PDA

View Full Version : Businesses in the post-XP world



jhsu802701
October 15th, 2010, 03:48 PM
I've read that many businesses refuse to "upgrade" from Windoze XP to Vista/7 because so many of the programs they rely on work in XP but not in Vista/7. Do you think these businesses will switch to Linux? Is the Linux world working on winning over these businesses that refuse to use Windoze Vista/7? Programs that work in XP but not in Vista/7 seem to undercut a main selling point of Windoze. Given the choice between paying a huge sum of money for a newer Windoze OS and having things not work OR using a free OS and having those same things not work, would that tip the balance towards the latter? I see a golden opportunity here. I think Vista will go down in history as Microsoft's Jump the Shark Moment. The Linux world needs to capitalize on it.

sydbat
October 15th, 2010, 03:51 PM
I've read that many businesses refuse to "upgrade" from Windoze XP to Vista/7 because so many of the programs they rely on work in XP but not in Vista/7. Do you think these businesses will switch to Linux? Is the Linux world working on winning over these businesses that refuse to use Windoze Vista/7? Programs that work in XP but not in Vista/7 seem to undercut a main selling point of Windoze. Given the choice between paying a huge sum of money for a newer Windoze OS and having things not work OR using a free OS and having those same things not work, would that tip the balance towards the latter? I see a golden opportunity here. I think Vista will go down in history as Microsoft's Jump the Shark Moment. The Linux world needs to capitalize on it.What is this "Windoze" you keep talking about??

kaldor
October 15th, 2010, 03:51 PM
I've read that many businesses refuse to "upgrade" from Windoze XP to Vista/7 because so many of the programs they rely on work in XP but not in Vista/7. Do you think these businesses will switch to Linux? Is the Linux world working on winning over these businesses that refuse to use Windoze Vista/7? Programs that work in XP but not in Vista/7 seem to undercut a main selling point of Windoze. Given the choice between paying a huge sum of money for a newer Windoze OS and having things not work OR using a free OS and having those same things not work, would that tip the balance towards the latter? I see a golden opportunity here. I think Vista will go down in history as Microsoft's Jump the Shark Moment. The Linux world needs to capitalize on it.

Windows*

No, they won't switch to Linux. One major reason is that they already trust their brand.

Simian Man
October 15th, 2010, 03:52 PM
I've read that many businesses refuse to "upgrade" from Windoze XP to Vista/7 because so many of the programs they rely on work in XP but not in Vista/7. Do you think these businesses will switch to Linux?
No.


Is the Linux world working on winning over these businesses that refuse to use Windoze Vista/7?
No.


Given the choice between paying a huge sum of money for a newer Windoze OS and having things not work OR using a free OS and having those same things not work, would that tip the balance towards the latter?
No.

BTW what's Windoze? I've never heard of it before.

Zzl1xndd
October 15th, 2010, 03:54 PM
I doubt many will as many of these businesses also use Active Directory, and although it is possible to connect Linux to AD few people in IT departments are aware of how to go about it.

Moving to a different platform that also doesn't support your applications also doesn't make much sense.

Although if the application worked perfectly in Wine or there was a Linux version then we might have something.

ebasa
October 15th, 2010, 03:55 PM
If they are that Dependant on their XP apps then the answer would be no.
I thought the 'jump the shark' moment was WindowsME.

CraigPaleo
October 15th, 2010, 03:56 PM
BTW what's Windoze? I've never heard of it before.
I don't know but I hear Linucks is better.

julio_cortez
October 15th, 2010, 04:05 PM
Who knows. Never heard of that "windoze" before. Maybe it's a Windows knock-off.

By the way, I think that people that have mission-critical software that only runs on XP are not going to leave XP until 2014 (http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?LN=en-gb&C2=1173) and even if "forced" to change PC for technical failures would use downgrade rights (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-20010285-56.html) to get XP back on the new machine.
This is obviously NOT a good idea security-wise, but it is just likely to happen.

Hopefully, come 2014, all available software would be compatible with Windows 7 and (why not?) Windows 8 so this wouldn't be really a problem anymore.

inobe
October 15th, 2010, 04:06 PM
there are many opensource alternative apps and i'm certain they will be taken advantage of, maybe not on a linux platform at first.

these apps are gateway drugs especially if one finds the rite app, if it works they are willing to overlook the miniscule differences.

it's a sacrifice me and many other were willing to take.

as for switching platforms, you can thanks the opensource apps for that, we could care less what runs them as long as they work.

Swagman
October 15th, 2010, 04:19 PM
Nope They'll stay with XP.

Most companies use a hardwall/firewall and lock down policies stop most sources of infection.

Our company use Bespoke software for Windows too.

Although all this is SERIOUSLY BAD news to Microsoft anyway.

inobe
October 15th, 2010, 04:30 PM
as your typical windows apps become ancient and unsupported and no "choice" out there i can see them upgrading at a larger scale.

i assure you, all business alike do research for alternatives, they aren't naive, it is an inevitable.


Change is inevitable - except from a vending machine.
Robert C. Gallagher

Tristam Green
October 15th, 2010, 04:34 PM
Windows 7 has a free Windows XP virtual mode appliance for any software that doesn't natively run, or run well, in Windows 7.

/whereisyourgodnow

perspectoff
October 15th, 2010, 04:35 PM
Windows*

No, they won't switch to Linux. One major reason is that they already trust their brand.

I have never upgraded my medical practice from XP. We tried going to Vista for a while and it caused endless problems, so we stayed at XP (and in fact specifically bought a few additional XP computers during the Vista years).

During that period we started the transition to Kubuntu. Now we have no desire to go to Windows 7, which is bulky and bloated anyway.

We do keep Windows XP around (for dual-boot) for the same reason we stayed at XP -- there are some programs that are irreplaceable that only work in Windows XP. Paying thousands of dollars to upgrade to Windows 7 just to run those 1 or 2 programs in virtual mode in Windows 7 is silly.

And don't get me started on the price of Windows servers. OMG, that can bankrupt a small company quickly.

pwnst*r
October 15th, 2010, 04:38 PM
I've read that many businesses refuse to "upgrade" from Windoze XP to Vista/7 because so many of the programs they rely on work in XP but not in Vista/7. Do you think these businesses will switch to Linux? Is the Linux world working on winning over these businesses that refuse to use Windoze Vista/7? Programs that work in XP but not in Vista/7 seem to undercut a main selling point of Windoze. Given the choice between paying a huge sum of money for a newer Windoze OS and having things not work OR using a free OS and having those same things not work, would that tip the balance towards the latter? I see a golden opportunity here. I think Vista will go down in history as Microsoft's Jump the Shark Moment. The Linux world needs to capitalize on it.

My company won't switch only because they know how lousy Vista was at the beginning. We'll be on Win7 3rd quarter 2011 though. Keep in mind also, that my company employs about 400,000 people as well, so it's not a small endeavor to upgrade.

sydbat
October 15th, 2010, 04:45 PM
Windows 7 has a free Windows XP virtual mode appliance for any software that doesn't natively run, or run well, in Windows 7.

/whereisyourgodnowDidn't used to be free. You had to pay for the version of 7 that had XP compatibility mode, which was more expensive. I guess they had lots of complaints.

inobe
October 15th, 2010, 04:59 PM
it has a huge portion to do with hardware, costs of upgrading and purchasing new work stations, they can extend the life of a relic with opensource software.

other platforms tend to cause this, they become resource hogs.

linux operating systems can run these relics at lightning fast speeds, the choices of light weights out there are are amazing.

as the software becomes outdated and web pages look like crap because only certain browsers are supported for the particular os a lightweight distribution would replace outdated software easily and run on that hardware when no other software could.

it's a huge sigh of relief to be able to keep things going for an extended period, at least till it's absolutely necessary to upgrade.

Jay Car
October 15th, 2010, 05:21 PM
Big corporations, like the one pwnst*r works for, will likely continue slogging onward tied to the tail of the lumbering Microsoft dinosaur until it finally stops. (The tar pits await?)

But for smaller business owners like perspectoff, and myself, upgrading to FOSS makes good sense, both business and security wise. I am tremendously grateful that it's available and so easy to use and take care of.

I mostly don't care what the big corps use, as long as I'm free to chose the software I trust and want to use.

By the way, I also dislike the use of "Windoze" and "M$", it's not necessary or polite. There's really no need to kick 'em when they're already down.

pwnst*r
October 15th, 2010, 05:34 PM
Big corporations, like the one pwnst*r works for, will likely continue slogging onward tied to the tail of the lumbering Microsoft dinosaur until it finally stops. (The tar pits await?)

Yawn.

koenn
October 15th, 2010, 05:42 PM
I've read that many businesses refuse to "upgrade" from Windoze XP to Vista/7 because so many of the programs they rely on work in XP but not in Vista/7. Do you think these businesses will switch to Linux?

Silly question. If those programs the rely on only work in Windows XP, how is switching to Linux going to change that ?
How does going from 'programs they rely on are not working on Win Vista/7' to "programs they rely on are not working on Linux' fix their problem ?

Tristam Green
October 15th, 2010, 06:34 PM
Didn't used to be free. You had to pay for the version of 7 that had XP compatibility mode, which was more expensive. I guess they had lots of complaints.

You still have to get either Ultimate, Professional, or Enterprise to run XP Mode.

It is meant for enterprise applications, after all, and any self-respecting enterprise would not be deploying a home-style desktop client.

weasel fierce
October 15th, 2010, 06:40 PM
They'll continue to use linux in the server room and microsoft for the secretary.

Calash
October 15th, 2010, 06:43 PM
The company I work for is still on XP. We even have a few legacy Windows 2K systems that, I hope, will get replaced in the next year.

They have FINALLY announced movement to Windows 7. It will be Win7 32Bit but at least it is moving in the right general direction.

Ctrl-Alt-F1
October 15th, 2010, 06:49 PM
The company I worked for (currently just a full time student), had a pretty good mix of XP, Vista, and 7. They were a relatively new startup and just added machines with whatever was shipped on them. Everything worked fine except a few of the Vista machines had mysterious problems with Windows Server 2008.

The windows 7 machines were easily the easiest to maintain.

alexan
October 15th, 2010, 08:34 PM
My company won't switch only because they know how lousy Vista was at the beginning. We'll be on Win7 3rd quarter 2011 though. Keep in mind also, that my company employs about 400,000 people as well, so it's not a small endeavor to upgrade.

400,000?
let me guess: your company is.... Microsoft?
Becouse only one kind of company wouldn't switch to Vista knowing what piece of junk it was from the beginning...




...and that company is Microsoft :guitar:

pwnst*r
October 15th, 2010, 08:52 PM
400,000?
let me guess: your company is.... Microsoft?
Becouse only one kind of company wouldn't switch to Vista knowing what piece of junk it was from the beginning...




...and that company is Microsoft

Um, no.

Swagman
October 15th, 2010, 08:54 PM
Must be some government institution.. Police.. Libraries ?

alexan
October 15th, 2010, 09:46 PM
Um, no.

Then, they didn't inform you...



Ballamer... typical from him :popcorn:
meet your supermasterboss (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvsboPUjrGc)

Giant Speck
October 16th, 2010, 04:01 AM
400,000?
let me guess: your company is.... Microsoft?
Microsoft only has 89,000 employees.

Khakilang
October 16th, 2010, 05:28 AM
Some of my customer had customise accounting software that run on Window 98 and Window XP and doesn't work on Vista and Window 7. If they were to upgrade it will cost them a bomb. From hardware cost to software licensing. So they prefer to stick to Window 98 and XP as long as they can until they work out their budget to upgrade.

If they were to use Linux. They have to write the accounting software all over again and that's take time. Come 2014 see what will happen.

ctyc
October 16th, 2010, 05:38 AM
No business man will upgrade if they need to spend money to do so, or if there is no savings resulting from the upgrade.

samjh
October 16th, 2010, 05:59 AM
Must be some government institution.. Police.. Libraries ?

Police aren't usually that big. Even all the federal law enforcement agencies in the US combined, barely crack the 100,000 mark.

Considering only IT companies, Microsoft is easily outstripped by IBM, HP, and Oracle. :)


Back on topic:

My employer is still using Windows XP for workstations and laptops. We're only just beginning to migrate to Office 2007 (from the venerable 2003 version), but still no sign of Windows 7. And it's not that the computers (aside from thin-clients) are incapable of running Windows 7: most have Core2 processors and enough RAM to comfortably run Win 7 with Aero enabled.

The main issue is licensing fees and software compatibility.

And no, there is no sign that we'll migrate to Linux on the client. In fact, I wouldn't be able to do my job if we switched to Linux (or if we did switch, everything will need to be re-developed from ground-up), because some key software products I need only run on Windows and there are no Linux-compatible FOSS analogues.

Having said that, at least some of our servers use Linux (Red Hat).

SeijiSensei
October 16th, 2010, 06:33 AM
Many companies continue to use Internet Explorer 6 because they have custom in-house applications using ActiveX and similar technologies that don't work properly with later versions of IE. You won't see companies like these upgrading to Win7 anytime soon either.

koenn
October 16th, 2010, 12:20 PM
No business man will upgrade if they need to spend money to do so, or if there is no savings resulting from the upgrade.
depends on whether that business man sees IT as a cost, or as a strategic asset.