista has clearly attempted to follow Apple's footsteps by making Windows more intuitive for novice user. However, unlike OS X, Windows has done so at the price of slowing down power users because it now often takes more clicks to do average tasks than it did in previous versions of Windows. For example, clicking into the properties page for a network interface takes one to two clicks in Windows XP and five to six clicks in Windows Vista. That kind of interface tweaking is not only an annoyance but also a productivity hit for business users.

Am I concluding that Vista will fall flat and not be adopted by businesses? No. Ultimately, Vista will be adopted by businesses because they simply don't have many other viable alternatives. OS X might see some incremental gains, but it's not prepared to make a full run at mainstream businesses. Linux? Forget about it. If Linux was going to make a move on the business desktop market, it would have happened years ago.

Microsoft admitted that Vista will fail to meet the goal of selling twice as many seats as XP during the same time period after its launch. Still, in its recent earnings release Microsoft reported that it has seen a notable rise in the number of businesses signing long-term licensing deals that include Windows. "They wouldn't be signing these agreements if they didn't have the intent to [deploy Vista]," said Mike Nash, vice president of Windows product management. So there could be a sizable chunk of companies that are buying Vista licenses with no immediate plans to deploy the OS. They are simply future-proofing themselves for Vista deployments.

Thus, it looks like there are three primary factors driving Microsoft's surprising spike in Vista revenue:

  • Worldwide growth (10%) in PC sales, featuring Vista on more than 90% of them
  • Consumers buying the higher-priced Home Premium and Ultimate versions of Vista
  • Businesses signing general licensing agreements that include Vista (future-proofing their PCs for if and when they deploy Vista)

These developments show that Vista might be bringing in a nice chunk of change in 2007 even if the OS is not yet showing up on huge numbers of PCs or winning the loyalty of IT pros. These developments are not a ringing endorsement of Windows Vista. They merely make it a melancholy inevitability.

What do you think about Windows Vista adoption in business? Join the discussion.

About

Jason Hiner is Editor in Chief of TechRepublic and Long Form Editor of ZDNet. He writes about the people, products, and ideas changing how we live and work in the 21st century. He's co-author of the upcoming book, Follow the Geeks (bit.ly/ftgeeks).

402 comments
kelly.oneal
kelly.oneal

And the VERY FIRST thing I did was wipe it. I never even bothered to boot Vista, as I have used others computers with Vista loaded, and absolutely hate it. I hate that its a pain in the A** to find things, huge pain to adjust settings, pain to make 50 shortcuts on the desktop just to make it usable. I'd much rather spend a few hours finding XP compatible drivers and have my system work the way I want. Now running dual-boot XPsp2 and Linux.

mikifin
mikifin

I have moved to Dell and Linux and so has my family.

goldenpirate
goldenpirate

"These developments show that Vista might be bringing in a nice chunk of change in 2007 even if the OS is not yet showing up on huge numbers of PCs or winning the loyalty of IT pros. These developments are not a ringing endorsement of Windows Vista. They merely make it a melancholy inevitability." Your last statement of the article I think sums up the saga of MS Vista. Its been all about cashing in on a dud OS (conning the MS following who will follow MS where ever it leads them). I think that this is worst than the dud win95 and win98 OSs (quickly superceded by Win98SE, which in turn was superceded by the even worse WinME). Microsoft is once again ripping people off with a dud OS - its as simple as that. It is understandable that the business sector that is loyal to MS would want to cover their backsides by purchasing Vista lisences even though they may not install the OS. But why would anybody in the business sector want to install Vista on their equipment when there already is talk about another version of Windows (Windows7)? The fact that MS is prepared to let OEM manufacturers downgrade to Win XP actually says a lot about the confidence that MS has in its Vista product. The problem that we have is that as processor speeds increase, storage capacity increases and access time decreases, graphics cards become better and better in handling images and memory capacity increases, programmers seem to think that they have a mandate to write bigger and ever bigger programs to make use of these capacities. Let's face it, the bigger the programs get (somebody once said that windows now had over a million lines of code), the bigger risk there is of insecurities and errors, and this has certainly been proven with MS Windows (of any flavour). But let's face another fact - in nearly every windows version one of the biggest bloatware factors has been the eye candy ie make the newer version of windows look better than the last (and this, unfortunately, seems to be that trend with Linux as well - and lets not forget that Linux, in one flavour or another, is in perpetual beta version). Look, its christmas eve, I've been to a christmas party and had a merry time, now I've had my rant so let me give you my christmas wish as far as an OS is concerned: I wish that in the new year MS dumps Vista and all considerations of bloatware and eye candy and gives us an OS that is secure, has a very small footprint (ie smaller code) and is lightning fast. Pulease, daddy xmuz let it be so. (to all those who would pick on my for some of my spelling and ideas - I told youze I've been to a christmas party and I did enjoy myself because I did not have to drive). Ah, what the hell, here's a merry christmas and a happy new year to youze all, MS haters and Linux lovers as well, and may the new year bring you everything that you wished for plus a few unexpected surprises. (disclaimer(?): I dont work for MS, I have absolutely no connection to MS now or in the past, and there is no likelyhood at all (unless hell freezes over first) that I will have any connection with MS in the future)

HypnoToad72
HypnoToad72

As with Flight Simulator X w/DX10 support, Vista's promise is more desirable than the end product. It's weird to look at an OS whose RAM usage, with 4 open browser windows antivirus/firewall, mouse, and printer monitor apps takes 1.3GB.

abhishek0216
abhishek0216

Well, you are absolutely right in the reaons you have analyzed, for surging up of vista revenues for MS. But I dont think, vista will be a good enough option for businesses right now. Only time can tell, how vista will be adopted in the time to come.

solid.snake26
solid.snake26

Ofcourse the popularity and market of Vista will go high because all most all vendors are selling desktops and laptops with vista pre installed and the best part is majority of laptops do not support windows XP at all espically sony and HP.

FrankNewberry
FrankNewberry

From the way the wind is blowing here, I would suggest that it might be more accurate for people to request that their new computers, with Vista installed, be UPGRADED to WinXP. I certainly do not plan to be downgrading from XP to Vista any time soon.

Grolan
Grolan

Hmm, well, in my shop, we're opting for an alternative not mentioned in the article - no local desktop at all. We're going thin client throughout, laptop fleet included, running all our apps on a Citrix farm. No local hard drives. The gains in security, reduced client cost, and reduced administrative overhead are huge. No Vista migration worries here - cuz there won't be any Vista. Nor any need for local antivirus, or local firewalls, or 3rd party encryption products, or any of the crap you have to run on fat client Windows machines. Just a (linux) OS image & Citrix client in flash memory. No worries about enforcing the IT policies either, as the users have no option to bypass them. What about user files, you say? Not a concern - our policy is and has been for some time that no business related files may be stored locally - everything must be on network volumes only. With today's broadband-everywhere environment and Citrix's bandwidth efficiency, it works just fine. As for Linux on the desktop, I agree it won't penetrate deeply in the business environment over the next year or two, but not for the reason given in the article ("If Linux was going to make a move on the business desktop market, it would have happened years ago") - which is just plain silly. The Linux desktop was nowhere near mature enough years ago to be in contention. It is mature enough now - both in terms of user experience and manageability/support tools (it couldn't get much easier than openSuSE, for example, which is what I use at home) - but it still won't happen mainly due to inertia. Businesses won't migrate in large numbers partly due to application compatibility (declining in importance but still significant), but mostly because Windows is what they're trained and used to dealing with. Sad, but true. I'd look instead for a gradual but modest increase in adoption, a percent or two a year, much the way alternative browsers have eaten into IE's dominance. In time, it may become significant - but that's very much up in the air.

mike_patburgess
mike_patburgess

If Microsoft is forcing the business community to go to yet another piece of crappy software with an over priced licensing scheme, my suggestion would be to conduct a cost benefit analysis of their business and move to another OS; yes I was carfull not to say Linux or UNIX. A current meeting of CIO's of North America have now done the switch to Linux. Conversations that I have had with manay of them show that they have not looked back. Of course there was the usual ramp up but after that... smooth sailing.

bdivine
bdivine

Vista is Microsoft's new ME, a watered down waste of a power users time. I'm a Lan Wan guy that has been in the business for 14 plus years and have seen all of Microsoft's incarnations of windows each attempt trying to make it "better". XP is far superior to Vista, reminds me of Windows ME vs Windows 2000. My guess would be that we as a company will adopt XP squared or whatever they call the next real version of Windows sometime in 2009-2010. We won't waste our time with vista.

deanja92
deanja92

There's a lot of bad words about M$ and Vista,especially the h/w hype and false superior security claim. My company had just bought 8 Compaq Presarios, loaded with Vista Business but to-date, everyone of them are constantly bombarded with various malware, trojans and the like. The nssfrch issue is especially notorious which led me to accept the fact that M$'s Vista security claim is a just a big marketing lie. With the new UAC, you are correct when you say that M$ is trying to point fingers back at users when security should be transparent to users. Now, everybody involved is asking for an XP downgrade. What a waste of time and resources.

calangley
calangley

Microsoft and Intel have always been in bed together, and one drives the other's business. Vendors have been trying to shove Vista down my throat for new hardware purchases, and our message to them is: "If you want our business, you'll put on what ever OS I request". We have software that is not compatible with Vista, and some hardware that is not compatible with IE 7, so that is what drives our purchasing decisions, not Micro$oft or Intel.

aktr
aktr

All of our laptops and desktops are standardizing on Ubuntu 7.10, since it supports all of the formats and applications required in our business operations, and it is easier for typical XP users to adapt to the Ubuntu desktop than it is for them to adapt to Vista. It's also much easier to standardize the environment and manage remote systems in Linux, which has allowed a 40% reduction in IT staff supporting a user-base that has grown by 15% in the past year. It has also obviated the need to upgrade a lot of hardware, since it is far less demanding than Vista. The change could never have occured, however, if we were still using MS-Office. The great enabler for this substantial ongoing savings was last year's conversion from Office 2k3 to OpenOffice 2.1.

nacht
nacht

... so why should any business adopt it, when you'll have to wait for Server 2008 in order to administer a domain from a system running Vista?

mark
mark

I???ve been using Vista Business and Vista Ultimate since its release in January. There are things I like and things I don???t like. I like the look and feel of the UI, but I hate the path I have to take in order to change simple network settings. I like the improvement MS made when copying and pasting files that are duplicate. I like the system diagnostics and event logging tools. I like the ???idea??? of the UAC (and I agree with MS???s stance on this issue), but I hate the implementation (It???s so annoying that my clients have BEGGED me to turn it off for them). I remember ZD Net (or whatever it was) ten years ago when they told me that there was no need to upgrade from Win95 to Win98. Most of the improvements could be had for free using 3rd party applications and free MS updates. But I sold my clients Win98 because there were some real-world benefits like universal USB support, FAT32 for larger hard drives, and DVD support. Windows 2000 was also a beneficial upgrade because it offered the familiar and usable 9x interface on an NT foundation with NT features (NTFS, real domain authentication, advanced networking). I didn???t have a problem selling Win2k and advising users to migrate to a Win2k platform (despite the fact that it was in eternal debugging mode!). Win2k made sense for business users and 98 was just fine for Ma and Pa Homeuser who wanted to crop jpegs of their grandkids. All was good with the world, until??? Windows XP merged the two platforms in 2001. Why? Now my small business clients have Windows Movie Maker, MSN Explorer, and Urge Music store. I like XP as an OS, but if I want to edit home videos, I???ll buy something by Pinnacle because it works better! I don???t want those features built into my OS. I don???t want to pay MS for bundled crapware, and then pay again for real software. My big gripe with Vista is that there are no real innovations. What happened to the WinFS? What happened to Integrated Virtualism? Why can???t MS make an indexed desktop search that works? Windows 98 and Win2k, and even XP had real innovations and there was a real-world reason to upgrade. Currently, there isn???t much if anything you can do in Vista that you cannot do in XP. In fact, I???ll go so far to say that you can currently do MORE in XP than in Vista. I???m speaking specifically to 3rd party software support, driver support (how much sense does this make ??? XP drivers are ???security hazards??? that cause 90% of OS crashes so let???s force all hardware vendors to completely rewrite drivers from the ground up and give them almost no time to test before we launch), and don???t get me started on the DRM debacle! Instead of innovation, MS has loaded Vista with crapware. Do I need a 12MB media player? Do I need a Windows Photo Gallery? Why, when I buy Windows Vista BUSINESS do I have links to My Music and My Pictures in Windows Explorer? I???m not the type to complain and not offer a solution. So MS, if you want to see greater adoption of your new OS, give your consumers more of what they really want??? Less. Please give me less bundled aps, and charge me less for it. Sell it to me ala carte! If I want CD/DVD burning capabilities, I???ll pay for it. If MS???s software lets me do it better than Nero or Roxio, then I???ll buy MS???s CD/DVD burning software. It???s Win-Win for everyone! You can quit wasting time and money developing and supporting aps that suck so bad no one would pay for them so you have to give them away ???free???. We consumers can pay for a stable OS without bloatware.

don.bouchard
don.bouchard

I think if the real truth was brought out that the total sum of users of Vista deminishes drastically. Obligated to purchase Vista in buying a new computer only to delete Vista and run XP Pro as the operating system. The amount of money made is then of forced thievery and deceit. Not showing how many who purchased a new pc is keeping using Vista as their platform. Bet you anything that less than 1/3 still using Vista because now can't afford to purchasing older software to replacing all that bull crap...

TechExec2
TechExec2

. Firstly, I assume Microsoft did not lie about the financials. Microsoft is extremely arrogant, overconfident, dishonest, and has very poor ethics. If they thought they could get away with it, I expect they would lie about the financials too. But, it would be truly insane for them to risk criminal prosecution by stating fraudulent financials in this post-Enron age of Sarbox. So, I accept the financials. [b]Microsoft is essentially [i]LYING ABOUT VISTA SALES DRIVING REVENUE[/i][/b] I don't believe for one second that "Vista" is selling strongly. Vista is dragging, not driving, the financials. It's a friggin' lie. It's right up there with "The Wow starts now", "Vista is ready today", and "Everyone is so speechless". ** In the beginning, Microsoft bragged that Vista sales were twice that of initial XP sales. Well, the [u]market[/u] is also twice as large too. This false brag is a deliberate deception. That is, a lie. ** Microsoft claimed 20M sold in the first month and only 25M/28M sold in the most recent three months (only 8.3M/9.3M per month). Vista sales are not rising. They are falling. ** Microsoft has billions in "deferred revenue" on its balance sheet and is reporting more each quarter than ever before. This helped to make the "record quarter". ** I suspect (but cannot prove) that WGA might be having some net positive effect on revenue. WGA is probably forcing more pirates to pay up than driving legitimate customers away, at least for now. This helped to make the "record quarter". ** Even Microsoft only claims 88M Vista sold [u]into the channel[/u] in 9 months, right? Estimates are that there will be 250M PCs sold in 2007, or about 187M over those nine months. Vista is only about HALF! Vista is not driving revenue even using the bogus 88M number. ** An aside: The 88M is [u]channel[/u] sales, not Vista sold to customers and certainly not actual running Vista systems. ** It's obvious that Microsoft is counting [u]many[/u] Windows sales as "Vista" when in fact they really end up being XP (i.e. "downgrade rights"). ** Enterprises are still signing multi-year licensing deals with Microsoft and these deals include Vista with downgrade rights. The companies are installing XP. And, they will continue to do so for many years. There is no rush to upgrade to Vista inside corporations. These deals are driving revenue, not Vista. ** PC OEMs have said that Vista is not having any affect on their sales. PC OEMs are not selling more PCs because of Vista. ** Each PC OEM says "We recommend Vista". The truth is that "We are forced to recommend Vista by our sales contracts with Microsoft. If we didn't do it, it would cost us our marketing dollars that we get from Microsoft.". ** I haven't seen XP on a PC in a retail store since January. This is due to Microsoft's manipulations also. ** Anecdotal: Windows XP Home and Pro full licenses have been outselling Vista on Amazon for months. I suspect these are being bought by many people who are buying those Intel-based Macintosh computers (big increase, record sales for Apple). Even Kubuntu 7.04 was ahead of Vista on Amazon before 7.10 came out! Now THAT'S funny! :^0 Microsoft is NOT telling the truth about Vista sales driving revenue.

TechExec2
TechExec2

. When you tried to install and use Vista, did you find incompatibilities with your software, hardware, and peripherals, and/or get the "blue screen of death"? Post YES or NO. How many of you can relate to this guy's experience with Windows Vista? Be sure to close your office door (if you have one). It has sound, but your laughter will likely be louder! :^0 Windows Vista: The Woe Starts Now! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVbf9tOGwno

Totohydra
Totohydra

??...two absolutes about Win OS upgrades..we'll see how "WinMin" goes...

mpasaa
mpasaa

I don't know any of my IT buddies in other places rushing out to install Vista. Just too costly overall. I think Microsoft is fudging numbers and the fact that Vista comes pre-loaded doesn't mean anything....as soon as we get any PCs we clean them up, strip them down, install our own apps and ghost them for the next unit to use. If Vista came with the computer it wouldn't last long I can tell you that. We have at least 3 in-house apps and a couple of commercial products that simply won't work with this OS. The 3rd party apps may have Vista support by now but who knows? It may require yet another unneeded expense on our part. We should make Microsoft pay for ALL of the apps that don't work on this new OS if they want widespread adoption. From what I've seen, Vista is junk and ripe with too many annoyances and issues. As I've posted in other places, the promises made with Vista were the same ones we heard when XP was released and we will surely hear the same promises in the next M$ release...might as well stick with what works... peace!

TuEKiD01
TuEKiD01

This December i was going to upgrade to windows vista, yet i have herd from several experts not to do so because its really not worth it. A lot of problems with software compatibility and crashing issues with games, I'll stick to windows XP for now, even my version of windows 64 doesn't want to cooperate with the video drivers for the last year.

mhawkins
mhawkins

I'm looking at the ease of use and eye candy once installed as well as the better security I can expect but I'm very hesitant to upgrade. I thought I'd count the ways to see if they are bogus -- or if sharper people will tell me that 5 reasons is only a start.... 1. The OS is 2x to 3x as expensive as W98 in it's lightest version. Haven't prices been going down? everything except MS I guess 2. There are too many variations on a theme between Home and Professional Upgrade versions, Ultimate versions and variations mixing and matching these. Come on, sell me one version in upgrade or full and then an add on pack if I want more. 3. I know piracy is an issue, but the XP validation process was insulting, time consuming and restrictive. Real hackers can still get around the PAC's but casual and home users are now locked down hard. And we want to do more business with this company? Just change a HDD or mobo and see what happens to the OS version you have and what needs to be done to be "official" again. 4. Speaking of which...WPA? Why does MS need to look in my private places every few months just to make sure I'm not a thief? Even the police can't do this. Maybe if they charged $79 for an upgrade again more would buy, less would try and steal and MS would waste less cycles peering in dark corners 5. When a new app (or OS) comes out why isn't it faster, smaller with better written code? Aren't they good at this yet? Maybe it's because they re-do the whole frickin' thing so everybody -- coders and users are learning fresh from the get-go. If you want to give me a new GUI, let me move into it slowly from management and user perspectives. In fact while were at it, let the DLL's move slowly too with better backward compatability. I don't have the privilege to throw everything, including my knowledge, out the door because you have a better idea. I wonder if your coders feel the same way? Nice desktop though when you have enough machine for the ultimate version....

anthonyivory
anthonyivory

All I hear is crying on this blog. WIN 98 -Sorry that was last century. LINUX- You've been tweaking it and praying for it for How Long? by the way try to make Linux work with all the software and hardware that MS has to work with. YEAR 2007 Welcome to this century - we dont buy updates we download them for FREE An OS in todays world is not stagnent it is always evolving and changing you should be too.How many versions and revisions of Linux have there been? -High speed internet access is common -Linux on everydesktop when everyone has a flying car Let's just learn VISTA as we did the previous OS's . If we focus on the positve we can let MS fix the rest.

mikeholli
mikeholli

solid_snake said [quote]Ofcourse the popularity and market of Vista will go high because all most all vendors are selling desktops and laptops with vista pre installed and the best part is majority of laptops do not support windows XP at all espically sony and HP.[/quote] Strange, seems Redmond has stated that Vista isn't selling as they had thought it would have, and currently Microsoft has already in testing Windows Ver7 the usurper to Windows Vista, speculations is a early Xmas 2008 release date. Furthermore, this will (if true) be the fastest release of Windows since XP came out to replace 2000. Maybe if were very nice to Jason here he can give us more details on the upcoming Windows v7.

domiller0550
domiller0550

I am writing this on a HP laptop. Either your info is screwed up or you are just a troll. Get some education before posting.

mikeholli
mikeholli

Grolan said:[quote] As for Linux on the desktop, I agree it won't penetrate deeply in the business environment over the next year or two.[end-quote] I disagree! Reason for my disagreement: Business oriented computer makers are going with Linux over MS Windows with most recent jumper being Dell. Medion Computer Corp did the jump back in 06. Gateway is talking about Linux desktops as I write this. IBM/Lenovo has their own flavor of Linux, and can do the jump most anytime.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

Xp to Vista , to Nix, VMS, or from any of them to something else... Even for a one man band the costs can be scary, and short of license fees the cost savings no matter how you add them up don't justify the risk and investment to a business. In a big place the cost's and risks of changing are at least as big as the benefits, and much easier to quantify. As a tech I'd be prepared to take it, but it's not my money and not my business.

mikeholli
mikeholli

bdivine wrote: [quote]reminds me of Windows ME vs Windows 2000.[end quote]HEY???? get your head out of your BOTTOM!!!! WinME was Win2000 home! Another thing Vista FAR exceeds WinME in terms of usefulness, actually Win98SE far exceeds it as well! Lets not talk about WinME ever again!!! (shudder)

The Scummy One
The Scummy One

8 systems with various trojans, sounds like network security is at the heart of this issue... Ar you sure a server is not infected, and infecting clients? Maybe XP was patched, but were the servers? Also, what kinds of places are these machines hitting? Are they being used to download free music/dvd's, etc???

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

style setting them up. I'm not a big fan of Defender but it's better than that.

Forum Surfer
Forum Surfer

I have roughly 20 pc's deployed in development departmens, half as many again in testing and about 10 laptops in the field, all with Vista. I don't seem to have any trouble. Even with the mobile clients connecting through VPN from various outside public hotspots I haven't had a single virus outbreak. It all boils down to how tight your network security (which can accomplish far more than security on the pc end)is, having a good managed enterprise level security suite and monitoring exactly what your users are doing. I'm not saying watch them all day, but at least have appliances or software monitoring traffic 24/7 so you can go back, find the root of your problem, then eleminating your weak points.

mikeholli
mikeholli

Dean, can you explain to me WHY THE HELL HAS YOUR COMPANY ROLLED OUT MS VISTA SO SOON? Whomever your system/services/operation admins are should of KNOWN better! Go over and scream at them they are idiots! Any SystemAdmin worth more than $2.50 knows they're suppose to wait at least 6 months to deploy company wide a new O/S, let alone make sure it will run the companies applications. That was A total moronic move on the Admin!

benjamin_nelson
benjamin_nelson

I am running Vista and I am able to manage users on the domain. I got a fix from MS. I also got a fix for Netmeeting.

don.bouchard
don.bouchard

Stranger things happen since my last entry. i been using Windows Vista on a Pentium 3 with only 733mhz processor and 758 mb of memory. Vista requirements are well above this dinosaur but it still works. the limitations are that sounds are not installed to work or else it would possibly crash. It don't matter to me if i hear things, i can read them just as easily. lol that is progress still will work in the old machines it does work not using all its powers it does fine, sidebar included and worthy of its being there.. . Good enough, ay!

hlhowell
hlhowell

Don't forget that most linux users have to purchase a machine occasionally, too, and that many of those machines come with VISTA installed even though they don't want or need it. In fact some vendors still charge for the Vista License (built into their sales price) even when they install Linux for you. Regards, Les H

Forum Surfer
Forum Surfer

Xp 64 was absolutely horrid. I spent weeks trying to get a pc at home run correctly on it. Granted it was an SLI rig with all the "latest and greatest" hardware, so something like that is bound to break occasionally due to it's very nature. Once I loaded Vista on it my problems (games crashing, crashing while encoding, Office apps crashing, dropping connection with my Linux fileserver and just general all around crashing) my problems went away. Everything was stable on Xp as well, but I went with Vista for the "latest and greatest" thrill of it. I also have Virtual pc running instances of SUSE, Xp and Ubuntu for various apps that just weren't designed for Vista. I don't however see Vista as the next ME or causing some major migration to Linux bt big brothers. Too many apps like SQL, Sharepoint and Exchange will keep us dependant on Microsft for a long time to come.

goldenpirate
goldenpirate

Oh yea, you really trust MS that much?????? So how come MS have not been able to get their act together since Win95?????? "LINUX- You've been tweaking it and praying for it for How Long? by the way try to make Linux work with all the software and hardware that MS has to work with." Well, lets see. Just for the hell of it, I recently tried a live distro of Linux (in case you are ignorant of what that means - it ran directly off a cd - unlike windowz) - it picked up my adsl modem, my network hub, my LAN, every printer on my network, every scanner on my network, every computer on my LAN - and I was able to access them all. Now, with windowz, everything that Linux picked up automatically, I had to do manually. So go and figure. Oh, and by the way, how come I can use a Linux boot disk (with the appropriate Linux program) on a Windows Computer and totally erase the admin password and any other Windows specific password and thereby gain total acces to that computer but I cannot do that with a Windows disk? And you say "let MS fix the rest" when they can't even produce an OS with security that's boiler proof? Get real, man. Just in case you're wondering - I do data recovery and also computer recovery where passwords have been lost or forgotten - particularly laptops that havent been used in a while. (btw In some respects I have to agree with you on Linux, but only as far as this - Linux, because of its open source nature, is in perpetual beta version and by its very nature that is how it will always be.) have a merry xmas. Cheers.

Dumphrey
Dumphrey

1) "High speed internet access is common" True, it is common, but it?s also still fewer than 50% for household adoption nation wide. http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Broadband%202007.pdf Also google will back this up with about 12 more studies. Face it, America is big, and unless you live in a city, high-speed internet is not a reality. There are some "towns" near me that just got dial up access about 5 years ago. I think they got cable (TV and internet) last year. 2) "- we don?t buy updates we download them for FREE" Actually you do buy them, the cost is covered in the initial purchase price of the product, ie Windows, Office, server licenses. This is economics 101. 3)"An OS in today?s world is not stagnant it is always evolving and changing you should be too" Lets see...Xp came out about 5 years ago... since then MS has released ummm....one OS, Vista, for the desktop. That?s a lot of change and development. Shoot, Vista even managed to add in desktop effects to mimic OSX/*nix from 2 years ago... so that means the next version of Windows will include true transparent windows like I have now? I can't wait... MS is not known for innovation on the desktop, just GUI changes and watered down "feature" releases. 4)"-Linux on everydesktop when everyone has a flying car" I cannot disagree here with your literal meaning, but I would say that Desktop Linux adoption has been greatly aided by the release of Vista, especially among audio and video files who disapprove of the massive DRM sitting between their files and their experience. 5) "Let's just learn VISTA as we did the previous OS's If we focus on the positive we can let MS fix the rest. " I will learn it, but I do not like it, it?s a bloated XP with lower performance (google it, its true, any gamer can tell you this) and new API's to force the re-write of code and drivers. There is nothing to justify the price of Vista upgrades. As for being positive, Vista has little to be excited about. The best I can say is that is bland. Its GUI is far from impressive, its performance is lacking (partly due to driver issues, but this also goes back to MS and their certification process), it has a huge footprint, you have to relearn simple things (admin cmd shell, ACTUAL firewall control (security center == useless)). XP was also not impressive when it came out, but at least it had the decency to not spend 10-20% of its resources attempting to police my actions, and the performance gains over 2000 and ME were substantial (speed (given 512 mb of ram, Vista is still slower on XP in the 2GB of ram range, on the same hardware), stability, plug and play, RDC included.... And before you go accusing me of being a linux fan boi, I should say that I am a Windows Admin. I have 6 servers and 45 workstations I support. I like Windows XP, I like Windows 2000, I love Server 2003, I am fond of Exchange, but I loathe MsSQL (and to be honest, working with any database). Vista has left me feeling underwhelmed when looking at gain vs. expenditure. We will probably add in server 2008 as part of the server rotation, but stick with XP until the next release of Windows. I did try to look at the positive, and I bought Vista Home Premium on my Fianc?e?s laptop (and yes XP was available) because she wanted to try it out. And so far, she has not formatted it and installed XP? But, I just can?t build up any enthusiasm for its adoption. It offers me nothing I need, and much that I do not want. If Vista is working for you, Great. And if you can see the bright side of Vista, Great. And if you want to post about people whining and crying, Great. But try to make sense and maintain internal cohesiveness with your own arguments.

mikeholli
mikeholli

[quote]That is news to me! I am writing this on a HP laptop. Either your info is screwed up or you are just a troll. Get some education before posting.[end-quote] Since writing that previous reply, I have gotten in my HP computer, and as I stated, and that information I had used was from reading up on HP computers. It is a reliable PC, of course you can go back to your Dell. My only problem(inital) with the HP was, and still is the networking, and that's nothing to do with HP, but a Microsoft problem. (Note: I hate they changed their networking with the introduction of Windows Vista.)I have had Dell computers in the past, they're purely garbage. So much so that Michael Dell has been put on the bottom of Bill Gates's craplist and has moved to installing Ubuntu Linux on his PC. (Note: incase you didn't notice - that was purely sarcasm about Michael Dell and the craplist. I can't say it is a fact, there might be other factors that Mr Dell had taken under advisement before the move to Ubuntu Linux.) But ALL in ALL This HP is running as per specs claimed it would. (Note to HP if your reading this. It would of been nice to include the software as a whole, and not just have me create a couple DVD Recovery discs.)

finmedmgr
finmedmgr

Some nut wrote - HP Laptops don't support XP? I have had my HP Pavillion DV9040us laptop for a year now, bought it last year on Black Friday from Circuit City after researching the best of everything in a laptop for several months and created a list of things it had to have. I don't understand how someone could say that HP laptops do not support XP. I have XP Pro with Vista compatible and love it with my HP laptop. My laptop has such awsome speakers, speed and volume. It has 2GB RAM, dual core intel centrino and 240 GB hard drive with an additional 500 GB hard drive with their expansion base memory module, 17" non glare brite screen , NVIDA Geforce GO 7600, lightscribe, and Altec dual speakers. The speakers on the expansion base are even more awesome. Nothing I have ever used can be better than this. I create web sites, use all Microsoft Office 2008 and 2007 products including Office Accounting for small businesses. I use photo ULEAD older versions and NEOPaint, about 35 media, photo and graphics applications. I have not had one problem since I purchased it, not one. I set up a LAN to my older desktop PC that has XP home and an all in one printer, so if I am on the patio and want to send something to the printer, just select print and voila. Still no problems. It also comes with web cam, remote control for media center that stores in the laptop hard case, 4 usb ports, an all in one SD.MS/PRP.MMC.XD card reader, High speed DVD recorder and player, HDMI and all the television and gaming hookups one could need. I use for my full time businesses, car clubs, creating graphics, power point presentations and usually have many many windows applications open and running at once. Their 24/7 on line tech support is marvelous. I use Quest,MSN live and MSN Mail, and 2 Wire for connectivity and have never ever had a connectivity problem once other than I forgot to turn on the wireless button a time or two in the begining and the 2 Wire staff were very nice about it. I did trash the Norton that came pre loaded and installed AVG, spybot, spysweeper and ID Vault for security. HP even sent their customers the Vista operating system conversion CD for Free if one wanted to install with conversion instructions and tips . Nothing better than the HP Pavillion DV9040us on the market as far as I am concerned unless it is a newer model.

Grolan
Grolan

I really do - I love linux and use it at home as well as at work. Just being honest in saying I don't see it penetrating deeply into business (on the desktop), but I hope I'm wrong! re Dell though, they say it's not selling in large numbers and they don't expect it to.

Media-Ted@Juno.com
Media-Ted@Juno.com

What on earth are you relying on for that blunder? W2K was NTSF; ME was/is Fat32; W2K could find lots of RAM; ME had very low upper limitations. ME was 98-3rd edition with some thumbnails thrown in for pzzzzzazzzzz. W2K was a workhorse; ME was a darkhorse plug. My HP ME came with an offer to upgrade to XP for free; did you get such an offer on W2K?

mikeholli
mikeholli

Awwwwwww come on Dumphrey, YOU know that's NOT true, for any Admin, Windows Vista offers you headaches, ESPECIALLY if you're a network admin!!! Don't you JUST love that Windows Vista changed IP protocol from ip4 to ip6? Are you having fun YET with getting, EVEN with Server 2008 getting all your systems up and running with the new Vista boxes your company has added? -LoL-

evilkillerwhale
evilkillerwhale

games built for XP aren't created for Vista. Vista is emulating XP, and therefore, by having minor slow downs, even with an emulator in between, your system is MUCH faster. For an Admin, you don't seem to understand software very well. WHAT DRM ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Only protected music has the DRM in between. Your old files, and your new ones don't. What you are spreading is straight up BS. XP had SP1 and THOUSANDS of updates. Economics 101 also states you get nothing for free due to the time spent doing it. This can EASILY be disproved. For instance: I am walking and someone hands me a brown paper bag full of food. I have just been given a free lunch. I have actually spent negative resources in getting this lunch as to the fact that I no longer have to pay, waste time in line, or make a decision on what I will be eating. Cost

Dumphrey
Dumphrey

were run from 1958 to 1961. And Yes I did mean local number dial up =) sorry about that. This town is only 40 miles away from a decent size area (population 200,000 ish) but its all mountain and woods. Above grund cables get knocked down once or twice every winter, and underground cable was too expensive to run for the longest time. and to be honest, I am still unsure how a buried fiber cable became affordable to run to a community of 600.

NickNielsen
NickNielsen

[i]There are some "towns" near me that just got dial up access about 5 years ago. I think they got cable (TV and internet) last year.[/i] Don't you mean they just got local number dial-up? There are some small towns where you are, but I'm sure they've had telephones there since at least the 1950s or 60s.

mark
mark

And so another TR article starts with the inane and spurious - then goes full circle :) Oh joy... I knew there was a reason to hit that unsubscribe button...

mikeholli
mikeholli

finmedmgr wrote [quote]Some nut wrote - HP Laptops don't support XP[end-quote] Hahahahahhahahahahahahha Your kidding, right? Heck even a crappy e-machine supports WinXP, let alone a company like HP other than a boutique PC, HP runs the home industry for our computing needs, as well as being my next Windows Vista Home Premium PC, and instead of a ton of junkware HP gives you some good programs. (note: Like the rest of the industry you will get some bloatware/junkware with any PC.) But outside of Medion, Gateway, I think that for a home PC HP is great. (Special note : Gateways and Medions go beyond regular use PCs. Both are almost boutique PCs) That's certain models of course.

mikeholli
mikeholli

That's odd, currently Dell is running a national TV, and radio advertisement that says the opposite of that. Stating within their commercial that Ubuntu will be the O/S.

mikeholli
mikeholli

Wrong, Win98SE was the final chapter in the 1900 series. Windows 2000 came in as Win2000, Win2000 Me AKA Home, Win2000Pro, and Win2000 Server Editions. In any case Win2000 ME was a horror story from day 1 of it's release. NOT even adding Microsoft Bob could save us from The Nightmare from Redmond!!!!

Editor's Picks