All the latest UK technology news, reviews and analysis
|
|
|
18 Apr 2008
In a sure sign that many companies are far from eager to upgrade to Windows Vista, analyst firm Forrester Research has published a report urging enterprises not to wait for Windows 7.
"Although we applaud companies for thinking ahead, there are some harsh realities for those considering skipping Windows Vista," said Forrester analyst Benjamin Gray in the report.
Forrester outlined the perils of holding out for Windows 7, the next version of the Microsoft operating system expected some time in 2010.
"Ironically, one of Microsoft's biggest weaknesses - the unpredictable release schedule of its desktop operating systems - will likely spur adoption of Vista as a result of this lack of faith in Microsoft delivering Windows 7 on time," said Gray.
The arrival of Vista Service Pack 1, and Microsoft's decision to phase out XP on new PCs from 1 July, are compelling reasons for companies to upgrade to Vista, according to Gray.
The analyst also trotted out Vista's oft cited benefits including improved administrative tools, security tools like User Account Control and integrated search functionality.
The report pointed to negative press coverage for Vista and a lack of early adopter case studies for the reluctance of CIOs to embrace the new OS.
"Because adoption has been cautious, it has been a challenge for companies to learn from early adopters," said Gray.
The report follows a Gartner study last summer which also urged companies not to wait for Windows 7, pointing out Microsoft's reputation for slipped launch deadlines and a general lack of detail surrounding technical requirements for the OS.
Latest stories from Operating Systems
Related articles
Related jobs
Poll
What is the most important IT priority for your company this year?
Sneak peek at the forthcoming glass-based machine
Connect with V3.co.uk
This paper focuses on a series of best practices and techniques for development teams looking to improve their software development processes
Why good data management at all levels is essential in the modern business (video, 6mins)
Support Engineer - Cisco - LINUX - ISP - NOC - £30-40k...
Netapp Storage Engineer - NCDA - NCIE - Unix/ Linux Skills...
Cisco ISP Pre-sales consultant - CCNA - CCNP - CCIE...
Netapp Storage Engineer - NCDA - NCIE - Unix/ Linux Skills...
Keep up to date with the latest products, services and technologies from the world's leading IT companies. IThound.com brings you over 2,000 white papers, case studies and analyst reports.
Do you agree?
Pandering analysts...
There is one major reason why the adoption of Vista is slow. It is not good enough to run on the bulk of current generation pc's without a reduction in performance. If in upgrading from XP to Vista a business must suffer even a 5% loss in performance due to increased start up/shut down time or reduced amount of RAM available for simultaneous application execution, then it is too much. Why upgrade your OS only to download the real performance and revenue of the business you are using the OS to run? Everything else falls out of this problem that is Microsofts to solve, when you release a product make sure that it is at base, BETTER in important metrics than the previous generation product. Not too difficult to ask there is it, cars become more efficient, powerful and light over time. Homes become more energy efficient and longer lasting, why is it only software (and Microsoft is a particularly prominent violator) that is allowed to get WORSE with each generation? Requiring more memory and more hard drive space but offering no improvement in efficiency?? Basically the inefficiency of Microsoft's OS designs has simply gotten so bad that the market refuses to tolerate it because it hurts the pocket books of businesses and consumers to do so, simple. It is an ominous sign when supposedly objective analysts bring out reports putting up canards such as this to scare people into upgrading to XP. Oh so I should upgrade now because if I don't it will delay adoption? hmm....so? Until Microsoft builds an OS from the ground up for efficiency and makes sure it gets faster, smaller and better with each iteration there is no need to upgrade, especially as the current generation OS will only work FASTER on succeeding generations of x86 based architectures, so were it not for Microsoft trying to strong arm businesses and consumers to upgrade no one would do it, we'd simply upgrade our upgrade and achieve a silent productivity boost. The people who realized this long ago moved over to Linux and other OS's that don't force you to upgrade if the current OS suits your current needs.
Posted by: sent2null 09 May 2008
Well I'll just have to adopt Vista then won't I?
Perhaps not! Perhaps I'd rather adopt Open-Source. I think Mr Forrester is obviously a Window-lover & doesn't want to lose his investments perhaps? I wonder how well the digital marketplace would fair without Windoze. Perhaps the whole digital world would collapse. Anything is possible. Perhaps it wouldn't. I suggest that this may be a more reliable result. XP is OK, not fantastic but OK. Everything that Windows does Linux is if not very close to in capability then perhaps better. Now that Adobe is supporting Open-Source then perhaps a few of the other major vendors will come around & develop for Linux. Then, the OS is free & Windoze is nobody & the world will instantly be a better place.
Posted by: Rex Alfie Lee 22 Apr 2008
Danger Will Robinson - you have been warned
I'm so sick of Gartner , Forrester , whoever the next bunch of disconnected consultants that companies try to hire to market their product / scare you into upgrading or worse yet scare the higher ups in the company. Here are some of the problems less and less compelling upgrades, new ultra fast hardware that the OS sucks the life out of, intel giveth microsoft taketh away, and deaf ears by companies. Extend XP until Windows 7 comes out, give your customers a choice Microsoft not just on "Ultra low cost" PC's
Posted by: Anonymous Coward 22 Apr 2008
Upgrade but know the facts first!
My experience of Vista from the perspective as a high end home user and IT business professional is to delay, until Microsoft sort out the major issues relating to Vista. Microsoft should not dictate to the world on it's support for products, the customer is king not the supplier (many years ago IBM made the same mistake - MS may be a monopoly supplier but customers will decide eventually). Vista is not a single operating system and maybe thet is part of the problem. The article argues there are pitfalls for delay (albeit mainly anecdotal evidence from how I read it). I would counter this by offering real hard facts for the opposite i.e. delaying, until Microsoft can get it's act together. Most companies and serious home users will find they need to seriously upgrade hardware for Vista to perform effectively. They may also find as I have to my significant cost that, software running perfectly well on XP will not work with Vista (especially 64 bit). This article fails to give the audience hard facts on the 2 sides of the discussion.
Posted by: Peter Ellis 20 Apr 2008