Note: I tried to take this poll in July, but technical
problems made a mess of things. This is a very important question for us to
consider, so we will try again.

In late June 2013, I spent half of the night in the hospital
emergency room with my father who had a minor fall in his bedroom. He is 91,
which means that even minor falls are a significantly bigger deal than it would
be for most of us.

While we waited for the various test results which would
determine our next steps, I observed that the entire hospital was running on
Microsoft Windows XP workstations. I wondered if the hospital had plans in
place to migrate off of XP to Windows 7 in the near future. Surely, the
hospital administration could not accept the potential extra liability that could
occur if something went wrong with a patient and some hot shot attorney noticed
they were using an unsupported operating system. (Windows XP will no longer be
supported by Microsoft in April 2014.)

Since tests in hospitals always take at least two hours to
complete, I had time to further wonder what factors were keeping the hospital
from performing a migration. Was it the time involved? Was it the cost? Was it
a combination of the two? Perhaps it was something else that had not occurred
to me.


So, I thought it would be beneficial to ask the membership
of TechRepublic what factors they see as Windows XP migration blockers.


If your answer is other, please explain in the discussion
thread following this article.

Also read: