Slashdot Mirror
Now Is Not the Time for Vista
narramissic writes "With nearly a month of Vista availability behind us, businesses don't seem to be in any rush to take the leap. An article on ITworld cites two significant reasons for the foot-dragging. First, Microsoft's case-by-case approach to Vista patches, which is leaving some problems unpatched until after the consumer release in January. Second, application (in)compatibility. From the article: 'Some of the applications that still aren't compatible with Vista include IBM Corp.'s Lotus Notes e-mail and collaboration suite; Cisco Systems Inc.'s and Check Point Software Technologies Ltd.'s VPN clients; Intuit Corp.'s accounting software QuickBooks 2006 and earlier versions; and anti-virus (AV) software from Trend Micro Inc.'"
'
Seems to me that it may also be that CEOs and others who make decisions haven't had the chance to experience it on a new home computer yet. I remember XP didn't take off for a while, but then was adopted by businesses more and more as execs started having it at home and liking the pretty colors and the bells and whistles. I suspect these decisions aren't based as much on stability as we'd all like to think -- I think a lot of adoption of Vista will happen when powerful people (not necessarily technical people) start wanting some of Vista's fun or pretty stuff at the office. And they just haven't had a chance to find out about it yet.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
First of all, in a business environment I'll attempt to make the following, quite imaginary, statements:
For desktop Linux in the workplace, you don't neccessarily want users installing software, let alone Quake 3. Many business IT people see the bigger picture in which IT plays a role. That bigger picture is that the business needs to run applications and manage data that's relevant to their operation. Nothing in that role description requires Windows or anything people are familiar with. I still see business running on terminal connections to a larger system somewhere. Nothing "NEEDS" a mouse... it's just a nice thing that many people have come to believe is normal. And when it comes to training employees, I believe that most of the training should and often does consist of understanding the DATA [information] that the business runs on. The user interface in those situations are somewhat irrelevant though admittedly not completely irrelevant. (A good UI is not the exclusive domain of Windows and I have seen countless BAD-UI applictions written for Windows as well, so the fact that something runs on Windows is no guarantee that the users will be more productive sooner or ever.)
And as a Linux apologist, I have to ask everyone to recall the "ease of use" that DOS/Windows had before Win95. And since package management isn't unified yet, it's obvious what is holding back the ability to "easily install Quake 3." The time will come though... it'll come. I imagine that if, for example, everything shifted over to RPM with YUM repositories, installing, updating and deleting packages could be managed through a convenient GUI such as Yumex. (It works really well in FC5 and 6) The problem isn't lack of technology, it's the diversity of technology combined with a presently low market drive. So the argument is actually a catch-22 argument. You're saying "linux sucks because because there's not enough mainstream apps to make it useful and those that do exist are too inconvenient to install and therefore it has a lower market share." I hold that as trends seem to indicate that the market share is growing in a very erosive way [meaning many people try Linux because they are annoyed with Windows whose market share they are eroding], "Linux sucks because its present market share is the cause for not having all the main-stream apps that other OS environments enjoy... presently."
No body has pointed this out yet, that the difference is 64-bit. Like 2d graphics acceleration, 32-bit will be the backwater poorly-optimized part of new processors. Yeah, you will be able to run your pirate copy of XP on new computers but over time it will get less and less efficient to do so. This transition basically solves Microsoft's problem of XP being 'good enough', so there will actually be a faster transition to Vista than say to 95->98, 98->ME, 95->NT, NT->2k, 2k->2k3. Only 3.1->95 will have been a faster transition IMO.
This site has a picture of Bill Gates as the Borg. When did you think this site was ever not biased? I've been with Slashdot for a long time, and I have noticed that within the past year or so there was a SHARP increase in people who pro-Microsoft. It should be surprising when people constantly bash open source and promote Windows on Slashdot, since Slashdot IS a pro-open source anti-Microsoft news site. And yes, it is very suspicious, since Microsoft has already been busted astroturfing Digg.
So stop buying Shimano stuff. Install some open source gears and a free software chain...
Shimano has driven most of the competition out of the market. They have a virtual monopoly on OEM equipment. The shit came preinstalled.
Does this sound familiar?
The "Open Source" stuff, well, mostly kinda sucks. It's not their fault, it's just that the newer "innovations" are all still tied up in Shimano patents; and the entire industry has to play Shimano's game or, at best, be relegated to a small niche market.
Does this sound familiar?
On my other bike, however, I have a Campy Nouvo Record Grouppo that, although propriatary, established the industry's "Open Standard." Although dating from the early 70's it still functions perfectly. It has actually outlived three frames.
But you must access the system from a console shell and don't expect to play DVDs on it.
Shimano took over an industry where there was already an established giant by cheaply mass producing knockoffs that were of inferior quality; but with the addition of features that made the equipment more convenient to use for the nonexpert. Once they had become the new giant they began throwing their weight around, raised their prices to the premium level and introduced planned, forced obsolesence.
Sound fam. . . ooooooooooh, nevermind.
Within the context of the story, however, the fact remains that until such time as the "chain" on XP wears out:
Why bother upgrading? XP has all those nifty "consumer" features already. Your existing system still works. What does it matter that Vista needs a new kind of AV package? As the OP illustrates the average consumer (note the absence of scare quotes) has come to simply expect all the little balls of needless shit he has to buy in order to upgrade.
So that isn't the real reason that uptake is a bit slow.
No, the real reason is that XP still works and for first time Microsoft has not been able to put forward a single compelling reason for the business consumer to find Vista desirable. It only seems to exist for the sole reason that Microsoft wants more of your money. For nothing.
Ok, so we have to buy new AV software for Vista, but why should we buy Vista?!
For the first time they have introduced a "new" operating system and the majority response is:
"Right, Bill. Blow me."
And they ain't gonna change that tune until the chain wears out.
This isn't strictly an issue with Microsoft either; I'm posting this from a Mandrake 8.0 box, but I could fire up the Red Hat 5.2 or Mac System 7 box.
But it's getting harder by the day to keep them up and usefully connected. Sooner or later I'll just say "Screw it" and put the Kubuntu box into frontline service.
When all I really need for Mandrake 8.0 (which on the whole I like better) is an improved chain. Carving chains by hand, however, while possible, is a pain in the ass.
KFG
Which is what everyone says. That shows that you don't know anything about the present-day Linux desktop. Question: what mainstream app is missing from the business computing desktop environment?
Is it:Well, the list goes on. Custom-written software (could work well under emulation unless designed specifically to thwart WINE), IP Telephony (Skype has a Linux client), and so on. My point is that any business that's interested could switch today if they wanted. There's no missing killer app (unless you're trying to make excuses). The roadblocks to migrating entirely to Linux on the business desktop are all artificially created by Microsoft to protect their monopoly. The most difficult part is convincing your users that it's a good choice. They've been brainwashed by years of Microsoft marketing, and believe pretty much every word that comes out of Steve's and Bill's mouths blindly. Many organisations will encounter significant resistance during training as belligerent, brain-washed Microsoft junkies demand that things go back to the way they were. That's unfortunate, because I can finally say after almost 15 years of using Linux, that using a Linux desktop is a joy, not an arduous task that requires command-line hacking to accomplish everything it can do.
"Please describe the scientific nature of the 'whammy'" - Agent Scully