Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Majority of Enterprise Customers Finally 'Migrating Away From Windows XP'

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the except-those-who-can't-stand-to-give-up-IE6 dept.

Windows 246

New submitter TinTops writes "Speaking in a keynote at Intel's Developer Forum, Microsoft's vice president of marketing, Tami Reller, said the firm has 'now seen about three quarters of Windows enterprises moving to modern desktops' from Windows XP, with the last leg of Windows XP migrations being spurred by the imminent availability of Windows 8.1. However, Reller did not offer a breakdown of the enterprise uptake of Windows 8 compared to Windows 7, both of which are counted by Microsoft as modern desktops."

cancel ×

246 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Migration (3, Funny)

puddingebola (2036796) | about a year ago | (#44845165)

Maybe they are migrating to Canada. I hear that it is a nice country.

Re:Migration (2, Funny)

ackthpt (218170) | about a year ago | (#44845317)

Maybe they are migrating to Canada. I hear that it is a nice country.

Well, two from the Enterprise came to the US from Canada (Kirk & Scotty) The Ambassador Bridge goes two ways, eh!

Re:Migration (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845495)

scotty iz scotch not canadan

Re:Migration (1)

JustOK (667959) | about a year ago | (#44845515)

ur thinking of welshy.

Re:Migration (0, Troll)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about a year ago | (#44846049)

I migrated from XP 8 years ago... TO OSX!!!!!

Re:Migration (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845627)

scotty iz scotch not canadan

Pretty sure he is talking about the actors. Because character-wise, Kirk is from Iowa. But both, Shatner and Doohan, are in fact Canadian. Actually, Doohan is so good at faking an Aberdeen-accent that most Scots wouldn't notice he was a foreigner.

Re: Migration (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44846237)

Was

Re:Migration (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | about a year ago | (#44845971)

Kirk is from Iowa!

Re:Migration (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845655)

Maybe they are migrating to Canada. I hear that it is a nice country.

No, no, you have it all wrong. American companies only migrate their money offshore...you know, when they want to avoid paying taxes.

Or, you just become the governments biggest tool (both figuratively and literally) and get a free pass on paying taxes at all. Troll them again Zuck...it's obviously worth it.

How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (5, Interesting)

rumpledoll (716472) | about a year ago | (#44845175)

I suspect well north of 90%. Anyone know a real number for this?

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (4, Informative)

RatBastard (949) | about a year ago | (#44845181)

My office is slowly migrating to 7. We have no plans to go with Windows 8 on the desktop.

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (4, Informative)

ackthpt (218170) | about a year ago | (#44845351)

My office is slowly migrating to 7. We have no plans to go with Windows 8 on the desktop.

For home I took one look at 8 and promptly bought 7.

Our office is not in the habit of supporting 8, so we are actively discouraging adoption of it.

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (1)

Vanderhoth (1582661) | about a year ago | (#44846021)

We're migrating to windows 7 in my office as well. Win8 is being highly discouraged.

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (4, Funny)

msobkow (48369) | about a year ago | (#44845193)

A real number? On Slashdot?

Let me guess: You actually read the article, too.

But I've not run into a single Windows 8 desktop at any business site I've ever worked for or visited, so I suspect your number is lowballing it.

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (1)

Sir_Sri (199544) | about a year ago | (#44845229)

I've seen a few, mostly in the testing sense, or for anyone who makes consumer software as a business, and they need to know how to work with 8.

But ya, I'm scrambling to get a bunch of windows 7 PC's in the next week or two for a LOT of small business customers in case 8.1 makes windows 7 unavailable. Unfortunately windows 8.1 is not actually a meaningful improvement on windows 8.

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (1)

ackthpt (218170) | about a year ago | (#44845357)

A real number? On Slashdot?

Let me guess: You actually read the article, too.

But I've not run into a single Windows 8 desktop at any business site I've ever worked for or visited, so I suspect your number is lowballing it.

We buy Windows 8 machines, then image Windows 7 over top.

Re: How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845499)

We have exactly one... sitting in the cube of one of our qa people.

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (0)

vux984 (928602) | about a year ago | (#44845737)

I'm starting to see it. Defininitely not common yet, and mostly in small businesses or new businesses (e.g 1-2 servers and 20 computers, with 5-20 employees) but its out there.

I think I see 8 more than I saw Vista the same timeframe after launch... no hard data, just gut, So take it for the practically nothing that is worth. :)

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (4, Insightful)

fishnuts (414425) | about a year ago | (#44845285)

As an IT manager who oversees deployment and maintenance of about 60 desktops and laptops, some of which are shared among multiple employees, consistency in OS availability for the end user is key. We upgrade one or two machines per month, and we started using Windows 7 three years ago, so about 15 systems still run XP. We're not touching 8.1 until there are no more XP systems on our network, AND people show interest in actually using 8.1, AND at least one service pack has been released to address outstanding issues since its public release, AND we discover a way to disable the "Tiles" start screen. Supporting systems with two different desktop interfaces is a serious pain in the ass, especially for non-technical users. So far, only two people have shown interest in using Windows 8 (techie geek types), and the vast majority of our employees are averse to changing their OS at all.

I've had to customize Windows 7 a bit to make it "comfortable" for the lowest common denominator: Long-time XP/2000 users.

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (1)

dnaumov (453672) | about a year ago | (#44845373)

As an IT manager who oversees deployment and maintenance of about 60 desktops and laptops, some of which are shared among multiple employees, consistency in OS availability for the end user is key. We upgrade one or two machines per month, and we started using Windows 7 three years ago, so about 15 systems still run XP. We're not touching 8.1 until there are no more XP systems on our network, AND people show interest in actually using 8.1, AND at least one service pack has been released to address outstanding issues since its public release, AND we discover a way to disable the "Tiles" start screen.

You will be waiting a very long time then, considering 8.1 is essentially the service pack for 8. The concept of a "service pack" is dead, Microsoft has long planned moving to rolling releases a la MacOS X.

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845557)

B.S.

Just yesterday Office 2010 SP2 got installed on my PC.

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (4, Funny)

msobkow (48369) | about a year ago | (#44845701)

*rolls eyes* Why, yes, Office is an Operating System.

Just like Emacs is. :P

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (1)

Algae_94 (2017070) | about a year ago | (#44845773)

so, a service pack for a 3 year old piece of software is evidence that windows will continue to follow the service pack model? Win 8.1 is the service pack to Win 8

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | about a year ago | (#44846235)

B.S.

Just yesterday Office 2010 SP2 got installed on my PC.

Office 2014, and VS 2014 are almost done.

Re: How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845677)

solutions for booting straight to the desktop have been publicly available and free since at least last december. As a windows admin, i realize you have a responsibility to suck at your job. Your boss will be so pleased when he learns you have fucked him out of two years of un upgrade cycle.
you should kill yourself.

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (3, Interesting)

vux984 (928602) | about a year ago | (#44845767)

AND at least one service pack has been released to address outstanding issues since its public release,

Wouldn't you consider 8.1 as a service pack to 8.0 ?

AND we discover a way to disable the "Tiles" start screen

The 3rd party add-ons do that well enough today. If you haven't "discovered" them yet, you haven't been looking. But honestly, by the time your company is likely to move to consider moving past 7, maybe you'll want to reconsider that.

2-3 years from now, I figure the new start screen will have largely been adopted as mainstream (at least if Microsoft doesn't abandon it in favor of a whole new UI next year...) and by then using it at work might be acceptable for the vast majority of employees, with minimal training.

Sure you'll have a few luddites who still get angry if the desktop doesn't look like what they used in 1998 but they can either adapt or be replaced.

Not that I'm suggesting rolling out the start screen now... I'm just saying make that decision a few years out. When XP launched everybody in business always set the classic theme to make it look more like Windows 2000. by 2005 that practice was long dead... people all had XP at home, and had acclimatized to the new start menu.

I think we'll see that repeat again with the start screen, although it may take a bit longer. since its a lot more different and computers last longer now.

And again... it all depends on what microsoft does... sitcks with it and further improves it... or if they throw it under the bus with Zune and Silverlight... :)

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (5, Insightful)

tftp (111690) | about a year ago | (#44846175)

The 3rd party add-ons do that well enough today. If you haven't "discovered" them yet, you haven't been looking.

Those 3rd party add-ons are not a good option for a business. Microsoft can break the functionality at any time - and they did it once already, with 8.1.

If they do it again, what will you do when on some fine Wednesday 100 workers come to their computers, wiggle the mouse, and they see ... what will they see? They never saw it before. Would be probably a thousand tiles. They will call the IT. The telephones at IT melt down, and the IT director commits seppuku with a dull byte. There is no option to "wait a couple weeks until the Start8 people figure out what is broken *this time*." The option to roll back the updates is also not very easy (if you need it, you aren't set up for approved deployment of patches.)

2-3 years from now, I figure the new start screen will have largely been adopted as mainstream

It won't be because it is not an improvement, it's a regress to Windows 3.0. Full-screen, single window Program Manager.

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | about a year ago | (#44846219)

Disabling Aero and instant search, aero peak, aero snap, gets rid of the reason to switch and reconfirms to those who hate change that XP is a supperior OS and ruins the credibility of your IT department as all change is for the sake of change.

I always let my users know the new capabilities and then they nod their head s and some even look forward to change aas they now see a plus side. You need to sell yourself

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845299)

FWIW, we're pretty much a Microsoft shop and have been on a fairly aggressive upgrade schedule as long as I can remember. We've been on 7 for years, and they were actually very enthusiastic about adopting Vista back in the day. We've already verified Windows 8 hardware and software compatibility, have Win8 images ready to deploy on a moment's notice, and actual deployment is simply not even talked about here. In fact, the absence of any plausible desktop upgrade path seems to be jump-starting our exploration of BYOD and making our business processes usable via iPads and iPhones.

If things keep going like this for another decade, we won't be a recognizably Microsoft shop anymore (the server infrastructure will likely stick around longer).

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (2)

ackthpt (218170) | about a year ago | (#44845343)

I suspect well north of 90%. Anyone know a real number for this?

As the age of XP approaches infinity the percentage ever decreases, usually through attrition of old hardware replaced with new. That's simply going to happen no matter how closely bound some users are to their old XP machines. But as we are now well along with VMs and such, there's no real reason anyone who isn't absolutely determined can't continue to run it in an emulator or VM instance. The limiting factor, however, will be inability to run software, such as browsers, which become more resource hungry with time.

I recall, well into the age of XP there were still large numbers of people still dinking around with Windows 98, determined not to give up until they could not longer start their machines (often the sort of people who thought $2,000 spent on a computer was an investment and it should run for decades.)

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44846287)

"I recall, well into the age of XP there were still large numbers of people still dinking around with Windows 98..."

Heh. When Vista came out I remember working on mission-critical equipment that was hooked up to a data collection PC running Windows 3.11, and upgrading was not possible. Windows XP will still be here 10 years from now.

Re:How close to 100% is the Windows 7 percentage? (1)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about a year ago | (#44846029)

I finally get upgraded at work to Windows 7 next Friday! Along with IE 8! Joy! I'm not kidding

Re XP is like herpes in the enterprise (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | about a year ago | (#44846347)

If you scratch under the skin and go on the network it is still there underneath the surface. POS systems, clients in a particular group who need an IE 6 app, equipment, branch offices far from headquarters etc.

90% still have XP used somewhere and 40% still haven't started migration yet from what I have seen. FYI I specialize in XP to Windows 7 migrations in consulting.

Hospitals and schools and small to medium sized businesses are the ones not upgrading. Even without IE 6 many smaller businesses doo not give a shit as they like the fact employees cant use facebook and view IT as an expense. Small to medium sized businesses make up the majority of jobs and have no IT departments but do have accountants who always advise no to IT.

XP is not going anywhere for years to come with these users. It is amazing how technology moved forward until 2002 or so and just stopped and set for this market. No gradual slowness just stopped from tje 2002 recession. These users now realized the cost saving and familiarity and like it. Why change for the sake of change

We're Skipping Windows 8 and 8.1 (4, Interesting)

ScottCooperDotNet (929575) | about a year ago | (#44845213)

I don't know why any sane company would be "spurred by the imminent availability of Windows 8.1" to drop XP. It's much more about XP's end of support on April 8, 2014. We can't have soon-to-be-unpatched boxes and laptops on our network, although I'm sure some will be in hiding past that date (VMs, second systems, etc).

Re:We're Skipping Windows 8 and 8.1 (5, Insightful)

plover (150551) | about a year ago | (#44845707)

It's only about XP's end of support on April 8, 2014.

FTFY.

There are zero positive valid business benefits to upgrading to Windows 8+, some non-issues that are used for sales pitches by OS vendors, and several negatives.

In the non-issue column, there are:

  • We have no need for any application changes that take "advantage" of any of the new features of the new OS.
  • We have no need for any GUI changes that take "advantage" of any of the new features of the new GUI.

In the negative column, we have the following:

  • Vendor support. End-of-life is used only for extortion by the vendor. We'd be perfectly content if they continued to support XP. It's not as if those bits rotted away through age.
  • GUI changes that disturb people who have no need to learn a new GUI. In particular, I don't want to pay someone extra to waste their time learning a new GUI.
  • OS storage requirements that increase the footprint of the OS. I don't want to have to buy new hardware, disks, CPUs, RAM, or motherboards.
  • Increasingly complex management and distribution requirements. We solved all those problems already. Now I have to re-solve them for the new OS.
  • Their originally poor security model was made more complex without making it better. Again, my training and costs rise, with no ROI.
  • Cost. Not only do the new licenses cost, but the ever increasing doom of moving to a Microsoft-based SaaSTCRMFYOAAB (Software as a Service That Collects Rent Money From You On An Annual Basis.) I don't need to pay their cloud fees to do my work.

Microsoft thrives on confusing people into to forgetting that an OS is nothing more than the kernel, and the rest of the crap is GUI and application stuff that should not belong in the hands of the OS vendor. Apple has mastered fostering that misunderstanding as well. It's obviously profitable for them, which means it costs us plenty.

The worst part is that I've had our infrastructure people tell us the cost of deploying Linux is too high, for several of those same negative reasons above. Well, we would have had to do it exactly ONE time, and then we'd have been done. But no, here we are, staring down another Windows end-of-life deadline, getting ready to write them another check. Too bad we can't sue those people for malfeasance.

Re:We're Skipping Windows 8 and 8.1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845867)

Zero? How about Hyper-V included with the OS?

Re:We're Skipping Windows 8 and 8.1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44846345)

How would it benefit the end-user or the IT department?

For the geek in me, I may be interested, but I might as well turn toward something that I am familiar with already: VMWare.

Re:We're Skipping Windows 8 and 8.1 (1, Interesting)

DogDude (805747) | about a year ago | (#44845997)

The worst part is that I've had our infrastructure people tell us the cost of deploying Linux is too high, for several of those same negative reasons above. Well, we would have had to do it exactly ONE time, and then we'd have been done.

Oh, that's cute. Where do I get a copy of a Linux that came out in 2001 and is still supported by the manufacturer?

Re:We're Skipping Windows 8 and 8.1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44846117)

If advances in computing technology doesn't excite you, please find a new line of work. Your just holding the rest of us back.

Re:We're Skipping Windows 8 and 8.1 (1)

marcosdumay (620877) | about a year ago | (#44846187)

Please, tell me what Linux distro did require that since the last decade you:
1 - Buy newer versions. The problem here is money spending, so free updates won't do it.
2 - Change your GUI to something completely unrecognizable. Yeah, one of the 2 most used options from the last decade changed, and several people started using a third one, one of them is pretty like it was at 2001. And there are several GUIs intentionaly like the onld ones if you really need it.
3 - Change your computer more than once on the decade.
4 - Increase your workload in maintaining it.
5 - Use a more complex security system.
6 - Pay for SAAS.

Those are the issues the GP enumerated. Go ahead, name one distro that has them.

Re:We're Skipping Windows 8 and 8.1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44846111)

Corporate IT guys that fight change to make their jobs easier are the reason why the rest of the web still has to support IE 8.

Yeah, that's what XP holdouts were waiting for (5, Insightful)

jayhawk88 (160512) | about a year ago | (#44845227)

Windows 8.1. *eyeroll* They're going to 7 you morons, and they're going to stay there for another 15 years. Doesn't matter what you do to the Start Menu.

Re:Yeah, that's what XP holdouts were waiting for (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845455)

XP being end of life next April was the spur where I work and I expect many other places too. And yeah we're going to 7, not even thinking about 8 except for some tablets.

Re:Yeah, that's what XP holdouts were waiting for (3, Funny)

Darinbob (1142669) | about a year ago | (#44845985)

So you're completely leapfrogging over Vista. How reckless :-)

Re:Yeah, that's what XP holdouts were waiting for (4, Interesting)

BitwiseX (300405) | about a year ago | (#44845513)

Windows 8.1. *eyeroll* They're going to 7 you morons, and they're going to stay there for another 15 years. Doesn't matter what you do to the Start Menu.

Yeah, I read that, and thought BS as well. They're looking the wrong direction I think. Looking backwards at the curmudgeon that was Vista, that was (at least in my enterprise environment) completely skipped over. It was really a matter of earning back some trust.
I understand that 8.1 is to 8 what SP2 was to XP (in theory) but I just can't see any advantage to using 8 in an enterprise environment.

Not to mention, enterprise adoption is a SLOW process in a lot of cases. It's the same reason certain cars sell better on the used market than others. PROVEN reliability.

(oh shit, did I just make a car anology... I really need to get off this site)

Re:Yeah, that's what XP holdouts were waiting for (2)

jbolden (176878) | about a year ago | (#44845531)

The end of Windows 7 extended support is January 14, 2020. Microsoft is not going to make the same mistake of indefinitely extending this date by continuing sales indefinitely.

Re:Yeah, that's what XP holdouts were waiting for (5, Interesting)

girlintraining (1395911) | about a year ago | (#44845713)

The end of Windows 7 extended support is January 14, 2020. Microsoft is not going to make the same mistake of indefinitely extending this date by continuing sales indefinitely.

They tried to kill XP. Repeatedly. They extended the deadline many times. They're going to do it again with Windows 7, because 8 is a steaming three coiled turd. Nobody asks when corporations are upgrading to Vista... because nobody is. How many corporations are looking at Windows 8? Next to none. Go ahead... find a job for a "Windows 7 to Windows 8 migration expert" on a job site for a Fortune 500 company. We'd all love to see the three positions in the entire world that are available for that job. -_-

Please. Microsoft can try shoving stuff down their customer's throats... but all they'll do is get another XBone out of the deal. How's that working out for you, by the way, Ballmer? Polishing up the old resume I hear.

Re:Yeah, that's what XP holdouts were waiting for (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845947)

You're writing as if your opinion matters. This indicates a complete lack of self awareness.

In case you have forgotten, you're writing a comment on the internet to people who are only here to see that they've made a comment on the internet. I suppose it makes you feel better, and since only people who have nothing else worth living for would do this sort of thing I'd just like to wish you good luck, and to hang in there, we all care about you very much.

Re:Yeah, that's what XP holdouts were waiting for (1)

DogDude (805747) | about a year ago | (#44846015)

Please. Microsoft can try shoving stuff down their customer's throats.

Absolutely. Now, where can I get another OS that will be supported by the manufacturer for more than a measly 13 years?

Re:Yeah, that's what XP holdouts were waiting for (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845957)

The end of Windows 7 extended support is January 14, 2020. Microsoft is not going to make the same mistake of indefinitely extending this date by continuing sales indefinitely.

Uh, hate to point out the fucking obvious here, but with that date, Microsoft already made the same mistake.

If you actually want people to buy your new products that you're trying to pimp every 6 - 12 months, then maybe you should consider shrinking the extended support down to something below a decade. Just a thought.

"Modern desktops" LOL (5, Insightful)

JoeyRox (2711699) | about a year ago | (#44845233)

It's a really bad sign when you have to obfuscate product uptake percentages with amorphous terms like "modern desktops" to cover up the fact that your latest flagship software release was an unmitigated disaster. Maybe instead of blaming Microsoft's horrible missteps on Balmer we can blame them on the "Modern Microsoft execute".

Re:"Modern desktops" LOL (2, Insightful)

click2005 (921437) | about a year ago | (#44845277)

I bet "modern desktops" includes Linux & OSX but MS wont talk about that.

Re:"Modern desktops" LOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845987)

I bet "modern desktops" includes Linux & OSX but MS wont talk about that.

Don't you mean GNOME 3 , GNOME SHELL?

Re:"Modern desktops" LOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845383)

Regardless of your opinion of Windows 8.x, enterprises have historically favored the 2-3 year old choice, no matter what it was. Having been around a couple of years means the early adopters have run into the bleeding edge issues, a couple patches have been released, and it's generally had time to prove itself.

Even if Windows 8.1 was the best thing ever (and I'm not asserting that it is or isn't), enterprises wouldn't be interested in it for another couple years.

Re:"Modern desktops" LOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845441)

It's a really bad sign when you have to obfuscate product uptake percentages with amorphous terms like "modern desktops" to cover up the fact that your latest flagship software release was an unmitigated disaster. Maybe instead of blaming Microsoft's horrible missteps on Balmer we can blame them on the "Modern Microsoft execute".

I tried that but I get this error:

"Modern Microsoft execute did not complete successfully, Your computer's files and settings were not changed.
Details;
Modern Microsoft execute could not access a file. This is probably because an anti-virus program is running on the computer . Temporally disable your antivirus program and retry System Restore.
An unspecified error occurred during Modern Microsoft execute, (0x80070005)"

Correlation does not imply causality (5, Interesting)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year ago | (#44845241)

Reller said the firm has "now seen about three quarters of Windows enterprises moving to modern desktops" from Windows XP, with the last leg of Windows XP migrations being spurred by the imminent availability of Windows 8.1.

Um, no. Even though firms are buying Win 8, it doesn't mean that they are installing Win 8. Many of them are using a Win 8 license to install Win 7. If MS believes enterprises and consumers want Win 8 by choice, they are deluded.

Re:Correlation does not imply causality (4, Insightful)

Mitreya (579078) | about a year ago | (#44845271)

If MS believes enterprises and consumers want Win 8 by choice, they are deluded.

I am almost certain that MS does not care whether people buy Win 8 "by choice" or not. As long as they buy it.

It is good to be a monopoly.

Re:Correlation does not imply causality (2)

binarylarry (1338699) | about a year ago | (#44845443)

Not so much when your empire is crumbling around you and you don't know why.

Linux Mint (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845257)

is the best Windows XP still on the market.

If you get sick of your desktop or laptop pretending that it's a tablet (due to modern Ubuntu, Microsoft, or Apple operating systems), give Linux Mint [linuxmint.com] a whirl.

Arch Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845657)

Or go to Arch Linux if you wanna train your brain :)

Re:Linux Mint (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845785)

>Linux Mint
Shitty bloated Ubuntu spinoff with a different theme and gnome-shell layout theme.

Re:Linux Mint (0, Troll)

ron_ivi (607351) | about a year ago | (#44845991)

Wine-on-Mint is probably more compatible with XP apps than Win8 is anyway.

Windows 7... (4, Informative)

PhantomHarlock (189617) | about a year ago | (#44845275)

...is actually nice desktop OS for functional productivity. It's like having XP but upgraded under the hood for modern hardware. Mine is tastefully retrograded to the XP UI theme, plus some deeper settings to get rid of some of the annoying defaults regarding the task bar.

Had no issues with it for a number of years now and plan to continue using it for the time being.

Re:Windows 7... (5, Funny)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about a year ago | (#44845507)

Mine is tastefully retrograded to the XP UI theme,

"Tasteful" and "XP UI" have, heretofore, never been seen as linked concepts. Typically, the comments are more along the line of 'my eyes bleed' and 'Turn it off!!!".

I do not want to see what your room looks like.

Re:Windows 7... (5, Informative)

mrscorpio (265337) | about a year ago | (#44845561)

He probably means the "classic" theme, which is really the Win2k theme.

Re:Windows 7... (1)

zippthorne (748122) | about a year ago | (#44845597)

the Silver and Green themes are pretty non-eye-bleeding.

Re:Windows 7... (2)

PhantomHarlock (189617) | about a year ago | (#44845635)

Correct, the Win2k theme. Should have clarified. The default XP theme is hideous.

Re:Windows 7... (1)

zippthorne (748122) | about a year ago | (#44845579)

you should try the win7 task bar.. I thought pinning things would be inferior to quick launch, but after upgrading I find I much prefer the pinning option, because they also added hotkeys for the items in the task bar.

windows + number will switch to the first ten items (or cycle through its group, if several instances are running and grouped), and it will open a new one if there isn't already one running. shift + windows + number will start a new one if there IS one already running.

I haven't been using 7 for long, but I'm looking forward to discovering the new shortcuts.

Re:Windows 7... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845605)

...is actually nice desktop OS for functional productivity. It's like having XP but upgraded under the hood for modern hardware. Mine is tastefully retrograded to the XP UI theme, plus some deeper settings to get rid of some of the annoying defaults regarding the task bar.

This.

HKCU\Control Panel\Desktop\ActiveWndTrkTimeout 50ms
HKCU\Control Panel\Desktop\UserPreferenceMask 9f 3e 07 80 12 00 00 00
HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\NoFileFolderConnection 1

Now you've got focus-follows-mouse. No autoraise. X-mouse fun, just like PowerToys did before they took that away.

And the third one disables the misfeature called "Connected Files" (if you save a web page, and delete foo.html, the default behavior is to delete the "foo" directory that contains all the assets required to make up foo.html. Who the fuck thought that was ever a good idea?)

Re:Windows 7... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44846011)

Thanks a lot. My life at work will be less miserable as these two features are central to my comfy Linux desktop usage (though your suggestions show how the "Windows is easy" mantra is just a lie, in fact).

Now, pardon me, but I'll have to look for some reference on those numbers -- no way I'm gonna type that and get serious problems with the IT folks at work.

Finally, if there's just a way to have copy-on-select, my life would be a bliss...

There are other things like multiple work areas, window shading and, my current infatuation, the plasma dashboard.

Re:Windows 7... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845715)

...is actually nice desktop OS for functional productivity. It's like having XP but upgraded under the hood for modern hardware. Mine is tastefully retrograded to the XP UI theme, plus some deeper settings to get rid of some of the annoying defaults regarding the task bar.

Had no issues with it for a number of years now and plan to continue using it for the time being.

Care to share the setting changes you made? I too use the XP UI theme, and I also use quicklaunch, but it keeps resetting it whenever windows 7 reboots.

Re:Windows 7... (1)

MtViewGuy (197597) | about a year ago | (#44846251)

Most corporations have pretty much migrated to Windows 7, not only because of the end of life support issue but also Windows 7 can handle large amounts of RAM, which makes it very useful running multiple corporate custom apps.

In my opinion, Windows 7 is probably the best version of Windows ever released: stable, fast, and most importantly, the user interface is familiar enough that anyone who's used Windows 95 or later can master Windows 7 fairly quickly.

NT versions (2)

chuckugly (2030942) | about a year ago | (#44845295)

In fairness, everything Windows PC since XP is NT 6.x, so moving from 5.x to 6.x isn't a completely silly thing to track.

Windows XP?? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845327)

people still use Windows XP? It is 2013! Don't tell me they are still running Pentium 3 computers at 900 MHz. My university uses Windows 8 and Dual Core processers at 2.6 GHz. Just saying.

Re:Windows XP?? (5, Informative)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about a year ago | (#44845407)

people still use Windows XP? It is 2013! Don't tell me they are still running Pentium 3 computers at 900 MHz. My university uses Windows 8 and Dual Core processers at 2.6 GHz. Just saying.

You should try running XP on a recent system sometime; it's very zippy, and with all the patches applied, quite stable.

Plus, it virtualizes well with a low memory footprint.

Re:Windows XP?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845517)

dat processer

Re:Windows XP?? (4, Informative)

Hartree (191324) | about a year ago | (#44845623)

And?

The attitude you are showing is that of a toy fan, not a professional.

There are still large numbers of XP boxes out there doing tasks every day.

They might not be what you'd want for your own workstation, but for running the mass spectrometer or x ray diffraction machines that would take 200K+ each to replace with the modern ones, they work just fine.

I'll guarantee that a lot of the workhorse computers in the laboratories at your university run XP (or maybe even Win 2K, or NT 4).

I maintain those systems for the chemistry department at a major university. Most researchers aren't flush with so much cash they can replace machines that are only a few years old. And, the manufacturers tend not to update their systems without good reason (if it ain't broke, don't break it by trying to fix it).

Just yesterday, I was working on a system with a VESA local bus 486 DX2 running it. Yeah, it's old, but it does certain specialized x-ray diffraction work just fine. We'll be happy to update it as soon as our broke state (or the NSF that's under sequester) coughs up a quarter to a half a million for something that can replace it. i.e. no time soon.

Re:Windows XP?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845643)

Running XP on a core i3. It works fine!

Win XP (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845337)

Windows XP is a great OS. I'm still using it here and boy, my system is very stable and fast.

Re:Win XP (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845999)

No plan to change most of our PC's away from XP or Win7. They have no issues, runs all the software needed for much of our business. Got in a few i7 faster PC's for animation work that came with Win8 installed. Our first task was to "upgrade" them to Win7 then load our software. Runs fine! A couple of the older XP's boxes we loaded Linux. They now run faster than when Windows was installed !

Our experience with XP to Win8 (4, Interesting)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | about a year ago | (#44845355)

We're finally getting around to having a bunch of XP boxes replaced with new ones, simply because they're old and a hardware failure in one of them triggered the decision to do pretty much all.

We looked at getting Win7 machines - or at least getting Win7 installed onto the machines as part of an agreement - but in the end, it just wasn't worth it. More than half our staff already has Win8 at home and are perfectly comfortable with it, and once you get past the start screen, Win8 is, for our purposes, practically the same as Win7.
I do say 'once you get past the start screen', but we're actually seeing uptake in using it. We tried a few 3rd party start menu offerings (most of them are crap, from not letting you modify it through not even listing all of the installed software that you would see listed if it were a proper start menu), eventually settling on one.. only to realize that most of the staff felt perfectly comfortable with either A. going to the pinned items on the task bar, or B. typing the name of the program from the start screen (we haven't bothered with tiles for most things, and removed almost all of the defaults... if they want to know the weather, they can listen to the forecast every half an hour on the radio, or hunt down the app in 'all apps').

While the future direction of Win8 may be something to worry about (more and more store-centric, marginalizing the desktop, etc.), the future of Win7 isn't all roses either. Given that Win8 at least will enjoy support far past Win7, well, the choice was a lot easier than we anticipated.

Our biggest struggle has actually been with outdated software. 16bit software just won't run on Win8 (64bit - can be enabled on 32bit, but that's just another wall waiting to be hit), and while our admin would be comfortable with installing a VM to keep these going, we're just biting the bullet and converting legacy files to formats used by more modern software, finding alternatives for those applications that we do still actively use, and keeping two machines around for everything else; one running with a VNC, and the other in storage 'just in case'.

Re:Our experience with XP to Win8 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845463)

So what you're saying is that you have no critical 16 bit apps and your staff do grunt work using a handful of programs. Nice for you. Does not extrapolate to the rest of the world though.

Re:Our experience with XP to Win8 (1)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | about a year ago | (#44845547)

We have a few - that's why we're keeping a machine around.

Yes, our staff do 'grunt work', like 95% of people using computers to begin with - whether that's somebody typing up a document in Word, or somebody elegantly pushing function key combinations to keep an critical industrial process going (though I'm sure it pleases you to know that that's on a unix box), or somebody doing CAD work on a custom rig for transporting whatever it is the energy industry's come up with as the next best thing this time - it's all 'grunt work'.

Nice for us, indeed - that's why the very title is "Our experience with", and not "Everybody's experience with". Silly AC.

Re:Our experience with XP to Win8 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845799)

If you really need to run legacy 16 bit apps, you should look into application virtualization. that will most likely resolve any compatibility issues you're having.

Re:Our experience with XP to Win8 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845909)

Critical 16-bit apps? If the apps were critical, then you should have moved them to 64-bit 10 years ago, seriously.

Re: Our experience with XP to Win8 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845613)

Dosbox

Re:Our experience with XP to Win8 (4, Informative)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year ago | (#44845649)

> We looked at getting Win7 machines - or at least getting Win7 installed onto the machines as part of an agreement - but in the end, it just wasn't worth it. More than half our staff already has Win8 at home and are perfectly comfortable with it, and once you get past the start screen, Win8 is, for our purposes, practically the same as Win7.

Um, no, it really isn't. It must be a relatively small company. We have well over 10,000 users, the great majority of whom are not computer geeks, and there's no way in hell a large company would make a jump like that, unless they were in the business of developing for Windows 8.

What OS incoming hardware has pre-installed makes absolutely no difference. It is always re-imaged with the company's copy of the OS the company has standardized upon, with the company's blessed settings and applications. No company in their right mind buys PCs and runs whatever is already on them. Among other issues, that's a serious security vector.

And so, for years we bought PCs loaded with Vista and reimaged them with our copy of XP. Now we're taking PCs and laptops loaded with whatever (Win8, say) and reloading them with our blessed copy of Win7. That's the way any large company does it who doesn't want to experience a widespread IT nightmare.

So no, unless you're a relatively small company populated with mostly computer geeks, I'm not buying it.

big enterprise sites are loaded with in house tool (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about a year ago | (#44845743)

big enterprise sites are loaded with in house tools and all kinds of other stuff that makes changing OS hard

Re:Our experience with XP to Win8 (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | about a year ago | (#44846027)

How do you manage to install Metro apps? The store requires a Microsoft ID even for free apps. Does the company assign Microsoft IDs to everyone?

Re:Our experience with XP to Win8 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44846039)

You know how I know you're lying?...

More than half our staff already has Win8 at home

---- waves hand ---- (2)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year ago | (#44845599)

Yeah. The company I worked for started migrating to Windows 7 earlier this year. We're maybe 30% there. We're going to skip 8.whatever and see what's available when 7 nears end of life.

Corporations that are not themselves in the computer business tend to be a bit conservative about OS upgrades.

Will that make NSA Happy ? (4, Interesting)

Fantasio (800086) | about a year ago | (#44845617)

I would not be surprised if for Microsoft, "Modern Desktop" means "with NSA compliant backdoors". I have been obliged to switch from XP to 7 and frankly I gained nothing in terms of functionalities or ease of access.

Majority of... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44845663)

'PC Gamers finally migrating Away from Microsoft'

Migrated my company from XP in 2008 (3, Interesting)

EmagGeek (574360) | about a year ago | (#44845925)

To Linux. We have been 100% Linux since then - not a single Microsoft machine in the entire operation. And yes, we do get threatening letters from the BSA every year...

Re:Migrated my company from XP in 2008 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44846141)

But how will the BSA snoop software work then?

At that time (1)

waldo_rastel (3077443) | about a year ago | (#44845959)

Ubuntu was not even an OS. OSX was at version 10.1. PageRank wasn't even patented yet. If you seriously believe that any successful software company, hasn't made improvements to their core product in 12 year, then I have this bridge to sell you...

The clock is ticking (1)

davidwr (791652) | about a year ago | (#44846005)

If it weren't for that April 2014 end-of-life deadline and related "end of support" for XP-compatible device drivers and application software, the numbers would be substantially lower.

I can live without support for most software, but anything that represents a potential vector for outside security threats as well as the core of the OS itself I need at least security-level support for in order to run a business on it.

How MS can fix this dumpster fire (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44846055)

It's painfully clear that enterprises will stay as far away from Win8.x as possible and for as long as possible. But I think there's a way to make everyone happy, not that I expect MS to take my advice.

As soon as Ballmer's replacement is installed, MS should announce that they're bringing out Win9 as soon as they can. It will be Win7 + some list of frequently requested features/changes (a real, industrial strength file manager, for example, something akin to Directory Opus). And it will be a free upgrade for Win8 users, and steeply discounted for everyone else -- say $49 for Win7 users and $99 for everyone else.

The kicker is to turn the dumpster fire into a positive. Run an ad campaign in which they show product logos/graphics and have a movie trailer dramatic voiceover that says, "You thought Microsoft Bob was bad... You thought Windows ME was bad... You hated Vista... And holy crap did you hate Clippy... But we managed to top it all with Windows 8." Then the new CEO explains that they screwed things up very badly, apologizes, and unveils Win9, code named Windows Classic.

The free pub from the media would be deafening. The comparisons to New Coke would be obvious and would only add to the benefit for MS. Above all, it would humanize a company that's done a spectacular job of dehumanizing themselves.

As I said, there's no chance whatsoever MS will actually do anything close to what I described. They will surely keep trying to bludgeon their users into running Win8.x, even as there's a booming business in "Windows 7 Forever" t-shirts and mugs and they get nothing but complaints from users and hardware OEMs.

Windows 8 Fear Mongering (0)

AnnonUSA (1235292) | about a year ago | (#44846079)

It is never easy changing OS versions. But if you are reluctant to the point of fear, nothing would ever change. I am using Windows 8 on my home, office and Laptop systems and there are zero issues that prevent me from doing what I used to do with XP, and everyone screaming about how Windows 7 is better than 8 is just wrong. Windows 8 is Windows 7 SP2. Windows 8 "metro" is like a shell that you do not have to interface with if you do not want to. The Windows 8 "Apps" are mainly garbage and just a way to sell advertizing space to Microsoft customers, but they and the Metro Interface are OPTIONAL. People should be much more concerned about Office 2013 and the Crippled "Click to Run" versions that Microsoft keeps as a dirty secret, as it allows them to block other companies interoperability to generate more Software as a subscription sales.

So that begs the question.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44846265)

Did the ReactOS finally go beta?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>