Ignore Vista Until 2008

Blakey Rat writes "According to Gartner in a research note entitled 'Ten reasons you should and shouldn't care about Microsoft's Windows Vista', businesses should wait until 2008 before installing Windows Vista, or 'pursue a strategy of managed diversity' by only bringing in new machines with Windows Vista and not upgrading existing computers. Although acknowledging the security benefits of upgrading, they explain in the report that most of the security-related benefits that come with Vista are available today through third-party software products."

Comments

The reason not to upgrade is...

[Sinryc]

if its not broke, don't fix it.

Re:The reason not to upgrade is...

[.darkaiyen.]

if its not broke, don't fix it.

wait, this IS windows we're talking about, isn't it?

Re:The reason not to upgrade is...

[BigDork1001]

if its not broke, don't fix it.

My NES still works but I bought a SNES. That still worked but I bought a 64 and then a GC. My X-Box still works and someday long after launch I'll get a 360. They weren't broke but I upgraded.

2000 worked pretty well for the most part(not too broken) but many people are running XP these days. XP isn't too broken but in the future many people will be using Vista. Improvements in functionality, security, and ease of use will eventually lead me to Vista. I don't plan on diving in the day it's released or anything but eventuall I will buy it and install it on my machines.

Re:The reason not to upgrade is...

[cshark]

God willing, I will be ignoring windows vista for much longer than that.

Re:The reason not to upgrade is...

[MoogMan]

(Unfortunately) this is also the same reasoning for not transitioning over to Linux

Re:The reason not to upgrade is...

[FidelCatsro]

Some great movies have been made using windows : Crash , Unstable , Dos Boot , Virus,The spy(ware) Who shagged me , Homers The Iliad (Think troy) and Dawn of the dead.

Re:The reason not to upgrade is...

[birge]

I see your point, but I think it's really more of a polite way of saying "Well, they didn't fix the shit that's REALLY wrong with Windows so why bother." In the case of Vista, maybe they actually will improve security and reliability, but heaven knows the pretty GUI isn't exactly what Windows has been most sorely missing all these years.

What's wrong with Windows may very well be something that doesn't exist at Microsoft: elegance, simplicity and modularity of design. They are trying for that lately, at least they say they are, but it's going to be hard to change the mindset of everybody at Microsoft. They've always had very clever people but not very smart people, as exemplefied by Bill Gates himself. He's a man who is as shrewd as any suit in the room, but he has no sense of elegance. He's like that guy everybody knows who can do any math problem you give him, but who has the creativity of a field mouse. Elegance goes a long way in design, and a good OS is equal parts design and science, I think. You can have the tightest kernel in the world, but when some dipshit comes up with an idea like the Registry, it's all over.

Amazing

[shmlco]

Amazing how many things stay the same. I remember reading the same headlines for XP, W2K, and NT.

Though this article is pretty lame. First time I've read, "Ten reasons you should and shouldn't care about Microsoft's Windows Vista client," in a summary and the linked article doesn't even bother to list them.

This is news?

Re:Amazing

[Blakey Rat]

The wrong text is linked. That text is the title of the Gartner article that the zdnet.uk article is written about. The Gartner article itself isn't available for public consumption, as far as I can tell.

Re:Amazing

[smartin]

Exactly, I wish I had mod points to mod you up. Each new generation of Microsoft operating system is suppose to fix the problems of the past, but each new generation continues to have them. The reason of course is that they simply can't throw the old crap away because they want backwards compatibility. M$ should really take a lesson from Apple when they switched to OS X. Toss the old code base and start new with a tried and true Unix kernel. Provide an emulation environment if you have to but toss it all out and go with what is known to work.

Re:Amazing

[cens0r]

Any old movies will not look perceptably better in HD

WTF? If they do another scan of the film at a higher resolution before compressing it into and HD stream anything that was shot on film will look better in HD. In fact most films are scanned in in resolutions beyond what is needed for HD already, simply because they know HD is coming and it's cheaper to just scan the film stock once.

Now certain movies and TV shows were shot on video and not film, and these will show no improvement. But they are the exception and not the rule.

Re:Amazing

[JPriest]

That is quite possibly the most impressive /. UID I have ever seen, can I touch it?

Re:Amazing

[ximenes]

Touch it!

Summary: Too Little, Too Late

[rsborg]

Seems as if Gartner, the analyst who was deeply in love with Microsoft in the nineties, has turned sour on them lately.

The majority of improvements in Vista will be security-related and most of this functionality "is available via third-party products today"

Ouch.

"Search is slow in Windows XP and files, email and calendar objects cannot be found with a single search." While Microsoft has tried to remedy this in Vista, "competent third-party desktop tools are already available" from companies like Google, Gartner pointed out.

I'd hate to be furniture in Ballmer's office.

My main problem with the article was the lack of options specified:

The analysts acknowledged that companies who use IE7 and Vista will have fewer points of weakness.

Or you could just install Firefox, with the foxie plugin, and get completely secure browsing for all sites, and great Triton/IE support for intranet/extranet legacy webapps.

Re:Summary: Too Little, Too Late

[dslauson]

"Seems as if Gartner, the analyst who was deeply in love with Microsoft in the nineties, has turned sour on them lately."

Keep in mind that he's still recommending Windows. He's not so soft on it that he's tell you to install Linux or BSD.

To me, it sounds like the guy's not really trying to rip on Windows, so much as he's offering sound business advice. Right? I mean, what's the benefit of rushing out and buying the latest version when the current one coupled with the third party software that you probably already have installed, is perfectly adequate?

Re:Perhaps we should wait until 2008

[JoeShmoe950]

I wish there was an "EgoManiac" mod.

11th Reason..

[loconet]

It will be delayed again.

Ten reasons??

[d3ac0n]

Heck. I can give you ONE reason not to move to Vista, and it's all you need.

Trusted Computing.

'nuff said.

Re:Ten reasons??

[dumeinst]

aye aye.
People who don't know what this really implies are going to be dumbfounded when they find out

Re:Ten reasons??

[Proc6]

"The ultimate goal is to lock out cheap independent software (especially, but not limited to, F/OSS)..."

I never understand comments like these. How exactly does DRM do that? How does DRM "force" a developer to charge a whole lot of money? If DRM were in place today and I was a freeware developer, what prevents me from just issuing a DRM key (or whatever the process is) and making my terms of agreement "anyone who requests one gets one and I charge nothing". Or does Microsoft beat down your door and say "NO, YOU HAVE TO CHARGE $500 PER USER!!11!!"

If you think that Microsoft is somehow going to force all software developers to pay some rediculous per application fee, thus forcing them all to charge for their app, thus whittling down the market to like 3 major apps, your tinfoil hat is on too tight.

If there's one thing Bill Gates knows its that his fortune was built on Windows having zillions of developers covering all possible realms of software from Diet Calculators to 3D Animation. Maybe the phrase "Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers!" rings a bell. Developers have to eat too, and once all of them can't afford to turn a profit off writing code for Windows unless they're one of the few working at Symantec or Microsoft or Adobe, they'll find a new career or OS to write for.

About the last scenario Microsoft wants is ONLY the major software developers like Adobe and Macromedia left standing, because they consistantly port their applications to OSX. If you were "forced" to quit using your $50 Paint Shop Pro, and replace it with $500 Photoshop instead, well then theres a 50/50 chance you may just become an OSX customer.

Microsoft may be corporate-evil, but they definately believe in small developer shops and know legions of developers and all their varying business models from freeware to $5,000/user licenses are the foundation of the Microsoft machine.

By that time...

[Spy der Mann]

...I'll already have ReactOS installed in my PC. Oh, btw, this week ReactOS reached version 0.2.8.

Of course, ReactOS will be installed in a dual-boot with the latest Linux, which I hope, will be user-and-hardware friendly by then.

As long as Linux keeps providing me with...

[ylikone]

... a cheap, free (as in freedom), reliable solution, I will continue to ignore Microsoft products for the forseeable future. Everybody knows MS is dead in the long run.

Isn't this Already the "Word on the Street"?

[eno2001]

Where I work we still have more Win2K than XP Pro because the move from NT4 to AD was a long and involved process for 3000+ machines and a team of 3 people to do it. When we got to Win2K AD (we STILL have NT4 domains because of crap legacy software we HAVE to have!) the move to XP was not relished. We've been doing it a building at a time now (60 buildings) and it's going. But this is 2005 going on 2006 and XP came out in 2002. So, you could say we are doing "managed diversity" in a big way. I don't see how this approach to Vista is any different than the way most wise insitutions proceed.

This is the LAST Windows you'll ever buy!!

[malraid]

That's right, every version afterwards will most likely be rented. Vista is just to get everybody slowly by slowly dependant on DRM for day-to-day activities.

You need 10 reasons?

[vertinox]

I only need 4 reasons not to upgrade.

1. OS X
2. Ubuntu
3. Win2000
4. $250

"Upgrade" boycott doesn't ignore Vista

[CDPatten]

A big problem with his premise is no companies would be able to purchase a computer from Dell, HP, IBM, etc. until 2008. As soon as Vista is released they will stop offering XP (almost immediately), and start offering only Vista. It's the way of the world. You can erase vista and install XP, but that would be foolish, not to mention they got a license for Vista with the purchase of the machine.

I'm also disagree with his reasons, but I'm not going to take the "flame-bait" ;)

Re:"Upgrade" boycott doesn't ignore Vista

[Whatchamacallit]

Big companies have corporate site licenses for Windows without Product Activation, etc. We install WinXP or Win2k from the network. We boot a new machine out of the box with a networkable boot cd and kick off a ghost image onto the hardware. The only people actually installing Windows onto hardware the manual way are engineers putting together a new ghost image. The boxes coming from HP, IBM, etc. are never even booted into the OS that comes with them before they are wiped out. The engineers will probably play around with Vista but it is unlikely they will approve it for rollout to 12,000+ PC's until at least the first service pack.

Ignore Vista Until 2008

[oztiks]

Only until 2008? I was hoping to ignore it for much longer then that :)

Re:Not only Vista...

[vertinox]

Microsoft is onto something, they make software that is easy to use and everyone knows how to use it,

I do corp help desk for a living supporting MS Office Applications and I would disagree with this part of your statment.

MS Office Apps are not intuitive nor easy to use for the average Joe office worker. It is why they pay me money to show people how to use them on a daily basis.

You may of course believe them to be so, but put someone who has no training infront of a windows box and you see the same mistakes over and over again by different people. Its a kind of bashing a head against my desk kind of job but its a living.

I could give specific examples about Track Changes and a few other settings that people think they should act a certain way but don't, but I could go on and on.

Have you tried it?

[JcMorin]

Did you run Windows Vista for real? I did, not just a few hours to write a review. I'm running Windows since the October 1st as my main OS.

- Software development (VS Studio 2003)
- Email / Browsing
- Gaming

First impression, wow this is great.
After 6 weeks, my impression have change, Vista (as of currently is pretty crap). I've got multiple reboot, blue screen, IE 7 is having a lots of issue (page not rendering properly, JavaScript error for example Google Spell checker not working properly on IE 7). The search "engine" is not that great, why we can't keep our old *.exe find?

Over that many application not working at all, some desktop application, other are game that just don't launch. Even stable program like SQL Enterprise Manager crash on Vista... :(

Vista new graphical engine is deadly slow too, all is on graphic card but this cause issue like to see the backbuffer when switching application and more. Application are not build like game with "Begin drawing" and "End drawing" so that cause to constantly redraw the screen and see flicker everywhere...

Iwill receive my new portable next week and I will definitely not install Vista on it... for me I agree with the report... I stay with Windows XP for a few years.

Re:Have you tried it?

[ichigo 2.0]

What did you expect, it's a beta version aimed at hardware manufacturers and software developers! I tried it too, and agree that it's buggy as hell (browsing folders locked up my computer), but I'm still going to try the final version.

Re:So how about...Macs

[DECS]

Choosing not to buy something that's available and updated regularly is not the same as having no upgrade path available.

And of course you're just wrong too: Mac users have not had to wait more than three months for a update over the last five years. And Apple delivered a whole new version every 12 months for the last 4 years. Based on the upgrade statistics, not may Mac users have been waiting to upgrade.

Preferably, the feature updates come out fast and furious, but remain compatible enough, so that you don't have to upgrade until you chose to do so. So, you can live without Tiger unless you want a some of the latest wizzy apps and features.

Microsoft has given its users no major upgrades since XP in 2001. "XP Server" slipped to 2003. Longhorn/Vista was promised and delayed in 2004, 2005, and 2006. What does ship will be XP with some Tiger features.

In the same timeframe, Apple has shipped four major OS upgrades and over 15 free "service pack" style upgrades that involve significant OS retooling, much faster performance on the same hardware, and lots of significant UI and API improvements. Including, of course, much of what Microsoft had promised in Vista.

During that time, Microsoft has continuously redefined its planned feature set in Longhorn, lopping off promised features and extending the delivery date over half a decade.

A single decision doomed Windows security

[Myria]

People don't understand the truth about Windows security. It can be traced to a single fateful decision.

In Win32, every module (EXE/DLL) is contiguous in the process virtual address space. The code and data are next to each other in each module, but not between modules. The stack and heap are allocated as blocks at essentially random addresses. The memory layout looks like this:

empty code data empty stack empty code data empty heap ...

The problem is that there is no single address that you could choose that says "only code is allowed below this address, and no code is allowed above this address".

On the x86, before AMD64, it was impossible to tell the processor that certain memory addresses cannot be executed. Anything that was readable was also executable. This means it is possible to execute from the data areas, a fatal flaw.

However, the x86 *does* have a feature that allows you to say "no code is allowed above this address". This is known as the "CS limit". By setting this, any attempt to execute from a data area would crash the program. Crashing the program is a lot better than taking over your computer.

Win32's memory layout prevents this feature from being used, because if you try to set a limit, either you have data in the code area, allowing exploits, or you have code in the data area, preventing legitimate code from executing.

AMD tried to correct this with the NX bit in the AMD64 chips, but it was too late. Too many Win32 programs rely on the ability to execute from a data section. As a result, in XP SP2 and Vista, the feature is only enabled by default in a few programs. You can turn it on for all, but then a lot of copy-protected games won't run.

Linux usually has the same problem. However, because most Linux programs come with source, it is possible to modify every application in the system to work this way.

Melissa