Sticking with Windows XP: The Case Against Windows Vista

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Obviously, I spend a lot of time working with beta software. If you're envious of that for some reason, consider this little slice of "grass is always greener" logic: Sometimes I wish my PCs just worked. Sometimes I wish I just used my computers as the tools that they are, and didn't have to spend so much time installing, reinstalling, and fixing problems. From my side of the fence, your lawn is looking pretty darned good too.

What I'm getting at is that the Next Big Thing isn't always a given. Sure, Windows Vista is cool, sort of, and it's got some neat new functionality....

To read the rest of the article, click here...

 

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Very interesting read

thanks

 

Its so true though, and thats how it was with XP, when it first came out it had plenty of issues and look at it now very stable OS. I feel its gonna be the same for Vista just like the guys said wait 6-12 months after it comes out.

 

Done quite a few Xp rollouts of Xp in the last 12 months and the NHS has only recently started migrating from 2000 pro to Xp this tells you something ;) Xp is now indeed a reasonably robust Os but its taken it a long time to evolve and so has the hardware necassary to run it properly (which is what a lot of peeps forget). Will give Vista a miss for a while just maybe install the 32 bit on one of my more up to date pc's to have a play!

Steve

 

Yups. Anybody jumping on the 'wow! A new O/S from M$! Big bucks for migration consultants!' is going to be sorely disappointed.

As far as I can see it, at least until 'Longhorn' (or whatever they imaginitavely call it when its released) is out there and has been around for a good 12 months, I can't really see many organisations deploying XP as a desktop OS - especially since many of them still haven't moved from 2000 to XP. Personally, there are some very neat things in XP that now make it a no-brainer for organisations to move from 2K - but its only really been stable enough for most companies who already had AD/W2K infrastructures to risk spending cash on an upgrade that was, basically, 2000 with bells & whistles.

I think Vista LOOKS nice, and there are some things I like about it, but its telling that I find the interface a bit 'meh' - Aero seems to be Vista's greatest selling point and if I can't get enhusiastic about that it doesn't say much for it as an OS! Dropping WinFS was a MASSIVE mistake - as was (changing the subject) dropping the move of Exchange's back-end from Jet to SQL Server. I understand this was all done because Billy Boy wanted to get the products out and nailing WinFS & Exchange 'innards' to a new version of SQL Server didn't square with the SQL Server team's release schedule (WinFS is now apparently two years away from being even beta ready).

IMHO, that sucks. Moving to WinFS would have brought the greatest benefit for customers. Instead, M$ appears to be trying to foist another pointless upgrade on us - and I'm pretty sure most places (outside of those that have Software Assurance) won't bother with it.

 

Maybe they are just using Vista as an intro to DRM (to work out the bugs) and as a (very nice looking) placeholder OS.