Windows 7 not looking hot to the IT crowd

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Eventually means "only when they absolutely have to" and in the end the customer is king. The ball is in Microsoft's court to when or whether they will kill access to "XP" (still the preferred purchase).

A premature cancellation of XP to corporates without a cost effective alternative would likely inflate that 6% migration figure exponentially.

I've yet to see a valid and costed reason for upgrade(?) to either of the most recent Windows versions, a reason where the benefits justify the substantial costs involved.

Phred (Cornerstone member):

Quoting Raindog:
"Eventually means: only when they absolutely have to"

Exactly! This large organisation that I provide support to, only up until recently was still using a combination of NT4 & Win2k, and was dragged kicking and screaming to upgrading to XP a little over 12 months ago.

Large organisations will only migrate if the total cost of ownership becomes too much in support, and this is usually well after the product has gone end of life.

Tin (Regular user):

6% planning to move to Linux or MacOSX is actually quite a huge figure in business, especially with 43% so worried about change that they aren't even changing to a new MS platform.

I'd say it's also potentially worth millions in lost sales to MS if that 6% do go ahead with it. If they all go Linux, MS will likely also lose out in the Office side of things too.

McBanjo (User):

Quoting Tin:
If they all go Linux

You're kidding right? Linux might be free, but the time you waste just learning and fixing it is enormous. Only if you were a complete idiot would you put Linux in front of an end user. It's been a year since I've bothered with Linux, but I doubt they've fixed all their core issues in that time.

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting McBanjo:
Linux might be free, but the time you waste just learning and fixing it is enormous.

That so many other are now having little trouble could suggest your rate of learning is below par. :)


Quoting McBanjo:
Only if you were a complete idiot would you put Linux in front of an end user.

Only if you were a one eyed fan-boy would would you remove alternatives from consideration without weighing up the relative pluses and minuses. The are numerous examples worldwide where business and public organisations have adapted a Linux desktop environment. The learning curve to produce basic correspondence from Open Office or to run a web or terminal interface to a corporate front end is not particularly OS dependant. Only a complete idiot would adopt an expensive solution for such tasks.


Quoting McBanjo:
It's been a year since I've bothered with Linux

That's OK your quite entitled to put forward comment from the position of ignorance.



Quoting McBanjo:
but I doubt

and from from a position based on speculation.


Peddle a hobby horse by all means, but your mention of core issues is simply fabrication. There are many reasons why Linux is not the most utilised desktop OS and there are equally as many reasons why Apple is a bit player too. But if your talking possibility of corporate migrations from a Windows only environment then Linux has something Apple does Hardware compatibility.

MickLang (New user):

This article is... silly. It misses the mark in several areas.

In my experience businesses have pretty much *NEVER* upgraded the OS on a machine. The only time you will see a Vista or Windows 7 box replace a Windows XP box is when the actual box is replaced. Eventually every XP desktop out there is going to fail and *if* it is replaced 90% probability the decision will be to replace it with the OS Microsoft is shipping at present date.

The days of upgrading boxes to keep up with ever increasing software requirements are over, the processing power required for the majority of business applications was exceeded years ago.

What is crucial for Microsoft is that this is triggering a shift away from clunky desktop machines to hand held devices as a common means of accessing information systems. The failure to penetrate the mobile market and online services as they did the desktop market is the true limiter of future growth for Microsoft.

I don't think success of Windows 7 will have as much of an affect on Microsoft as will the success of (the forever in the pipeline) Windows Mobile 7 OS and whether they can out wow the IPhone and Google's Android OS.

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting MickLang:
In my experience businesses have pretty much *NEVER* upgraded the OS on a machine.

A wider experience would certainly not contain the word NEVER.

Quoting MickLang:
Eventually every XP desktop out there is going to fail and *if* it is replaced 90% probability the decision will be to replace it with the OS Microsoft is shipping at present date.

That curious given that most business machines at the present time are shipping with a loaded copy of XP. Microsoft statistics show how many Vista licenses they are shipping not how many copies of the OS are actually running. All those COA downgrades and all the new loads of corporate XP images are Vista licensed.

If Microsoft was to embargo further shipment of XP at the present time your supposed NEVER for corporate OS loads would be blown to pieces.


Quoting MickLang:
The days of upgrading boxes to keep up with ever increasing software requirements are over

The days of migrating to a newer version of an OS just because are not going to happen. It's all about need and justification.


Quoting MickLang:
the processing power required for the majority of business applications was exceeded years ago.

True in a general sense, however the demands placed on the average desktop are increasing in most business environments.


Quoting MickLang:
What is crucial for Microsoft is that this is triggering a shift away from clunky desktop machines to hand held devices as a common means of accessing information systems.

Which corporate environments is this happening in? There is a definite trend towards desktop replacement in the form of notebooks, but the corporate desktop is alive and prospering and will likely do so for some time. Only the form factor is changing. Like it or not corporate Desktops are a substantial proportion of the market.

Quoting MickLang:
I don't think success of Windows 7 will have as much of an affect on Microsoft as will the success of (the forever in the pipeline) Windows Mobile 7 OS and whether they can out wow the IPhone and Google's Android OS.

While you are quite correct that MS has not exactly taken the mobile device OS by storm you have to still consider the overall environment, such devices are being used in conjunction with traditional desktops they are certainly not replacing them.

PriMinister (New user):

You are right about one thing, the reason to upgrade includes justifying the cost of the OS, it may even be the driving factor in upgrading or not. If MS made its software affordable, people would upgrade simply to have the latest in technology

JGrant (User):

Maybe they're just afraid of the headaches of another windows OS and the updating process. If updating were easier they'd probably be on windows 7 straight away. I don't think this is a positive reflection on how good XP is, I think it's more of a reflection on how difficult updating is with windows.

Stupid Arcticle (New user):

This article is ladend with bias, "Unfortunately....moving to linux or OSX", "when Windows was at it's weakes...". Corporates never want to move or change, it costs and it hurts. If and upgrade to an OS hurts why the hell would they even consider completely changing the OS.
The writer seems to suggest that products with minute market share should be taking over the world when Microsoft upgrades it's software. There is a reason why Apple and Linux have such a small share of the corporate market.
Rubbish article, downgrading my interest in APC content!

SLi (Cornerstone member):

Quoting Stupid Arcticle:
This article is ladend with bias, "Unfortunately....moving to linux or OSX", "when Windows was at it's weakes...". Corporates never want to move or change, it costs and it hurts. If and upgrade to an OS hurts why the hell would they even consider completely changing the OS.
The writer seems to suggest that products with minute market share should be taking over the world when Microsoft upgrades it's software. There is a reason why Apple and Linux have such a small share of the corporate market.
Rubbish article, downgrading my interest in APC content!


ABSOLUTELY 100% agree with you. This article is a simple waste of time good for nothing article. Geoff, please write about something interesting and worthwhile instead of this biased rubbish! We dont come here to read speculations and Mac fanatic articles... find something worthwhile to write about or not at all APC.

HojuDingo (New user):

This writer seems to suggest that pathetic products with large market share should be taking over the world. Microsoft don't make a real operating system. Windows (almost any version) is a broken toy of an operating system. Windows = NOS, a Non Operating System. Of course if you want a real operating system there are only two choices - VMS or some version of Unix - and why not the ever polished and reliable OS X.

Tin (Regular user):

Quoting Stupid Arcticle:
There is a reason why Apple and Linux have such a small share of the corporate market.


And what reason would that be? I've seen mass rollouts of Macs, and mass rollouts of Linux... And both do very well when managed by people who are willing to use something different.

TV Bis (User):

Let’s be realistic here! It all comes down to money only!
Every staff member in a company using old software hates it. I hate using my slow Xp machine at work, which I have to say has only recently been upgraded from 2000, because I know there is a much better OS out there.
Companies never did like upgrading well before the current state of the global economy so there is no way a company could use the economic downturn as a legitimate excuse!
It’s just penny pinching and the company employees have to wear it…….

Phred (Cornerstone member):

Quoting TV Bis:
It’s just penny pinching and the company employees have to wear it…….

Quite wrong indeed. Corporate SOE's aren't just the OS & applications installed, it takes time and money to perform proper test and certification to ensure that your applications actually work on the new platform along with being able to co-exist with one another, not to mention the potential security risks involved.

TV Bis (User):

Quoting Phred:
Quite wrong indeed

I have been in the industry long enough to know that 99% of the time it is based on expenditure not productivity.

Quoting Phred:
it takes time and money to perform proper test and certification to ensure that your applications actually work on the new platform along with being able to co-exist with one another, not to mention the potential security risks involved.

If a product has been running for x amount of years before hand I think the proper tests and certification of applications argument goes completely out the Window.
In my company they already knew that everything was tried and tested years before by other major companies. There is no re-iventing of the weel here it was pure and simply penny pinching..........

ejr (New user):

failed to move in the for kill when

in the for kill, what kind of English is that? American English?

The Big Baboo (User):

Quoting ejr:
In the for kill, what kind of English is that? American English?

And when exactly did we become American clones my friend :( I'm Australian and proud of it even though I was born in Italy :)

ejr (New user):

seriously failed to move in the for kill when

What kind of English is that? American English?

AnthonyQLD (New user):

No large companies but as someone that provides support to a total of 9 companies (with between 3-14 computers each) I certainly won't be recommending Windows 7. I use XP at home, I can't afford Windows 7 so there would be no way I could recommend an OS that I've hardly used and providing support for it would also be difficult if I don't use it. They all use XP at the moment, as I also couldn't recommend they update to Vista(as I also have never had a chance to have a good look at that OS). I've used the Beta version of Windows 7 and it gave me an error after 2 days that I might be a victim of software piracy, so it doesn't exactly make me confident in the software. I didn't worry about getting another key, as I knew that I'd never be able to afford to buy it, so there's no point.

Sp33d d3mon (Cornerstone member):

Windows 7 will get SP2 in 3013?

The Big Baboo (User):

Quoting Sp33d d3mon:
Windows 7 will get SP2 in 3013?
Yup well I certainly won't worry about getting it then because I'll most probably be dead even if my PC isn't :) Sort of sounds like a scene from that "Forbidden Planet" movie if anyone else remembers that:)

TV Bis (User):

Quoting Sp33d d3mon:
Windows 7 will get SP2 in 3013?

Now you must work for Microsoft! 3013 for SP2? Now that Windows 7 must be good!

Halcon (Advanced member):

APC Magazine should steer clear of sensationalism.
Microsoft is not going to win big if companies still want to use XP, this is because most computers used in some offices may be Pentium 4 or Core2 class machines.
The other factors to take into consideration are performance, this means the machine must have an adequate amount of memory and Hard disk capacity, or a brand new machine; not all business are ready to splash out a big amount of money.
Linux is a more affordable option to look at, with this economic downturn many companies will try to save money by using it instead of Windows, due to the licensing restrictions and its cost per computer, its wise to think in a better alternative with less burden.
So Microsoft is not going to have a golden egg after all.

gankul (Cornerstone member):

any core2 class machine that cant handle windows 7 should never have been purchased.

If you bought a core2 machine with less the 2gig of ram, then you should never have been in charge of purchasing it. coinsidering 4 gig is only 80 dollars.

But there has been nothing to say why upgrade to win7 if XP does all you need.

Maybe they need to do what apple does, just re-release XP, but with more securtiy, bugs fixed at the start, code better optimised, extra support for some things, remove legacy support for others, then charge a 50 dollar - 100 dollar fee for it, every 1.5 - 3 years.

TV Bis (User):

Onward and upward!

todd_h86 (User):

You do realise Windows 7 will run on most Pentium 4 and Core2 class machines.....

Quoting Halcon:
Linux is a more affordable option to look at, with this economic downturn many companies will try to save money by using it instead of Windows, due to the licensing restrictions and its cost per computer, its wise to think in a better alternative with less burden.

Less burden to the pocket when purchasing maybe, but not less burden to the IT support who will have to be trained to support that version of Linux, not to mention the cost of getting similar programs to run on Linux and also not to mention TRAINING THE USERS,
again Halcon you are a douche, did someone mention Microsoft? O here is halcon, saying Linux is the snizzle and Windows is terrible and everyone should just dump Windows and all its software for Linux and its software, cause it would be cheaper....

HOW IS IT CHEAPER TO RETRAIN STAFF AND RE-PURCHASE SOFTWARE YOU ALREADY OWN THAN TO UPGRADE AN OS WHEN YOU UPGRADE A PC!!!!! You have no sense of money and just spruke about cost of licensing and licensing restrictions and you dont look past that, where as any normal person who was in charge of an IT budget/network would go hey, we can upgrade these PCS with Windows for this, still use our existing software which everyone knows, or we can buy this PC with Linux and then buy all this software that we dont know how it works and also we may need to pay for that training (I bet it would be more than a Windows license) o and pay to train the users (again more than a WIndows license...).

Please halcon, think before you type, its not hard!.




Quoting Halcon:
So Microsoft is not going to have a golden egg after all.

Which means what? Microsoft isn't the goose your trying to make them out to be? Who is this goose? Why a goose? Are you a goose?

I think maybe...... !

Daniel at Westmead (New user):

Uhm.. is APC stand for Australian Linux Computing or something? While MS certainly is no saint, if this is journalism, shouldn't you at least maintain some sense of balance? "Unfortunately"? Unfortunate for whom? I can understand it if this is Linux magazine or Slashdot, but as far as I know this is not. APC seems to be taking side. That could also be fine, but then you should be clear on your position

Aubrey (Advanced member):

Wow, the MS Fanboys are upset about one "Unfortunately" ?

Maybe it should spelled out:

"Unfortunately, (but only for those who would like to see some competition in the OS market so that one vendor doesn't ever again gain monopoly status and thereby the power restrict innovation, set global prices and crush any effort by small companies and individuals to bring anything genuinely new to the market) ......"

The Big Baboo (User):

Quoting Aubrey:
"Unfortunately, (but only for those who would like to see some competition in the OS market so that one vendor doesn't ever again gain monopoly status and thereby the power restrict innovation, set global prices and crush any effort by small companies and individuals to bring anything genuinely new to the market)..."
Well said young "Aubrey" You sir are a beacon shining in a fog of murky visions and an allround gentleman :) I salute you :)

TV Bis (User):

The tall poppy syndrome is still alive and kicking......

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting TV Bis:
The tall poppy syndrome is still alive and kicking......

Tall poppy syndrome would imply criticism of Microsoft solely on the basis of the size or market position. It's curious you make this claim given the post you replied to clearly outlined numerous reasons why Microsoft is out of favour for it's behavior.

For Microsoft to make obscene profits I say good luck to them, provided they do so based on merit and fair and accountable practices. The deliberate efforts to make Windows incompatible with anything else including early Windows versions offer no customer benefit whatsoever. If Microsoft cannot learn to play nice in a crowd then they are engineering their own demise.

When a company becomes predatory in it's behavior towards smaller competitors, and when the same company attempts to monopolise markets, the criticism of that company can hardly be consider as tall poppy syndrome.

I come back to the same point what business advantages have recent versions of Windows offered? The answers have been silence.

The customer is king, any prospering business knows that and IT departments and corporate heads are sending a clear and valid message. It's a message so clear even marketing departments should be able to interpret it.

Halcon (Advanced member):

APC stand for Australian Personal Computer, ACP Magazines is the publisher of this and other magazines in Australia, the other computer magazine is PC User, by the same publisher.
Both publications are well established, I recommend them for a good reading.

GeoffSpick (User):

Hi all,
thanks for the comments. While I can't account for other's perceived bias - I like pretty much all systems and technology, except when it doesn't work. I'm hired to write about Windows here, so that's what I cover but also the "ecosystem" (hate that word) in which it lives.

I also remember a few years back endless press releases about how Linux was storming into the business space. That was the reason for my "in for the kill" comment, language used specifically as its a song title from La Roux, no other reason.

On the whole journalism has to have a catch to it to attract attention, some call it sensationalism, others just selling the product, that's not my call either.

Finally, I looked at some statistics and drew my own conclusions, you don't have to like them and are welcome to come up with your own.

Geoff

petert (Senior member):

Windows fanboys need to stop for a minute and take a deep breath. The word "unfortunately" can have various connotations. One is that the lack of hard competition against MS is bad for all of us. If OSX, Linux or some other OS was to begin to truly bite into MS share of the market, then the undoubted result would be a better product from MS at a cheaper price. How could that be bad?

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting petert:
the undoubted result would be a better product from MS at a cheaper price.

Got it in one, Peter! Windows itself is not fundamentally flawed, but it is fast becoming the software equivalent of a Hummer. Over blown , expensive to buy, expensive to use, environmentally irresponsible.

Until Microsoft realise that the customers desire to upgrade is based on ROI and TCO and not on a desire to maintain some obscene mark-ups back at Redmond.

Yes there are some nice features added to Windows 7 but which features are there that offer a cost justification? In a corporate sense their are none, which makes one wonder whether Windows is becoming a gamer OS.

Not that I expect them to listen, but the first quick tip for Microsoft would be for them to consider how well their new releases interact in existing environments.
The endless necessity for bigger faster and more energy consuming hardware may have seemed like a top idea back at Redmond as would have been the idea that to take full advantage the corporate server environment should have been revised too. All great ideas if your customer base has an unlimited IT bankroll.
Back in reality land however there are still are cost constraints.

I windows wants to maintain sales it needs to ensure that any new release can slip seamlessly into existing environments, the more MS try to enforce upgrade and obsolete their own prior releases the more they will open the door for customers considering alternatives.

Breaking Samba with each new release may seem like a killer blow to MS but to the IT staff that have to mess out such a policy the villain is obvious.
Making ongoing sales of XP difficult may seem a great idea at Redmond but guess what business managers who are now going to have to wear migration costs for no real benefit are going to think.

Where Windows needs to go is obvious, when, whether and how long it takes to get there will decide what OS's are run in coming years.

Those full bellies back at Redmond may find it becoming harder and harder. No market place ever accepted being manipulated by a vendor for very long.

Carmar (User):

"Not that I expect them to listen, but the first quick tip for Microsoft would be for them to consider how well their new releases interact in existing environments."
Very good point - even in a small corporate environment trying to get existing software to work, changing over 50+ programs and retraining staff can be a nightmare. And don't staff love being presented with anything "different"? Not until after 3 months of whinging and moaning about how they can't do things the old way blah blah. I use Vista on my own PC at work, but the staff are still on XP by popular choice.

TV Bis (User):

Quoting petert:
Windows fan boys need to stop for a minute and take a deep breath

I think we all need to stop and think sometimes and give credit to where credit is due. I cannot see why the "Windows Fan boy" tag is given to anyone who simply likes a Windows product? I am grateful for the companies who have helped bring computing to where it is today.

Halcon (Advanced member):

Windows 7 is driven to become a commercial failure, if you ar not convinced about that, head to this place to read more.

http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/article/309805/vista_ultimate_users_fume_rant_over_windows_7_deals?fp=2&fpid=1

As you are there reading the latest MS scam, there is still more to create an upheaval, this is regarding to the license model, I would not buy a thing if this would happen here, Read this article to get the idea at:

http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/article/309792/reports_microsoft_will_sell_windows_7_family_pack?fp=2&fpid=1

One last word: Microsoft is not going to win more devotees with its nefarious plans of world domination, who will save us Linux or OS X?

Phil in NZ (User):

Actually the article is spot on. I am the CIO of a good sized company. Other than some of the IT support guys, we use XP. Even brand new PC's get the corporate XP image. Its the devil we know, and it runs on every PC/notebook we have. Supporting one platform at the same patch level is far easier than having a pick and mix network.

Yes we will move to windows 7 or what ever its called when we have to. At the end of the day, it all comes down to cost benefit, and switching operating systems at this stage cannot be justified. Remember windows 9x was ditched for windows 2k or XP because the operating system was crap relative to the upgrade proposition. The same is not true of XP so its a much harder sell for Microsoft.

Moving to OSX is an even more unlikely scenario, as you have to do the hardware also. Not going to happen.

TV Bis (User):

Quoting Phil in NZ:
At the end of the day, it all comes down to cost benefit,

Never a truer word said!

AlexF (User):

Corporate answer to "when you want to upgrade OS" is always "never", and answer to "when you want to upgrade hardware" is the same.

There's no value in this article except clicks for APC which I am happy to provide (thanks to ABP plugin).

EggLet (User):

haha '3'013 wow I didn't know Windows 7 was destine to last so long