Half of American Business PCs Can't Run Vista
-
I can imagine Microsoft making the next version of Office only run on Vista, at which point businesses will be forced to upgrade, as they won't want to risk losing trade when they can't open office documents that are emailed to them from third parties. Either that, or the boss wants to play Halo 2
-- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
-
So what! Most businesses won't be upgrading the OS on their existing PCs. Users will get vista when their old computer ends it's lease and is replaced with a new one.
-- Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.
-
The development box given to me is barely spec'd to run Windows 2000. One day I must work for one of these companies who give their developers Windows XP
Michael CP Blog [^] Development Blog [^]
You would be so jealous. I have a workstation beefed up like a server. It has a 3.0 Gig Xeon processor, 2 gigs of ram, SCSI Array drives and Dual Monitors. The workstation is almost 2 years old and it still runs twice as fast as my new dual core machine at home.
-
The development box given to me is barely spec'd to run Windows 2000. One day I must work for one of these companies who give their developers Windows XP
Michael CP Blog [^] Development Blog [^]
What about stopwatching compile times? It took a while to get the company out of the "go to (german consumer electronics mega chain), buy some machine, not to expensive." habit. You get a good workhorse for €600 here, it's one of the better investments for the company to make.
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Velopers, Develprs, Developers!
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify!|Fold With Us! -
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,2068351,00.asp?kc=EWRSS03119TX1K0000594[^] About half of the average business PCs in North America are unable to meet the minimum requirements for Microsoft's Windows Vista operating system, while 94 percent do not meet the system requirements for Vista Premium. Within these figures, 41 percent and 78 percent, respectively, require RAM upgrades to meet the minimum and premium system requirements of Vista, says a new study by Softchoice Research, which is expected to be released later this week. In comparison, when Windows XP was released, some 71 percent of the PCs met its system requirements, Softchoice services consultant Dean Williams said in an executive summary of the report.
Kevin
Much less *need* to run Vista. Xp woks fin (which can noc be said from all Microsoft products), and moving hastily can only worsen things. So keep your feet still - the next PC you buy will bring Vista anyway. The only one who cares is Microsofts CFO.
"We trained hard, but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form up into teams we would be reorganised. I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganising: and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress, while producing confusion, inefficiency and demoralisation." -- Caius Petronius, Roman Consul, 66 A.D.
-
I can imagine Microsoft making the next version of Office only run on Vista, at which point businesses will be forced to upgrade, as they won't want to risk losing trade when they can't open office documents that are emailed to them from third parties. Either that, or the boss wants to play Halo 2
-- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
benjymous wrote:
I can imagine Microsoft making the next version of Office only run on Vista,
To have OpenOffice take over all of the market of their cash cow? I seriously doubt this. They will force the PC-vendors to bundle Vista and reliy on the natural turnover of PC-Hardware.
"We trained hard, but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form up into teams we would be reorganised. I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganising: and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress, while producing confusion, inefficiency and demoralisation." -- Caius Petronius, Roman Consul, 66 A.D.
-
That's a good thing. Maybe business will back off of Vista completely. The reality is that there is really nothing in Vista that businesses "need". There's a bottom line of ROI. Since it's minimal (if any at all), they may stay away.
edboe wrote:
The reality is that there is really nothing in Vista that businesses "need". There's a bottom line of ROI. Since it's minimal (if any at all), they may stay away.
Well, businesses might not "need" single-source easily update-able images which make for easier deployment, tighter group policy control for things like USB drives, and user-mode drivers that let folks skip the call to the help desk, but all those things sure would come in handy. I'm always so sure I'll come off sounding like a Microsoft fanboy when I say things like that (I'm not), but the Vista FUD crusade is ridiculous. Vista is the most business friendly version of Windows there has ever been.
if(!curlies){ return; }
-
edboe wrote:
The reality is that there is really nothing in Vista that businesses "need". There's a bottom line of ROI. Since it's minimal (if any at all), they may stay away.
Well, businesses might not "need" single-source easily update-able images which make for easier deployment, tighter group policy control for things like USB drives, and user-mode drivers that let folks skip the call to the help desk, but all those things sure would come in handy. I'm always so sure I'll come off sounding like a Microsoft fanboy when I say things like that (I'm not), but the Vista FUD crusade is ridiculous. Vista is the most business friendly version of Windows there has ever been.
if(!curlies){ return; }
-
The real issue is that Microsoft's track reacord. Most corporations will shy away until (at least) SP1 or even SP2.
I'd certainly agree with that.
if(!curlies){ return; }
-
I'd certainly agree with that.
if(!curlies){ return; }
-
The federal government probably won't even allow Vista on their systems until 2009... I would bet that the percentage of existing home systems capable of running Vista is much lower. I personally don't see many people buying new systems just so they can use Vista. That would amount to a $1000 OS upgrade (and I use the term "upgrade" very lightly). I wonder what Microsoft was thinking...
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,2068351,00.asp?kc=EWRSS03119TX1K0000594[^] About half of the average business PCs in North America are unable to meet the minimum requirements for Microsoft's Windows Vista operating system, while 94 percent do not meet the system requirements for Vista Premium. Within these figures, 41 percent and 78 percent, respectively, require RAM upgrades to meet the minimum and premium system requirements of Vista, says a new study by Softchoice Research, which is expected to be released later this week. In comparison, when Windows XP was released, some 71 percent of the PCs met its system requirements, Softchoice services consultant Dean Williams said in an executive summary of the report.
Kevin
Talk about increased productivity!
Jeremy Falcon "It's a good thing to do and a tasty way to do it." - Wilford Brimley[^]
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
I wonder what Microsoft was thinking...
They've got to move the ball forward at some point, no? At what point do you stop writing for 10 year old hardware?
if(!curlies){ return; }
That has nothing to do with needless fluff in the OS....
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
I love how the racket in the pc industry works. Hardware manufactures package MS operating systems in order to sell windows. MS produces code that requires upgrades to sell hardware. All of them making fat ca$h, while us consumers foot the bill. God bless America.
-
That has nothing to do with needless fluff in the OS....
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
That has nothing to do with needless fluff in the OS....
Which part would that be? The GUI? If that's needless fluff, I'm sure glad they've added gobs of it since the text-screen days.
if(!curlies){ return; }
-
Yep, eventually in 3/4 years Vista will be mainstream, I really don't know why people are whining.
We made the buttons on the screen look so good you'll want to lick them. Steve Jobs
-
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,2068351,00.asp?kc=EWRSS03119TX1K0000594[^] About half of the average business PCs in North America are unable to meet the minimum requirements for Microsoft's Windows Vista operating system, while 94 percent do not meet the system requirements for Vista Premium. Within these figures, 41 percent and 78 percent, respectively, require RAM upgrades to meet the minimum and premium system requirements of Vista, says a new study by Softchoice Research, which is expected to be released later this week. In comparison, when Windows XP was released, some 71 percent of the PCs met its system requirements, Softchoice services consultant Dean Williams said in an executive summary of the report.
Kevin
From my experience half of the employees of North American businesses don't even know how to use a computer beyond the most rudimentary point. (I once had a product manager report a bug that sometimes underscores show up in dialog boxes and sometimes they don't. She reported several other XP features as bugs.) Now my rant: 41% is not half. Yet, Williams keeps saying 50%. Second, who did this "study"? Turns out it's a hardware vendor using FUD for the purpose of making sales, nothing more.
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
:rolleyes: Come on, you *know* it's the consumers that drive the pc and os market. There is no conspiracy unless you consider plain old capitalism a conspiracy.
I wan't implying a conspiracy. I was just saying that they making boatloads of money of this nice arrangement that they have.
-
-
Much less *need* to run Vista. Xp woks fin (which can noc be said from all Microsoft products), and moving hastily can only worsen things. So keep your feet still - the next PC you buy will bring Vista anyway. The only one who cares is Microsofts CFO.
"We trained hard, but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form up into teams we would be reorganised. I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganising: and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress, while producing confusion, inefficiency and demoralisation." -- Caius Petronius, Roman Consul, 66 A.D.
Presumably if it hadn't been 2 years late the picture would have been even worse (from MS's point of view). But makes little difference to them really. They still made $16 billion last year despite no new Windows or Office. The market for their products in general is so huge that it doesn't matter that only a fraction upgrade.
Kevin
