Microsoft: Fast start for Vista in businesses
Posted by Steven Parker on 01 October 2006 - 13:05 · 44 comments & 10993 views
About the Author
Full name: Steven Parker
Forum name: Neobond
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Steven Parker
Forum name: Neobond
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
(1 reply)
#1 Posted by LTD on 01 Oct 2006 - 13:13
- We'll see, but that's enough baloney to make a sandwich. 20% after a year at Vista's prices and system requirements. Riiiight.
I'm gonna remember that -
#2 Posted by ShiZZa on 01 Oct 2006 - 13:36
- Well DirectX 10 is one thing that will force you to upgrade. Alot of companys as example buy new versions of things like AutoCAD and 3DS Max every other year. So if MS can swing AutoDesk into making a version that DX10 Only that automaticly makes it Vista Only.
Laptop users are the other benfit personaly. They didn't say at release but these new ReadyBoost Drives rock.
-
(2 replies)
#3 Posted by Pug on 01 Oct 2006 - 14:59
- "Vista is built for businesses," Goldberg said.
Huh ? -
#3.1 Posted by Primetime2006 on 01 Oct 2006 - 17:15
- Quote - Pug said @ #3"Vista is built for businesses," Goldberg said.
Huh ?
What part of that statement don't you get? Have you actually used the OS? There's lots of things that would benefit my business right off the bat.
But I think MS is getting ahead of themselves with the whole 20% thing. At our workplace, we are all Windows XP, but I see a few Windows 2000 systems popping up now and again. I've only been working there a few months, so that leads me to believe that they most likely just started upgrading to Windows XP and this is 5 years after the OS came out and my place of work is a huge multi million dollar corporation. -
#3.2 Posted by Pug on 01 Oct 2006 - 20:56
- Quote - Primetime2006 said @ #3.1
What part of that statement don't you get? Have you actually used the OS? There's lots of things that would benefit my business right off the bat.
Yeah I'm in the beta tester team, so yeah, I tested it. I try to install every build that comes out. I just want to know which business features included in Vista are much better than the one in XP. Like how a business would really benefit going from XP to Vista.
-
(4 replies)
#4 Posted by Tomo on 01 Oct 2006 - 15:14
- No business is going to adopt Vista until its proven to be reliable and stable, something that takes a bit of time
-
#4.1 Posted by RealFduch on 01 Oct 2006 - 19:16
- Our company uses Windows 3.11.
Recently we thought about upgrading to more modern Windows 95, but after we made some research in internet we found out it's still not enough reliable and stable. So we decided to wait a bit until it's stable. -
#4.2 Posted by RiVaLSSJ on 02 Oct 2006 - 03:40
- Quote - RealFduch said @ #4.1Our company uses Windows 3.11.
What!? Companies actually use that still - I'm surprised
-
#4.3 Posted by PCyr on 02 Oct 2006 - 04:20
- I saw in a TD Bank a 3.11 machine; I think they only used it for the books people used before bank cards.
-
#4.4 Posted by Tomo on 02 Oct 2006 - 12:25
- Quote - RealFduch said @ #1.1Our company uses Windows 3.11.
Recently we thought about upgrading to more modern Windows 95, but after we made some research in internet we found out it's still not enough reliable and stable. So we decided to wait a bit until it's stable.
You are going to waiting a very long time for Windows 95 to become stable! lol
-
#5 Posted by betasp on 01 Oct 2006 - 15:33
- Hardware within business will have to catch up before any upgrade will take place. The company I work for has over 20,000 desktops, few of which can run Vista at the "glass" level (including IT). Yes, one day we will be Vista, but I bet it won't be for 3-4 years (at least that is the target timeline set forth in our last manager meeting).
-
(4 replies)
#6 Posted by Ruciz on 01 Oct 2006 - 15:37
- lol, most companies I know are still using windows 2000. Only school or high demand businesses that need cutting edge technology to further gain marketshare have bothered to move up to windows XP.. I doubt that any business will spend $400 to upgrade to a buggy and unstable OS.
-
#6.1 Posted by Primetime2006 on 01 Oct 2006 - 17:17
- Quote - Ruciz said @ #6lol, most companies I know are still using windows 2000. Only school or high demand businesses that need cutting edge technology to further gain marketshare have bothered to move up to windows XP.. I doubt that any business will spend $400 to upgrade to a buggy and unstable OS.
Who said it was buggy and unstable? Have you actually used the OS recently? Get a clue.
Only school or high demand businesses have moved up to Windows XP? You really don't have a grasp on the industry at all do you?
Even $400 per upgrade is not likely. A lot of businesses get a volume discount.
Go back to school. -
#6.2 Posted by RiVaLSSJ on 02 Oct 2006 - 03:43
- Quote - Primetime2006 said @ #6.1Go back to school.
No need for attacks like this. You always have the clue don't you - you've never been wrong? -
#6.3 Posted by Hak Foo on 02 Oct 2006 - 05:32
- Quote - Primetime2006 said @ #6.1
Who said it was buggy and unstable? Have you actually used the OS recently? Get a clue.
Let's see:
5600 x64 bluescreened during install and once during less than a week of use. I gave up on it for want of driver support.
5734 (or whatever that next public one was) x86 hangs on shutdoiwn EVERY TIME.
The 2000SP4 install on the same hardware doesn't. My biggest "error" with 2000 was that it took longer than I expected to detect hardware, so I rebooted, assuming it had hung.
And that's even neglecting driver and software support, which for x86 is servicable-to-poor and for x64 is a complete joke.
Driver support could be a deal-breaker, especially if there are firms who are running hardware that has "irreplacable" drivers (i. e. the manufacturer is out of business or wants to use a lack of support to force customers into replacing gear) -
#6.4 Posted by dangel on 02 Oct 2006 - 14:36
- Quote - Hak Foo said @ #6.3Quote - Primetime2006 said @ #6.1
Who said it was buggy and unstable? Have you actually used the OS recently? Get a clue.
Let's see:
5600 x64 bluescreened during install and once during less than a week of use. I gave up on it for want of driver support.
5734 (or whatever that next public one was) x86 hangs on shutdoiwn EVERY TIME.
The 2000SP4 install on the same hardware doesn't. My biggest "error" with 2000 was that it took longer than I expected to detect hardware, so I rebooted, assuming it had hung.
And that's even neglecting driver and software support, which for x86 is servicable-to-poor and for x64 is a complete joke.
Driver support could be a deal-breaker, especially if there are firms who are running hardware that has "irreplacable" drivers (i. e. the manufacturer is out of business or wants to use a lack of support to force customers into replacing gear)
5600 Running here for 3 weeks, not a hitch (32bit mind). x64 should be avoided for the time being as third party drivers suck (hardly MS' fault). I'm actually using it full time to develop our product on. The majority of feedback on RC1 (5600) is very positive and even the inquirer liked the latest build (ye gads!
.
-
#7 Posted by simsie on 01 Oct 2006 - 15:40
- My school finished making all the computers XP september 2005. Before then it was when departments bought new pc's or when a department requested it speifically (ict i think was the only one)
-
#8 Posted by Yogurth on 01 Oct 2006 - 16:13
- Talk about delusional ^^
-
#9 Posted by ironsight2000 on 01 Oct 2006 - 16:23
- the high school i was going to was still on windows 95 when i graduated and they came prebuilt with XP installed
-
(1 reply)
#10 Posted by M118LR on 01 Oct 2006 - 16:27
- The version of Vista designed for big business is Enterprise and will not be available to the public for sale. It has extra built in security features for companies that deal with sensitive material. For Laptops you can encrypt the entire hard drive and then lock it down with Bit-Locker in case it gets misplaced.
-
#11 Posted by stgeorge on 01 Oct 2006 - 16:34
- I work for a company that has 250,000 PC's, and about 90% of them are on Win 2000. This year the approval for XP came through, but only for new PC's (through attrition). The plan for Vista is to adopt the same strategy in 2011/2012 assuming all PC's have been replaced by XP by then (ie, only new PC's would get Vista). Note that we forced Microsoft to extend our support contract on XP for the next 5 years. I expect that most Fortune 500 companies are doing the same thing.
-
#12 Posted by Windam on 01 Oct 2006 - 16:44
- I wouldn't be surprised if it when up to 30%; Vista is just too good.
-
#13 Posted by Chicane-UK on 01 Oct 2006 - 17:00
- I can tell you now that my campus isn't even THINKING about Vista yet.. I worry that Microsoft miiight have got this one wrong!
-
#14 Posted by EduardValencia on 01 Oct 2006 - 17:36
- i hope so,but in fact it will need a very marketing strategy to sell it,along with it
-
(4 replies)
#15 Posted by Johnny105 on 01 Oct 2006 - 17:37
- Contrary to MS claims, Vista is built for Gamers...not businesses. Upgrading to Vista means MAJOR investment in new hardware. Take where I work for example: we have 5000 plus desktop units, 95%, conservative estimate, with 256mb system ram and 8mb video cards. Clearly unable to run any form of Vista. I suspect this scenario is common throughout most industries. The likely probability is that MOST businesses will take eons to upgrade because of the draconian hardware requirements.
-
#15.1 Posted by billyea on 01 Oct 2006 - 17:54
- and that's why we have windows vista basic UI right?
fact is, Vista can run on the same machines running XP just without the shiny glass interface that the companies don't need anyway -
#15.2 Posted by Johnny105 on 01 Oct 2006 - 18:17
- Quote - billyea said @ #15.1and that's why we have windows vista basic UI right?
fact is, Vista can run on the same machines running XP just without the shiny glass interface that the companies don't need anyway
That, my friend, is clearly not true. Vista will NOT run on a machine with 256mb ram...any form of Vista, including the most basic. Presently, XP runs beautifully on machines with 128mb of system ram. You need to check your facts before you post misleading info. -
#15.3 Posted by billyea on 01 Oct 2006 - 18:24
- Quote - Johnny105 said @ #15.2Quote - billyea said @ #15.1and that's why we have windows vista basic UI right?
fact is, Vista can run on the same machines running XP just without the shiny glass interface that the companies don't need anyway
That, my friend, is clearly not true. Vista will NOT run on a machine with 256mb ram...any form of Vista, including the most basic. Presently, XP runs beautifully on machines with 128mb of system ram. You need to check your facts before you post misleading info.
well okay I think I read something wrong so thanks for clearing it up
-
(1 reply)
#16 Posted by excalpius on 01 Oct 2006 - 18:46
- the MS marketing goon is just trying to help keep his job and bolster his stock price. My expectation is that, due to the now mandatory system replacement dongle requirement for Vista, Microsoft will see a MUCH slower adoption rate for Vista than they did with XP.
Think about it. It made sense to upgrade lots of Windows 2000 and Windows 98 machines to Vista. Today, however, I won't even be upgrading the machines I have now that are capable of running Vista. It is simply too expensive, contains a ton of things I don't like/need/trust (WGA, new DRM(s), "trusted" computing, god knows what else), and offers to the general consumer nothing obviously of interest/need except for the snazzy interface.
So, I'll be doing what I am recommending to all my clients, family, friends, etc. - re: when I buy a new machine, it'll be Vista, PCI/X, SLI, etc.
I expect Vista's sales curve to be very, very tied to the sales of new computers...period.
-
#17 Posted by bobbba on 01 Oct 2006 - 19:24
- There seems to be very little in vista for business. I certainly expect organisations (especially public sector) that are sensitive to expenditure to only adopt vista after several years when the cost of hardware to run vista well has fallen.
-
#18 Posted by WinMonKey on 01 Oct 2006 - 19:32
- You all know why it will be adopted right ? Cause XP has been out for soo dawm long, I love how MS tries to take things that naturalley happen and turn them into something media worthy LOL
-
#19 Posted by Croquant on 01 Oct 2006 - 22:17
- Wow. That's some good weed they're smoking over at the MS spin doctor offices.
-
#20 Posted by pallavsuri on 01 Oct 2006 - 22:21
- noway is this going to happen!!!!!
vista adoption faster than XP?? yea sure if they start distribting new pc and vista for free definately.
forrrrrrget it otherwise MS, as such vista is a big mess (atleast till 572
-
#21 Posted by coolvi on 01 Oct 2006 - 23:11
- Uh...10% and 20% in 2008 are quite logical numbers.
Most companies tend to skip a version because upgrading operating system every three years just isn't realistic unless the primary business practice is software-related (hint: most of that 10%...). When Windows 2000 came out, many companies adopted it to replace Windows 95 and NT 3.51/4.0. Windows XP wasn't a big improvement over 2000, so many companies held on for a little longer. But it took Microsoft almost half a decade to release the next version, now with the EoL for 2000 nearing and XP's not-so-ordinary life story (e.g. Blaster), is it so hard to make the decision?
-
#22 Posted by cheesegoduk on 02 Oct 2006 - 02:02
- I wonder what MS are smoking......
Many Businesses will not deploy a new OS until it has been out for at least a year. Of course they will test the OS in the meantime on a few systems, but thats all. Tons of software will be unsupported by vendors on Vista, eg A Software vendor won't have it certified for Vista, so they won't support it, leaving the business SOL if something goes wrong.
Also many "Business" class systems will not have anything above 256/512mb ram max and I doubt many systems have decent GPU's. I work in a school thats currently being refurbished and we've ensured that all our new systems come with semi decent cards ready for Vista and 2GB of ram.
As for deployment, even in a school where we aren't required to provide 24/7 uptime(tho of course we do :cool We won't be running Vista on anything other than our work laptops which can easily be trashed and reimaged with XP if something went wrong.
Tho all that said I believe that Office 2007 will be a bigger challenge than Vista for deployment, as it is so different than what users are used to(Ribbons, ugh)
-
#23 Posted by hardgiant on 02 Oct 2006 - 05:42
- Early on the sales department was saying 400 million installs of vista in 2 years time and most would be premium and ultimate versions.
It took XP 4 or 5 years to reach those numbers and it was a bigger jump.
Most home users will upgrade when they buy a new PC.
-
#24 Posted by Wiggz on 02 Oct 2006 - 07:37
- For my two penneth, money talks.
The only way they are going to be able to reach the figure they have stated (in my opinion) is to lower their start and upgrade prices for the product.
At the end of the day, as many people have eluded to, the features in Vista are not groundbreaking in terms of business development. WinFS (new file structure) for one was dropped from the feature list. Something that would have had more meaning to businesses due to the increase or perhaps supposed increase in security.
Vista is not a massive leap in terms of general GUI, and inovation (for the general user). I would have though Office 2007 would be causing more of a stir, simply due to the level of training required to use the new interface.
I think MS is making a bold move in both product lines. I have to be honest and say I'm not sure it will come off this time. The have been the front runners for inovation in the IT industry for many years, bu have managed to keep the same sort of interface. Whilst this managed to keep customers (due to the amount of 3rd party programs that adopted the same style to win market share), it has also brainwashed them. The occasional user now will not accept an OS, or an Office application that is not easily picked up and used out of the box.
It was always going to be a problem changing interface, which, as I said, will provide more of an obstacle with Office 2007 than Vista.
-
#25 Posted by wicker_man on 02 Oct 2006 - 07:52
- Businesses will jump onto Vista bandwagon in two cases:
1. When they are having a hardware refresh.
2. Only if Vista has close to 100% compatibility with the software of a particular business.
Having said that, a lot of businesses might prefer XP over Vista during hardware refresh due to its bigger software and drivers compatibility, etc.
-
(1 reply)
#26 Posted by ShiZZa on 02 Oct 2006 - 17:34
- LOL who would want to pay the cost for extented out of life support services for the OS. I could maybe understand Server or a back office app like SQL / Exchange. Do you know how much those contracts cost. Were talking 6-7 figures on avg. You could buy your upgrades for that price. And who says a company needs to run GLASS on there desktops. Alot of developers like WCF / WPF and those are some more things that might force you to use Vista if you want 100% functionality from those products.
-
#26.1 Posted by stgeorge on 03 Oct 2006 - 00:15
- You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Our contract with Microsoft is 9 digits and lasts 10 years. We get Vista on day one. We simply won't install it. And we don't pay per unit prices for Windows or Office. No current application requires WCF/WPF and no future application that claims to need those technologies would get approved. My input is considered when these decisions are made, and I am strongly against Vista because it provides no new technology. The killer argument? The fact that we would need to set up hundreds of dedicated WGA servers to support 250k machines "phoning home" for validation every 30 days.
Twelve months after the release of Vista, Microsoft expects that usage share of the oft-delayed operating system in businesses will be double that of XP a year after it shipped, said Brad Goldberg, general manager for Windows product management at the software maker.
"Vista is built for businesses," Goldberg said. "We're giving businesses the tools they need to get out of the gate faster with Vista...Our goal is to have twice as fast deployment of Vista than for any other operating system."
Microsoft declined to give its own figures on Windows XP's usage percentages, and instead referred to research by IDC. According to the analyst company, XP was installed on about 10 percent of enterprise PCs after a year. That would put the goal for Vista at 20 percent.