M
M.I.5¾
Guest
Re: ARTICLE: Users Not Upgrading XP to Vista (Even with SP1)
"Fiddler" <j.boy@ridge.com> wrote in message
news:OznRgGmuIHA.1240@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> MB"chipset"drivers are easy to get.
>
There easy to get if they are available. They are impossible to get if they
don't exist for the Operating System that you want to use.
> "M.I.5?" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:48329b19$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net...
>>
>> "Clear Windows" <carlferedeck@wizzmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:48328e09$1@newsgate.x-privat.org...
>>> My comment:
>>> People want proof that vista is a pile of poo poo... and I tell them,
>>> you want proof on a platter? Screw you! Do some surfing and you will run
>>> into millions of
>>> pages that state how bad Vista is and how much people absolutely hate
>>> it!
>>>
>>> Users Not Upgrading XP to Vista (Even with SP1), SP3 Didn't Do it
>>>
>>> ARTICLE:
>>> Over a year after the general availability of Windows Vista (January 30,
>>> 2007), and a year and a half after the business launch of the latest
>>> Windows client (November 30, 2006), the product has yet to receive the
>>> love forecasted by Microsoft. While predicting nothing short of Wow
>>> experiences, it is waking up following the availability of Windows Vista
>>> Service Pack 1 to the sound of silence where upgrades from Windows XP to
>>> Windows Vista should have been. This realization seems difficult to sink
>>> in for the Redmond company.
>>>
>>> "During the conference call my team had on Friday, we were discussing
>>> the upcoming content we are planning for the August-December timeframe.
>>> One of my team members who shall remain nameless stated that most of the
>>> customers he has talked to aren't upgrading existing Windows XP machines
>>> to Windows Vista. Instead, they are just buying new machines with
>>> Windows Vista as the old XP machines roll off the books and are
>>> re-purposed, or die," revealed Keith Combs, Microsoft IT Pro Evangelist.
>>>
>>> According to statistics provided by Microsoft, Windows Vista had sold in
>>> excess of 140 million licenses by March 2008. Data published by Net
>>> Applications give Vista a 14.57% share of the operating system market at
>>> the end of April 2008. By comparison, Windows XP accounts for a share of
>>> 73.07%, down from a high of 85.02% back in January 2007. With worldwide
>>> shipments of PCs reaching over 250 million items the past year, it is
>>> clear that Vista's growth comes largely from acquisitions of new
>>> machines rather than from upgrades.
>>>
>>> "None of the security, network, search, etc. improvements warrant an
>>> upgrade of an existing machine, even with Aero glass turned off so that
>>> it performs on par or better than Windows XP?" Combs asked rhetorically.
>>> But the real question was "Is that accurate? Is that what you are
>>> doing?" with Combs referring to the customers' failure to upgrade. The
>>> comments wrote in response to Combs' post indicate that customers are
>>> steering clear of Windows Vista, and sticking to what they already know,
>>> namely XP.
>>>
>>> The reasons for doing this are multiple, and they are related to the now
>>> year old problems of the operating system that caused a barrage of bad
>>> publicity. Vista is avoided due to performance issues, compatibility
>>> problems, but also the cost of the upgrade, although Microsoft has
>>> continually touted that the operating system would deliver a lower TCO
>>> in the end. However, the total cost of ownership does not generally
>>> include the costs of the upgrade. But one thing is clear: none of the
>>> users mentioned Service Pack 3 as the reason why the move to Vista was
>>> avoided. At the same time, SP1 for Windows Vista also failed to catalyze
>>> a new wave of upgrades to the latest Windows client.
>>>
>>> "Are you running mixed environments of old and new machines with each
>>> OS? I understand for small and small medium businesses that's unlikely,
>>> but what about when you have several hundred PCs up? Are you buying new
>>> machines with WinXP or flattening them and installing WinXP? What
>>> happens when we stop selling Windows XP in a few weeks?" Combs asked.
>>>
>>
>> It's probably fair to say that a lot depends on your perceptions and
>> expectations. I know 2 people who speak very highly of Vista themselves
>> and can't really see what the fuss is about. As both are translators,
>> their power applications are internet, e-mail and word processing, all
>> run on a core 2 quad processor. As non of those are remotely demanding,
>> it is perhaps not unsurprising that Vista copes well. They both like the
>> eye candy, but freely admit that that they rarely use it.
>>
>> On the other hand, a visit to the forums of a well known video editing
>> application shows considerable problems with user trying to edit and
>> produce high definition video. Of those having major problems, there are
>> two common factors which seem to prevent the editor working the way users
>> expect, one is running it on any PC with a lesser processor than a core 2
>> duo (or core 2 quad for the really demanding formats). The other is
>> running it under Vista, not because it shouldn't run under Vista, but
>> because Vista hogs too many resources and leaves too little free for the
>> editor to do its stuff.
>>
>> I have PCs that use both operating systems (Vista was preinstalled on my
>> laptop). I find it frustrating that once you discount the relatively
>> useless eye candy, Vista actually seems to have less functionality
>> overall than XP (not counting the software and hardware that doesn't work
>> under Vista - which only makes it worse). I know it includes extra
>> functions like DVD writing, but this could be added under XP using
>> freeware third party utilities.
>>
>> I don't run heavy power applications on the laptop so if pushed I would
>> describe the Vista operating system as adequate, but I wouldn't mind
>> upgrading to XP, if only I could source motherboard chipset drivers.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
"Fiddler" <j.boy@ridge.com> wrote in message
news:OznRgGmuIHA.1240@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> MB"chipset"drivers are easy to get.
>
There easy to get if they are available. They are impossible to get if they
don't exist for the Operating System that you want to use.
> "M.I.5?" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:48329b19$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net...
>>
>> "Clear Windows" <carlferedeck@wizzmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:48328e09$1@newsgate.x-privat.org...
>>> My comment:
>>> People want proof that vista is a pile of poo poo... and I tell them,
>>> you want proof on a platter? Screw you! Do some surfing and you will run
>>> into millions of
>>> pages that state how bad Vista is and how much people absolutely hate
>>> it!
>>>
>>> Users Not Upgrading XP to Vista (Even with SP1), SP3 Didn't Do it
>>>
>>> ARTICLE:
>>> Over a year after the general availability of Windows Vista (January 30,
>>> 2007), and a year and a half after the business launch of the latest
>>> Windows client (November 30, 2006), the product has yet to receive the
>>> love forecasted by Microsoft. While predicting nothing short of Wow
>>> experiences, it is waking up following the availability of Windows Vista
>>> Service Pack 1 to the sound of silence where upgrades from Windows XP to
>>> Windows Vista should have been. This realization seems difficult to sink
>>> in for the Redmond company.
>>>
>>> "During the conference call my team had on Friday, we were discussing
>>> the upcoming content we are planning for the August-December timeframe.
>>> One of my team members who shall remain nameless stated that most of the
>>> customers he has talked to aren't upgrading existing Windows XP machines
>>> to Windows Vista. Instead, they are just buying new machines with
>>> Windows Vista as the old XP machines roll off the books and are
>>> re-purposed, or die," revealed Keith Combs, Microsoft IT Pro Evangelist.
>>>
>>> According to statistics provided by Microsoft, Windows Vista had sold in
>>> excess of 140 million licenses by March 2008. Data published by Net
>>> Applications give Vista a 14.57% share of the operating system market at
>>> the end of April 2008. By comparison, Windows XP accounts for a share of
>>> 73.07%, down from a high of 85.02% back in January 2007. With worldwide
>>> shipments of PCs reaching over 250 million items the past year, it is
>>> clear that Vista's growth comes largely from acquisitions of new
>>> machines rather than from upgrades.
>>>
>>> "None of the security, network, search, etc. improvements warrant an
>>> upgrade of an existing machine, even with Aero glass turned off so that
>>> it performs on par or better than Windows XP?" Combs asked rhetorically.
>>> But the real question was "Is that accurate? Is that what you are
>>> doing?" with Combs referring to the customers' failure to upgrade. The
>>> comments wrote in response to Combs' post indicate that customers are
>>> steering clear of Windows Vista, and sticking to what they already know,
>>> namely XP.
>>>
>>> The reasons for doing this are multiple, and they are related to the now
>>> year old problems of the operating system that caused a barrage of bad
>>> publicity. Vista is avoided due to performance issues, compatibility
>>> problems, but also the cost of the upgrade, although Microsoft has
>>> continually touted that the operating system would deliver a lower TCO
>>> in the end. However, the total cost of ownership does not generally
>>> include the costs of the upgrade. But one thing is clear: none of the
>>> users mentioned Service Pack 3 as the reason why the move to Vista was
>>> avoided. At the same time, SP1 for Windows Vista also failed to catalyze
>>> a new wave of upgrades to the latest Windows client.
>>>
>>> "Are you running mixed environments of old and new machines with each
>>> OS? I understand for small and small medium businesses that's unlikely,
>>> but what about when you have several hundred PCs up? Are you buying new
>>> machines with WinXP or flattening them and installing WinXP? What
>>> happens when we stop selling Windows XP in a few weeks?" Combs asked.
>>>
>>
>> It's probably fair to say that a lot depends on your perceptions and
>> expectations. I know 2 people who speak very highly of Vista themselves
>> and can't really see what the fuss is about. As both are translators,
>> their power applications are internet, e-mail and word processing, all
>> run on a core 2 quad processor. As non of those are remotely demanding,
>> it is perhaps not unsurprising that Vista copes well. They both like the
>> eye candy, but freely admit that that they rarely use it.
>>
>> On the other hand, a visit to the forums of a well known video editing
>> application shows considerable problems with user trying to edit and
>> produce high definition video. Of those having major problems, there are
>> two common factors which seem to prevent the editor working the way users
>> expect, one is running it on any PC with a lesser processor than a core 2
>> duo (or core 2 quad for the really demanding formats). The other is
>> running it under Vista, not because it shouldn't run under Vista, but
>> because Vista hogs too many resources and leaves too little free for the
>> editor to do its stuff.
>>
>> I have PCs that use both operating systems (Vista was preinstalled on my
>> laptop). I find it frustrating that once you discount the relatively
>> useless eye candy, Vista actually seems to have less functionality
>> overall than XP (not counting the software and hardware that doesn't work
>> under Vista - which only makes it worse). I know it includes extra
>> functions like DVD writing, but this could be added under XP using
>> freeware third party utilities.
>>
>> I don't run heavy power applications on the laptop so if pushed I would
>> describe the Vista operating system as adequate, but I wouldn't mind
>> upgrading to XP, if only I could source motherboard chipset drivers.
>>
>>
>>
>
>