PDA

View Full Version : Vista not a priority for business



winmacguy
01-08-2007, 03:07 PM
July 30, 2007 (Computerworld) -- Fewer businesses are now planning to move to Windows Vista than seven months ago, according to a survey by patch management vendor PatchLink Corp., while more said they will either stick with the Windows they have, or turn to Linux or Mac OS X.
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9028478&source=NLT_AM&nlid=1

Maybe the tide is turning. ;)This from the US based Computer world magazine.

pctek
01-08-2007, 03:15 PM
Its not a priority round here either. Not one single person has wanted it on their new PCs, they have all asked for XP.
I have had the opposite though, people wanting me to install XP on Vista Pcs.

winmacguy
01-08-2007, 03:19 PM
With this news I would expect to see Microsoft's bottom line staying flat or declining from this point onwards. It would seem that they have become what IBM was in the 80's.

johcar
01-08-2007, 05:36 PM
With this news I would expect to see Microsoft's bottom line staying flat or declining from this point onwards. It would seem that they have become what IBM was in the 80's.A bit soon to be counting chickens.... I seem to recall a similar line taken back in 2002 when corporates were saying they would stick with NT or W2K, and wait and see... Most eventually moved to XP.

winmacguy
01-08-2007, 06:00 PM
A gradual flattening of Microsofts bottom line is quite possible considering the increased acceptance of Linux into the work place and a greater awareness of OS X. Even if it just presents greater bargaining power to reduce the licensing cost of Vista. A lot of corporates also run increasingly mixed environments as not all of their employees use XP.

kenj
01-08-2007, 07:29 PM
Hey winmacguy... I read that M$ have sold 60,000,000 copies since the release.

The cost of the DVD plus packaging, freight and print would be miniscule compared with the wholesale cost that they would receive.

Thats a lot of dollars.

PS Not sticking up for them! I purchased Vista Home Premium and it works OK. However I find that XP is easier on my old eyes. Not all glitz and glam. So, I have reverted to XP and am happy with it.

Ken

winmacguy
01-08-2007, 07:40 PM
True I have also seen that reported. It is also called channel stuffing. What you need to check it against is the number of machines or copies of Vista actually bought by customers and businesses which is probably a lot smaller. That will give you a more accurate picture.

Digby
02-08-2007, 07:21 AM
Also of those 60m copies most would have been bought on new pc's my mom an dad shoppers in home appliance stores where they have no choice.

So another question would be "How many new PC's were sold world wide in that period ?

Regards

Digby

kenj
02-08-2007, 07:30 AM
Also of those 60m copies most would have been bought on new pc's my mom an dad shoppers in home appliance stores where they have no choice.

So another question would be "How many new PC's were sold world wide in that period ?

Regards

Digby

I feel that is not relevant Digby. 60M is 60M regardless of how you look at it. My sister just bought a new desktop. She wouldn't know the brand of the machine, let alone the OS on it. She is a "Push this thingy" person - like a high % of "users"

Ken

winmacguy
02-08-2007, 02:42 PM
From what I have read and heard a lot of non corporates (individuals) who have bought Vista, have had XP installed on it to replace Vista since they were overly impressed. I am sure that there are probably also a similar amount of people who are happy with Vista and continue to use it. You would still subtract the original number of XP "revertees" from Vista to get a truer number of the versions sold.

Battleneter2
02-08-2007, 03:03 PM
We have seen this before with XP. Business did not want to know about XP at launch stating it was bloated and slow and they will stick to 2000/98 bla bla. Two years in and it got real traction and the rest is history.


Also keep in mind there are 10,000's of legacy apps used by corporates that need testing and possibly patching for Vista, this can take several years for any large organisation.

winmacguy
02-08-2007, 03:21 PM
I certainly remember hearing similar stories when XP was launched when a lot of people were more than happy with Win2k which is actually still a very good system. This time how ever, people have had 5 years to get used to XP in the work place while Vista was being developed and moon beams were being promised. Add to that the fact that Apple has come a long way since OS X was first released in early 2001 (about 6 months before XP), Linux has had a number of years to mature and be put through its paces in the server room and on the desktop which means that IT managers now have more than one potential OS to consider when they upgrade. By the time some IT managers get around to upgrading XP will be 7 or 8 years old and Leopard will have been out for 1+ years and more companies will be exploring Linux while MS decides what is going to be in the final build of Windows 7.

Battleneter2
02-08-2007, 04:04 PM
I certainly remember hearing similar stories when XP was launched when a lot of people were more than happy with Win2k which is actually still a very good system. This time how ever, people have had 5 years to get used to XP in the work place while Vista was being developed and moon beams were being promised. Add to that the fact that Apple has come a long way since OS X was first released in early 2001 (about 6 months before XP), Linux has had a number of years to mature and be put through its paces in the server room and on the desktop which means that IT managers now have more than one potential OS to consider when they upgrade. By the time some IT managers get around to upgrading XP will be 7 or 8 years old and Leopard will have been out for 1+ years and more companies will be exploring Linux while MS decides what is going to be in the final build of Windows 7.

I will concede I always liked XP as a replacement for 98 which was horrid and i was thrilled to ditch 98/95. However 2000 vs XP was a different story, many IT professionals cried they will never change as there is no advantage.

There is even less incentive to go to Vista for Business now, however I would be very surprised is the migration does not follow a similar path for similar reasons.

For the record I dual boot Vista and hate the bloated piece of poop, just don't buy into its failure.

kenj
02-08-2007, 04:17 PM
By winmacguy.... "You would still subtract the original number of XP "revertees" from Vista to get a truer number of the versions sold."



No, winmacguy. Even if only one person out of the 60M was using Vista and the rest had either reverted to XP or purchased a copy of XP to replace Vista, that is still 60M copies sold. Might show as a boost in XP sales?

As I said, I have reverted to XP for various reasons. This does not reduce the 60M down to 59,999,999. It stays at their figure of 60M (Assuming they haven't lied on the sales number) I still have my copy of Vista which I paid good cash for.

Ken :badpc:

winmacguy
02-08-2007, 04:34 PM
No, winmacguy. Even if only one person out of the 60M was using Vista and the rest had either reverted to XP or purchased a copy of XP to replace Vista, that is still 60M copies sold. Might show as a boost in XP sales?
:badpc:

Possibly or at least a continuation of XP sales. I am sure that MS has "shipped" 60 million copies although I would argue that this figure wouldn't be 100% of what has actually been on sold through the distribution chanels at this stage.

Graham L
02-08-2007, 06:41 PM
I wonder if IBM have installed XP SP2 (www.infoworld.com/article/04/08/09/HNdontinstallxp_1.html) on their 400,000 desktop systems yet. They might not be an early adopter of Vista, either.

winmacguy
02-08-2007, 07:06 PM
I am pretty sure that they have been big contributors to Linux if my memory serves me correctly...??

winmacguy
02-08-2007, 07:17 PM
There is even less incentive to go to Vista for Business now, however I would be very surprised is the migration does not follow a similar path for similar reasons.

For the record I dual boot Vista and hate the bloated piece of poop, just don't buy into its failure.

This is what one large corporate in the US has decided to do
http://computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=297804&intsrc=article_pots_side

Digby
02-08-2007, 07:45 PM
Just looked up a Gartner report which said that 250 million PCs were sold in 2006. And they were looking at a bit more than that this year.

So if say 125 million PCs have been sold world-wide so far this year, so Vista is not doing very well at only 50% of that ! I know some will be Macs. But also some of those sales would be upgrades.

regards

Digby

winmacguy
02-08-2007, 09:31 PM
Just over 1.76 million Macs for the last quarter which is their most for a quarter ever.

Twelvevolts
03-08-2007, 12:04 AM
Vista is pretty good - certainly well ahead of XP. I still use XP at work and it is kind of lame by comparison, so hoping we'll upgrade to Vista as my work PC is grunty enough to deal with it.

winmacguy
03-08-2007, 02:25 PM
It is a bit of a sad state of affairs when you need a "grunty" PC to run an OS just to write a word doc.

Graham L
03-08-2007, 02:34 PM
I have always felt that I buy a computer to run my software, not an operating system.

The work the computer does should be for me. An operating system shouldn't do anything except load programmes and store files. If it needs gigabytes of storage and lots of CPU time to do that, something has gone wrong.

Digby
04-08-2007, 08:06 AM
I have always felt that I buy a computer to run my software, not an operating system.

The work the computer does should be for me. An operating system shouldn't do anything except load programmes and store files. If it needs gigabytes of storage and lots of CPU time to do that, something has gone wrong.

Agreed.

I have alway felt that M$oft should spend much of their effort on SPacks to REDUCE the size of each program within their OS. I know this is possible it just needs better tighter coding.

But how can we let Bill know what most of us throughout the world feel ? Whats his email addy again ?

Regards

Digby

winmacguy
04-08-2007, 02:15 PM
Agreed.

I have alway felt that M$oft should spend much of their effort on SPacks to REDUCE the size of each program within their OS. I know this is possible it just needs better tighter coding.


Considering it took a team of 45 people 3 months just to create the Start menu in Vista, I doubt that MS will ever have better, tighter coding.:rolleyes:

Erayd
04-08-2007, 02:26 PM
That wasn't the whole start menu, that was just the 'shutdown' bit of the start menu. And if I recall rightly, it took a year. :groan:

winmacguy
04-08-2007, 02:31 PM
That wasn't the whole start menu, that was just the 'shutdown' bit of the start menu. And if I recall rightly, it took a year. :groan:

Only a year?:eek:
"“The reason we come up with new versions is not to fix bugs. It's absolutely not. It's the stupidest reason to buy a new version I ever heard. When we do a new version we put in lots of new things that people are asking for. And so, in no sense, is stability a reason to move to a new version. It's never a reason.”

Gates was explaining that people buy software to obtain perceived value, and that users commonly don't see value in paying for fixes to a product's outstanding flaws. People generally expect to gain significant new features. Of course, even there Apple has Gates beat: it has delivered three paid OS upgrades in the same period Microsoft has struggled just to deliver Vista."