With Microsoft's earnings report this week, Mark Kaelin thought it might be a good time to assess how far along we are in this slow migration to Windows 7.
This past week Microsoft Corporation gave Wall Street and shareholders its earnings report for the second quarter of 2011. As Larry Dignan reported on ZDNet, the numbers the company reported beat previous estimates by a significant amount.
The company reported fourth quarter earnings of $5.87 billion, or 69 cents a share, on revenue of $17.37 billion, up 8 percent from a year ago.
Wall Street was looking for earnings of 58 cents a share on revenue of $17.23 billion.
Delving deeper into the numbers, the driving force behind the increased revenues and profits was enterprise spending. Microsoft is benefiting from increased demand in servers, the corporate PC upgrade cycle, and continuing deployment and upgrade to Office 2010.
So, despite Microsoft's bad reputation and the persistent perception of being an innovation laggard, the company is raking in billions of dollars. Perhaps the drumbeat of naysayers sounding the death knell of Microsoft is premature.
Back in December 2009, I asked TechRepublic members how likely they were to upgrade their systems to Windows 7 and what kind of time frame would be involved. The basic gist of the results indicated that many IT professionals were going to deploy Windows 7 over a two-year period. The caveat was that the deployment would come slowly with the product cycle of existing systems. In other words, Windows 7 would be deployed when old hardware was replaced and not in a massive, all-at-once migration. That was a practical and perfectly understandable response.
With the earnings news of this week, I thought it might be a good time to assess how far along we are in this slow migration to Windows 7.
Based on responses to various poll questions over the past few years, a general consensus has been established: most enterprises are just not going to do massive, all-at-once technology migrations anymore. I am wondering aloud if this method is easier on the IT pros responsible for maintaining enterprise systems or more difficult?