Ballmer tells companies to upgrade from XP

CEO of Microsoft Corporation, Steve Ballmer, has warned companies to upgrade from Windows XP, or else they will face anger from employees. The reason for this is because, according to Steve, "If you deploy a four or five-year old operating system today, most people will ask their boss why the heck they don't have the stuff they have at home".

Many of you know that many companies chose to stick on Windows XP when Vista was released, due to poor driver support on Vista, and the fact that XP did everything they needed. However, PC World states that 31 percent of IT decision-makers said they are beginning the switch to Windows Vista. Never-the-less, Ballmer admitted that compatibility issues have hindered Vista's progress.

Windows Vista is now at SP1, with SP2 on the horizon, but it seems a strange time for Ballmer to urge companies to switch to it now that Windows 7 isn't far away. Additionally, with the news that Microsoft is offering discounts for upgrades from XP to 7, it seems a rather poor time to upgrade.

Ballmer also said, "Our enterprise customers basically are pretty happy with what we did with Windows Vista, with one notable exception, which we needed to do to improve security, which was to break compatibility".

What do you guys think? Upgrade from XP now to keep employees happy, or wait it out until Windows 7?

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

UK spent 6.6 billion on new ID's, didnt buy one card reader

Next Story

Microsoft listens, changes UAC behavior in Windows 7

79 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Did I forget to mention that that one command will upgrade all the software, as well as the operating system while maintaining your previous settings. That means it will upgrade open office (word, excel,powerpoint), firefox(internet), evolution(email), pidgin(aim,msn,yahoo, etc.), gimp(photoshop), all the programs that come free with ubuntu. Along with the thousands of free programs you can install right from the menu under applications/add&remove.
No spyware, No virus. Quality software.
Ubuntu:Easy, Free, Fast, Secure.

Fanboy.

XP is an old operating system, and companies should definitely look at upgrading, whether it be to Vista or 7, there are definite advantages to having something that isn't 7 years old....

Webworldx said,
Fanboy.

XP is an old operating system, and companies should definitely look at upgrading, whether it be to Vista or 7, there are definite advantages to having something that isn't 7 years old....

Yeah...uh...UNIX shoots that little argument right out of the water...

We upgraded from NT4 to XP (SP1) around about the time the XP SP2 came out - I asked why we didn't have SP2 installed at the same time and was told that a SP would take at least 6 months to test before rolling out.

We have SP2 now and no plans for Vista that I'm aware of. We also use IE6 with no plans to upgrade.

Key IT personnel are busy doing other projects that add value rather than spending the money to upgrade for the sake of upgrading. That's what it comes down to in big enterprises - the bottom line and if it aint broke don't fix it.

All you guys are hilarious. Talking about all your upgrade problems.
All its takes in one line in the terminal.
sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade.
Ubuntu:Easy, Free, Fast, Secure.
Open your minds people.
My whole company uses it, as well as my old school.

Intelman said,
I can't stand to use XP after Vista, I wish my employer would upgrade...

That's because you are no power user

Upgrading just because an employee "has it at home" isn't a good enough reason if any. I work in IT within a Health Service Environment and we use so many different and diverse custom applications that we cannot upgrade to windows vista, the compatibility issues are just too immense and too costly to cope with.
Example: Our X Ray imaging system won't work on Vista, do we a) upgrade and say to the X Ray department, sorry you can't do X Rays anymore. b) don't upgrade at all and stay with XP forever until it is no longer supported c) Microsoft work with us to resolve compatibility issues instead of trying to force new operating systems on us that the end user have at home.

Most companies have workstation with less that 1gb, because its fairly enough to 100% of the duty. Installing vista means to upgrade the machine (a costly measure) or to upgrade a memory (cheap but still a expensive), of course too purchasing a vista license (extra cost) and reinstalling and configuring the machine (cost x time lost). Not counting, a workstation usually haven't the best graphic card of the market, ideally a workstation (not for designer) have a embedded graphic card, a intel 94x igp for example.

So, for a company with 50 clients (a somethat tiny company), the cost to upgrade to vista is from $8000 - $20000 or around the same price to buy a bunch of expensive printer or the price to toss away those crt monitor and buy a brand new LCD screen, or to add new harddisk for every pc.

So, do you want vista, or a "office upgrade" ?.

Anyways, the switch from office 2003 to office 2007 was painful mainly because the "promised" new toolbar wasn't created for enterprise level but for home usage (dumb users).

Right now many are paying extra money to stay with WinXP because someone put it in their head that Vista will destroy their world. Unless you run the same list of crappy apps that freak out whenever MS releases a major patch (IE/SPs), there is nothing preventing a new PC from running Vista next to its XP counterparts. If you haven't virtualized those apps already then I don't know what to tell you.

I guarantee most companies wont upgrade to windows 7 when it comes out. If we're lucky maybe they'll go for XP finally...

I work at a company with 30,000 employees worldwide and a lot of the guys i work with are still stuck with windows 98 or 2000 on a 15" CRT. No idea how they put up with that. (I'm lucky and have xp and an lcd)

Our budget got slashed so we won't be upgrading to anything until 2012.

All the bugs in Windows 7 will be fixed and drivers will be updated and newer compatible software versions will be out. Maybe the economy will recovery some by then as well.

Windows XP is a nice mature operating system at this point for running expensive niche software.

That's a pretty obvious thing to say... that if you have a 2-version old OS at work it might seem dated compared to having the latest at home. But as already stated, upgrading isn't a simple decision to spend the money. IT Departments must spend a lot of time planning before making the move.

It would look more foolish to jump blindly into Vista or Windows 7 right away than to stick with XP until the move can be properly planned and executed.

Besides that, Windows 7 is selling itself. No need to push harder, Steve

I remember back in school we had to use Windows for Workgroups 3.11 while I was using Windows 98. I remember they had copies of Windows 95 but the IT teacher didn't want to install them as he was used to 3.11. So for one room with its own mini network, I set it up on there and the users were much happier.

Some IT managers may be putting their own preferences before that of the users...

I have a feeling that with today's job climate in the US now that most employees are more concerned with having a job than with what OS is at work. (Worse unemployment rate since 1974)

What do you think is more important to an office worker? Pretty windows, or speed? We have bulk per user licensing for whatever we get. So why spend $200,000.00+ for a new OS that will be outdated shortly, and then replace the many software title$ that they are using because they no longer work for new titles they will need to learn again?

So basically Ballmer wants to sell as many copies of Vista as possible, then turn around and say Upgrade again as soon as windows 7 is out. From a business standpoint I find it hard to believe anyone who is even remotely satisfied with XP or 2000 would consider upgrading to Vista now just to turn around and pay again to upgrade to Windows 7, MS really shot themselves in the foot here, as usual.

I work for a large retail chain in the UK and we've only just upgraded our workstations from NT to XP. Our tills still run NT, but they are talking about upgrading the workstations to Vista soon.

Exactly. Regardless of the discussion of Vista is a good OS or not, the fact is that for an office environment, there is not much advantage to upgrade to Vista. And you actually think that a system administrator would go to the pain of deploying Vista across the office and perhaps upgrade the hardware only for a new OS with no benefits regarding production? I'm not a system admin, but i don't think so.

LOL! Yes, many people have Vista at home now who have been using one of our over 4,000 computers with XP on it. Guess what they say: "Please do not install Vista on my machine". I hear this everyday. Why would we want to buy computers for NO REASON? What REAL benefit does Vista offer over XP in the workplace, other than the need for newer hardware and more drivers? This is nothing but a ploy for money.

lol.. one of the funniest things I've read in a while. No doubt they'll try and use the same rubbish line to scare companies off deploying Linux at work too.

off course , he well tell them to upgrade .

it is microsoft best interest after all (money to be gained )

Im starting to deploy vista to my new machines here now(not in any hurry though) - and yes i got those questions too...

I say stick to XP if it does the job. We talk about recession and all and here companies would spend thousands of dollars into upgrading a new operating system when the previous one works just fine. Additionally, wait till they roll out 7, once it's stable, switch.

If you analyze his statement from a business prescriptive, he is trying to make profit during hard times, I mean c'mon. That wasn't a well marketed statement.

I like the way he is trying to scare the IT departments to push out windows Vista because the employees might have Vista at home. What you have at home has nothing to do with what is used at work. Terrible sales pitch.

HAHA no kidding! Name me one thing you can do on Vista that you can't do on XP in an enterprise environment. It's all about $$ people! CEO's don't care if you have the latest and greatest OS, as long as the employee's are able to do their jobs that's the bottom line.

daz411 said,
HAHA no kidding! Name me one thing you can do on Vista that you can't do on XP in an enterprise environment. It's all about $$ people! CEO's don't care if you have the latest and greatest OS, as long as the employee's are able to do their jobs that's the bottom line.

Last product I completed used DirectX10. I don't think I could've done that in XP.
And no, it wasn't a game either...

He is right, I can't stand Xp now. When we got new computers a while backit was decided that we would get Xp, but I demanded Vista.

I'm am the only Vista user in the office

Lord Ba'al said,
Definitely wait for Windows 7, don't waste any money on that Vista junk.


Couldn't have said it any better!!

To that person above that says how IE7 is faster, more secure and more stable than IE6, what kind of low quality dope are you on?!! IE7 & IE8 both suck compared to IE6. Both those versions are to dumb to remeber usernames after a reboot even. I get sick and tired of having to type that in all the time.

A person or company would have to be totally brain dead to upgrade to Vista now.

cork1958 said,
Couldn't have said it any better!!

To that person above that says how IE7 is faster, more secure and more stable than IE6, what kind of low quality dope are you on?!! IE7 & IE8 both suck compared to IE6. Both those versions are to dumb to remeber usernames after a reboot even. I get sick and tired of having to type that in all the time.

A person or company would have to be totally brain dead to upgrade to Vista now.


IE7 is more secure than IE6 though it happens to be slower at times.

IE8 is faster than IE7 (so far), and it is also more secure than IE7.

Whatever issues you have with IE not remembering user names, it is an issue with your browser and/or system configuration, not the browser itself.

Exactly, as head of an IT dept myself, we will never upgrade to Vista with 7 being so close. In fact we won't even upgrade to 7 until at least SP1. XP works just fine for us and keeps our IT budget in check!

cork1958 said,
To that person above that says how IE7 is faster, more secure and more stable than IE6, what kind of low quality dope are you on?!! IE7 & IE8 both suck compared to IE6. Both those versions are to dumb to remeber usernames after a reboot even. I get sick and tired of having to type that in all the time.


Fail.

bob_c_b said,
You are getting tedious, Vista works fine for most people, sorry you had bad luck with it.

XP works for even MORE people.

Lord Ba'al said,
Definitely wait for Windows 7, don't waste any money on that Vista junk.

And what do you think 7 is? It's got a hell of a lot of Vista in it.

FrozenEclipse said,
And what do you think 7 is? It's got a hell of a lot of Vista in it.

A refined version of Vista. It is possible to logically hate Vista and like Windows 7, despite Win 7 being based from Vista.

Goddamnit, I'm trying to present logic to someone on the Internet. Why am I bothering?

Ah, typical Ballmer! Demanding consumers to upgrade now when a new version is not that far away (7 is already near the RC stage and it just might be RTM'ed by the end of June). Don't expect that many businesses to fall for this crap, LOL!

So its better to jump to a new OS? 7 will probably have bugs and you have to reformat to get there from XP. Plus you need to take the time to retrain all your staff and make sure all your applications are compatible. Wouldn't it be better to upgrade to Vista, which is heading into SP2 (so very few bugs), and find out your compatibility issues now, then make a small jump to 7 after it hits SP1?

If I had to manage a large company, I would NEVER take it straight to an RTM release. I'd want at least 6 months worth of feedback after release to make an informed decision, and would probably delay deployment until after the first, or perhaps even the second service pack. I'd estimate that Windows 7 will take well beyond two years to become close to mainstream in IT-heavy businesses, because beyond the latest and greatest technology, a responsible manager needs reliability.

Relativity_17 said,
If I had to manage a large company, I would NEVER take it straight to an RTM release. I'd want at least 6 months worth of feedback after release to make an informed decision, and would probably delay deployment until after the first, or perhaps even the second service pack. I'd estimate that Windows 7 will take well beyond two years to become close to mainstream in IT-heavy businesses, because beyond the latest and greatest technology, a responsible manager needs reliability.

Actually I have the 7 beta running on a IBM R40 Thinkpad with a 1.4GHz Pentium 4M, 32 MB vid card, and 1GB of RAM and it runs just fine, Vista choked on the same laptop to the point I rolled it back to XP. This is a major step for MS, image 7 on a system that is only a year or two old.

schubb said,
Actually I have the 7 beta running on a IBM R40 Thinkpad with a 1.4GHz Pentium 4M, 32 MB vid card, and 1GB of RAM and it runs just fine, Vista choked on the same laptop to the point I rolled it back to XP. This is a major step for MS, image 7 on a system that is only a year or two old.

The R40 is hardly a year or two old They were released in 2004, and those specs you posted certainly match a machine of that age Don't get me wrong, that is great that 7 runs on it! However, it is a machine that I would never have put Vista on. That would be like putting vista on a Latitude D400...very painful.

Upgrading is a complicated issue. For example, the department I work for is still running IE6. I had to request an upgrade to IE7 on my computer. I was told by another employee that the general rule of thumb is to stay "one version behind". I don't really understand it, seeing the IE7 is faster, more secure, and has less bugs than 6. I feel the same way about Vista as they just ordered a new Core 2 Duo computer and put XP on it. So they paid for a new computer, which comes with a Vista license and then paid more to use an older OS. Hilarious.

When it comes to Vista vs XP, I would say stay with XP if you need to, but upgrade to Vista on any new computer purchases. There is no reason to downgrade to XP on a new computer. I'd wager that a huge majority of programs are compatible with Vista now and the same for hardware. Plus, Vista is far more secure than XP which should help protect your corporate network. The speed difference of Vista on a new computer vs XP on an old computer should be negligible at best.

Finally, since 7 is basically built off Vista, companies could jump to Vista now and get compatibility issues and learning issues worked out. Then, when 7 gets its first service pack, the upgrade to 7 will go much easier. (I say wait for the service pack because any new OS has bugs to begin with.)

Chrono951 said,
It seems to me that a lot of IT departments are just lazy and don't want to change anything. Although I would bet that a good amount of employees are scared of change too. For example, the department I work for is still running IE6. I had to request an upgrade to IE7 on my computer. I was told by another employee that the general rule of thumb is to stay "one version behind". I don't really understand it, seeing the IE7 is faster, more secure, and has less bugs than 6. I feel the same way about Vista as they just ordered a new Core 2 Duo computer and put XP on it. So they paid for a new computer, which comes with a Vista license and then paid more to use an older OS. Hilarious.

When it comes to Vista vs XP, I would say stay with XP if you need to, but upgrade to Vista on any new computer purchases. There is no reason to downgrade to XP on a new computer. I'd wager that a huge majority of programs are compatible with Vista now and the same for hardware. Plus, Vista is far more secure than XP which should help protect your corporate network. The speed difference of Vista on a new computer vs XP on an old computer should be negligible at best.

Finally, since 7 is basically built off Vista, companies could jump to Vista now and get compatibility issues and learning issues worked out. Then, when 7 gets its first service pack, the upgrade to 7 will go much easier. (I say wait for the service pack because any new OS has bugs to begin with.)

Wait, did I read that correctly? Lazy? I don't suppose you have ever been involved in a mass upgrade of an OS before? When I was in the USAF I was involved in the mass upgrades to Windows 2000 Pro and even Windows XP Pro. This was for several thousand computers. It took forever to do and the time it took to resolve issues experienced (failed upgrades, software breaking) was absurd.

On the other hand, Windows XP works so why would anyone NEED to upgrade? It's secure if you use proper security measures with your Group Policy. The big problem is dumb developers making software dependent upon users having local admin rights.

Lazy...that's just funny. Maybe you should work in a large enterprise corporation instead of smaller companies?

Chrono951 said,
It seems to me that a lot of IT departments are just lazy and don't want to change anything. Although I would bet that a good amount of employees are scared of change too. For example, the department I work for is still running IE6. I had to request an upgrade to IE7 on my computer. I was told by another employee that the general rule of thumb is to stay "one version behind". I don't really understand it, seeing the IE7 is faster, more secure, and has less bugs than 6. I feel the same way about Vista as they just ordered a new Core 2 Duo computer and put XP on it. So they paid for a new computer, which comes with a Vista license and then paid more to use an older OS. Hilarious.

When it comes to Vista vs XP, I would say stay with XP if you need to, but upgrade to Vista on any new computer purchases. There is no reason to downgrade to XP on a new computer. I'd wager that a huge majority of programs are compatible with Vista now and the same for hardware. Plus, Vista is far more secure than XP which should help protect your corporate network. The speed difference of Vista on a new computer vs XP on an old computer should be negligible at best.

Finally, since 7 is basically built off Vista, companies could jump to Vista now and get compatibility issues and learning issues worked out. Then, when 7 gets its first service pack, the upgrade to 7 will go much easier. (I say wait for the service pack because any new OS has bugs to begin with.)

If it works why fix it, why create a problem where there isn't currently one, if something is doing the job and working correctly then there is no point in placing money into something that might not work.

Does IE6 work for you, does XP work for you? my guess is yes!

General rule of thumb is that companies are 1 version behind because its 'usually' more stable.

I don't see people upgrading when XP is working fine and with all the economic crisis going on ATM.

IE6 did not work for me, hence why I requested an upgrade. Most people in the department have issues with IE6 or XP, but the IT department here is really too lazy to care. I never said all IT departments are like that.

On a fiscal note, why are you spending time & money on downgrading to XP on new computers? I don't understand that. If you are so strapped for cash, you shouldn't be buring new computers to begin with, but if you do, leave Vista on it. Save that downgrade money. If your currently using XP, maybe look into deploying Vista soon, you don't need to make a company wide jump, just be ready as XP is slowly being killed off. Besides what people think, Vista and 7 are extremely similar. Don't expect to hold onto XP and then leap to the promised land of 7. I gurantee you, you will be disappointed.

Finally, I love the mantra that big companies have. Eventually you will need to upgrade from XP. You will need to go through those mass upgrades and problems. Wouldn't it be better to slowly roll out a new OS, instead of doing thousands of computers at a time? Vista and XP should work fine on the network together and compatiblity at this point in time is almost a moot point. Plus, you can spread out the cost of the upgrade over time, instead of one giant bill.

If it works, why bother upgrading? If your car runs, why bother buying a new one? If your computer works, why get a faster one? If your copy of Madden 2004 works, why get the latest one? etc, etc, etc.

Chrono951 said,
IE6 did not work for me, hence why I requested an upgrade. Most people in the department have issues with IE6 or XP, but the IT department here is really too lazy to care. I never said all IT departments are like that.

On a fiscal note, why are you spending time & money on downgrading to XP on new computers? I don't understand that. If you are so strapped for cash, you shouldn't be buring new computers to begin with, but if you do, leave Vista on it. Save that downgrade money. If your currently using XP, maybe look into deploying Vista soon, you don't need to make a company wide jump, just be ready as XP is slowly being killed off. Besides what people think, Vista and 7 are extremely similar. Don't expect to hold onto XP and then leap to the promised land of 7. I gurantee you, you will be disappointed.

Finally, I love the mantra that big companies have. Eventually you will need to upgrade from XP. You will need to go through those mass upgrades and problems. Wouldn't it be better to slowly roll out a new OS, instead of doing thousands of computers at a time? Vista and XP should work fine on the network together and compatiblity at this point in time is almost a moot point. Plus, you can spread out the cost of the upgrade over time, instead of one giant bill.

If it works, why bother upgrading? If your car runs, why bother buying a new one? If your computer works, why get a faster one? If your copy of Madden 2004 works, why get the latest one? etc, etc, etc.

IE6 does work without a problem. Not sure how it wouldn't work for you. Most companies will be restricting internet access anyway so the browser isn't so insecure.

Fiscal note of downgrading? Who is downgrading to Windows XP? Corporations will have Windows XP volume licensing and Windows XP is already installed, especially via an image like Ghost or SCCM image deployment. I am beginning to wonder what level of experience you have...if any.

Regarding upgrading, it was done in phases but there are always deadlines. Nothing is more fun for tech support then doing their usual job and having a mass OS upgrade rollout on top of it. Where do you pull that "lazy" comment out of? Honestly? What is the largest corporation you have worked for?

offroadaaron said,

If it works why fix it, why create a problem where there isn't currently one, if something is doing the job and working correctly then there is no point in placing money into something that might not work.

Does IE6 work for you, does XP work for you? my guess is yes!

General rule of thumb is that companies are 1 version behind because its 'usually' more stable.

I don't see people upgrading when XP is working fine and with all the economic crisis going on ATM.


Exactly. In a work environment, stability and security are paramount.

Thirtythree said,
IE6 does work without a problem. Not sure how it wouldn't work for you. Most companies will be restricting internet access anyway so the browser isn't so insecure.

Who says he's part of "most companies"? And how can you possibly defend IE6?

Thirtythree said,
I am beginning to wonder what level of experience you have...if any.
...
Honestly? What is the largest corporation you have worked for?


Why do you assume my experience to begin with? Just because I'm not head of the IT department for a company with 30,000 people doesn't mean I can't make an opinion on a technology blog. I never stated experience. I only mentioned that in my experience, with the present department I work for, in the present day and time, at this exact moment, the IT department seems bloated, and ineffecient, as well as lazy.

If your company works great, congrats! Pat yourself on the back! Does it mean every IT department is great? No. Does my comment mean every IT department is lazy? No! Are their lazy IT departments that have little to no concern for the end user? Yes!

Finally, just so everyone will shutup about it, I'm modifing my original comment to something that can't be bent out of proportion.

Thirtythree said,
Corporations will have Windows XP volume licensing and Windows XP is already installed, especially via an image like Ghost or SCCM image deployment.

You can't just buy a new machine and slap a ghost image of XP on it. Even if you're using a 'universal' image, the machine still needs drivers. If there are no XP drivers available for the machine, you'll have a hard time imaging it. Slowly but surely more and more machines will not have XP drivers available, and corporations will be forced to upgrade anyway.

And good luck getting support from a company like Dell or HP if you buy machines with one OS on, and then downgrade/upgrade to a different OS. It becomes a nightmare and a time waster. We ran into that issue last year with 95 D630s that we bought with Vista on. The division chickened out the week before they were to be deployed and requested XP on them for one more year. Not a problem, since we had an XP D630 image built. However, the BT card was OS specific. Called Dell...they could offer us no help because we had downgraded the OS.

As someone pointed out, the jump from XP to 7 is going to be no picnic. It's going to be the same time consuming process that jumping from XP to Vista was. Or jumping from 98 to XP was way back when. I was part of the 98 to XP upgrade, and I engineered our XP to Vista upgrade. In another 6 months or so, I'll start prototyping the transition from Vista to 7. I have a feeling it will be a lot less painful than the last two I have done!

As for IE6, it's time has passed. For the most part, corporations keep it around because some web based/proprietary apps they have don't work with IE, and they either don't want to pay to upgrade them or don't want to find alternatives. I've run into that as well, with Cisco Callmanager. Only the issue is not with IE6. The issue is with IE8 and possibly Java. I have yet to narrow down the culprit. All I know is that I cannot access CCadmin using IE8. Whenever I need to make a change in the phone system, I either remote directly into the callmanager (which is still on Windows 2000) or into a Win2k8 server to use IE7. I'm waiting until the final of IE8 hits and the first or second release of Java after it to determine what the cause is. It may just be that it's time for a Callmanager upgrade. But those are the types of problems that keep corporations running older browsers. It's certainly not for security sake. You can lock down IE7 just as easily as you can IE6. But when that upgrade breaks things, IT departments usually back away from them. In our case, we've had a policy in place for quite some time now to only use off the shelf software (nothing modified or programmed just for us), which has made upgrades on everything from operating systems to browsers to versions of Java a lot easier to test and implement. In fact, the only proprietary apps we have left are a couple of database front ends, though they'll be going away soon as well.

Chrono951 said,
There is no reason to downgrade to XP on a new computer. I'd wager that a huge majority of programs are compatible with Vista now and the same for hardware.

Most are, but not all. Especially not the custom network/security stuff certain businesses run. Just because Vista works "ok" on a home network doesn't mean it's ok for everything.

It's also easier to fix XP than Vista. Businesses don't like to support mixed environments, it complicates things significantly.

offroadaaron said,
Does IE6 work for you, does XP work for you? my guess is yes!

It works. But does it work properly.

It's a trade-off. By those of you in the IT department, who refuse to allocate reasonable resources to keeping out of ancient and dated technology, us web developers easily make up for time you don't spend, in time we have to spend writing crappy workarounds and spend a vast majority of time testing in IE6.

The Burning Rom said,
You can't just buy a new machine and slap a ghost image of XP on it. Even if you're using a 'universal' image, the machine still needs drivers. If there are no XP drivers available for the machine, you'll have a hard time imaging it. Slowly but surely more and more machines will not have XP drivers available, and corporations will be forced to upgrade anyway.

Haha! We're not talking about advanced computers here. The basic Dell workstation will have everything onboard. Chipset drivers can be downloaded directly from Broadcom, Intel, etc.

The Burning Rom said,
And good luck getting support from a company like Dell or HP if you buy machines with one OS on, and then downgrade/upgrade to a different OS. It becomes a nightmare and a time waster. We ran into that issue last year with 95 D630s that we bought with Vista on. The division chickened out the week before they were to be deployed and requested XP on them for one more year. Not a problem, since we had an XP D630 image built. However, the BT card was OS specific. Called Dell...they could offer us no help because we had downgraded the OS.

Er, that's why you have IT tech support, whether internal or contracted. I am tech support for the company I work for. I resolve OS problems on my own, although they are rare due to the fact that we use Group Policy to lock down systems.

I use my DCSE to get things easy and quick from Dell.

The Burning Rom said,
As someone pointed out, the jump from XP to 7 is going to be no picnic. It's going to be the same time consuming process that jumping from XP to Vista was. Or jumping from 98 to XP was way back when. I was part of the 98 to XP upgrade, and I engineered our XP to Vista upgrade. In another 6 months or so, I'll start prototyping the transition from Vista to 7. I have a feeling it will be a lot less painful than the last two I have done! :)

XP to 7 will be a lot easier than it would had we went from XP to Vista...given most systems have 1GB RAM. We would have had to spend tens of thousands of dollars on memory upgrades.

Thirtythree said,
Haha! We're not talking about advanced computers here. The basic Dell workstation will have everything onboard. Chipset drivers can be downloaded directly from Broadcom, Intel, etc.


Er, that's why you have IT tech support, whether internal or contracted. I am tech support for the company I work for. I resolve OS problems on my own, although they are rare due to the fact that we use Group Policy to lock down systems.

I use my DCSE to get things easy and quick from Dell.


XP to 7 will be a lot easier than it would had we went from XP to Vista...given most systems have 1GB RAM. We would have had to spend tens of thousands of dollars on memory upgrades.

Not everyone orders basic Dell workstations or basic Dell laptops. For example, we don't order anything with onboard video. And everything we order has to be wireless N. You missed my point either way. Eventually even Intel and Broadcom won't have those drivers available for XP.
-------------
You don't have IT Tech support for issues like I described above. Not EVERYTHING can be solved in house. If you're claiming everything can be, then I'm definitely wondering how diverse the environment that you work in is. I'm the systems administrator for the company I work for. But even I can't magically change the firmware on a BT card from Vista to XP if there's no firmware out there to download for the change. That's when you call the manufacturer. If you've switched OS's on the machine, they won't help. Simple as that. It's not something you can use your Dell Certification for either. Tried that as well. I'll give you another example where a call to the manufacturer was needed. We have a department that has USB microscopes. During our hardware testing phase before the Vista rollout we were having issues getting them to work with Vista. Their software worked, but not their drivers. I tried every driver the software package came with. Tried to force the XP driver in. I even tried every driver I could find on their support forums. Nothing worked. I then called the manufacturer. They told me the camera they used in that model (it was a few years old) did not support Vista, and that we'd have to send them in to have a new camera fitted, which we did, and they work great now. But how would you have solved that in house? How would an external contractor have solved that without calling? Would you have butchered 10 $1600 microscopes and fitted MS life cams in them?
-----------
Again, you argument about 1gb doesn't fit for everyone. All our systems that we went to Vista on had 1gb of RAM already. Some orders we've made over the years even had 2gb and 4gb. No additional cost required. Even the 4yr old systems that were in their last service year. Whenever we order a system, we account for future expansion and resource demands of software and operating systems. It's just good IT planning to do it that way. If you have a machine that doesn't have the specs to run Vista, don't deploy Vista to that machine. Deploy it to the machines that can handle it, and let the hardware cycle catch up and take care of the rest.

Thirtythree said,
On the other hand, Windows XP works so why would anyone NEED to upgrade? It's secure if you use proper security measures with your Group Policy. The big problem is dumb developers making software dependent upon users having local admin rights.


xp needs admin rights for EVERY F* SH*T and u say grouppolicy cures this? and therefore, even xp is the root of all evil, does his job justification enough to be on the safe side?

vista was forcing the devs to think with the time but vista wasn't adopted, thereore the old admin sh*t (i could count 10 apps in 1 second) method is still going on,,,in 2009!

somewhat funny isn't it...

Well, breaking compatibility doesn't come without issues. Start removing 9x and 2000 from the list, leaving XP, Server 2003, and Vista RTM.

I just got an email today ( no joke) from our IT dept that says we will not be updating to vista becasue it "offers no benefit to our current platform" and that the plan is to jump directly to windows 7 in 2010

bdsams said,
I just got an email today ( no joke) from our IT dept that says we will not be updating to vista becasue it "offers no benefit to our current platform" and that the plan is to jump directly to windows 7 in 2010


which actually is just vista in a new shape...and so on...and still in beta phase.


your IT dude is full of sh*t i say.

bdsams said,
I just got an email today ( no joke) from our IT dept that says we will not be updating to vista becasue it "offers no benefit to our current platform" and that the plan is to jump directly to windows 7 in 2010

And what will 7 give your company that Vista will not?

I'd strongly suggest upgrading to Vista first. just to get the kinks out. upgrading from XP to 7 will be just as difficult.

I think your IT manager is actually making a good choice here. I mean, why pay twice as much to get Vista and 7, when 7 will be available in a few months to a year?

TCLN Ryster said,
And what will 7 give your company that Vista will not?

they won't have to pay a second time for an OS upgrade that they don't really need? I'm guessing the only reason they are upgrading in 2010 is because XP will almost be out of support (no security patches will be issued) so they have to move on to maintain a secure work environment. And in 2010 why install Vista? Windows 7 will already be out and SP1 might even be out too by then.

It's more of a case where they don't have a choice to upgrade, otherwise they would most likely stay on XP, for most companies upgrading to Vista/7 has no benefits.