Dell Will Offer XP Past Cutoff Date

Dionysius, God of Wine and Leaf, brings news that Dell will be offering Windows XP pre-installed on their computers past the June 30 cut-off date. Computers purchased with Vista Business or Vista Ultimate past June 30 will come with a copy of XP Pro. Dell plans to simply install that copy upon request to save users a step. Perhaps this will help Microsoft officials make up their minds about another extension.

Comments

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Submitter diversity

[peipas]

I couldn't help but notice that the submitter, a commercial entity, currently has four articles on the front page.

Re:Submitter diversity

[ShaunC]

Don't worry, it's just Roland, he forgot he was logged in under his boyfriend's account.

Re:Submitter diversity

[Xenographic]

They seem to be submitting a lot, but in support of their consultancy business, instead of their blog (Roland) or the EFF (the IP guy). I notice that they have a message on there for Slashdot users if you visit the site that says they're regular readers or something.

I dunno, a few of their stories were pretty well linked, so I don't personally mind too much if it gets us better articles (and not Roland-style spam, where all submissions go to his blog, or Beatles keyword stuffing).

Re:Submitter diversity

[dkleinsc]

I'm suspecting that they've put together a bunch of sock puppet accounts voting things to the top of the Firehose, and that the "editors" aren't looking carefully enough at what they're doing to notice.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[iamhigh]

Selling a computer with XP past the Microsoft cutoff date is pretty irresponsible. At least Ubuntu has community support, whereas XP will have no support? Is it really Dell's place to oversee microsoft's business decisions? Why, because that is what the customer wants? We have already moved our purchasing to used retailers in expectance of this day. We have no plans on installing Vista, and as much as I would love it, Linux is not a viable option at this time.

I applaude this decision and will do my best to support them if they continue selling XP.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[yincrash]

There is no XP community support?

Re:People still BUY Windows?

[yincrash]

Sorry, not everybody is a pirate.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[MightyMartian]

It's what they're customers want. I can't roll out Ubuntu where I am because it doesn't support Outlook, at least in a fashion that I would consider stable. It's that simple. I don't want Vista when I get new machines, I want the operating system that I know is proven reliable.

Step out of your Linux bubble for a second and accept that XP is still in demand by a lot of businesses.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[gx5000]

LOL, irresponsible ? support ? who still needs Xp support ?!
Here in the Gov 'o' Canada we are just starting to migrate to XP.
A lot of US Defense is just migrating to XP as well...
We have our own Support staff, and any user that chooses XP over
"supported" Vista obviously has a support route or has abandoned
the parachute knowingly. Remember that this is "By request".

PS: I'll have the porterhouse

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[electrosoccertux]

At least Ubuntu has community support, whereas XP will have no support? Is it really Dell's place to oversee microsoft's business decisions? ?
XP has support into 2014. Wiki.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[andy9701]

Selling a computer with XP past the Microsoft cutoff date is pretty irresponsible. At least Ubuntu has community support, whereas XP will have no support? Is it really Dell's place to oversee microsoft's business decisions?

It's my understanding that the only thing changing as of June 30 is that Microsoft is going to stop selling XP. XP will be supported until something like 2014, IIRC.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[snowraver1]

Good luck with that. Companies like to have someone to blame when the software stops working. With Linux you have no one to blame becuase (for most cases) you aren't paying anything for it, so you don't really have much leverage.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[WinPimp2K]

"why not instead redirect the customers to their Ubuntu offerings instead?"

Maybe because they are going with XP Pro? The OS that Dell's business customers are already using and still demanding? The OS that Dell obediently stopped offering back when MSFTs product rollout originally demanded that Vista go on all new machines more than a year ago. The OS that Dell started putting back on new machines as soon as it was discovered that Vista BROKE "mission critical" business applications left and right.

Maybe Ubuntu is no more capable of handling those same mission critical applications that Vista. Is it's Dell's reponsibility to guarantee that Ubuntu is going to seamlessly slot into any and all of their business customer's IT infrastructure and run the myriads of customized internal and thrid party apps run by those customers?

Why the heck would Dell put a "kick me" sign right over their corporate cojones by offering another useless OS to their business customers after having already been on the steel toed receiving end of the backlash over Vista?

Why do people still want this OS?

[filesiteguy]

I've been a Vista user for over a year now, and am somewhat satisfied with the OS. Compared to XP it is worlds above in both stability and usability. It almost even comes close to KDE for a decent UI.

What are the reasons people want to stay with XP?? As it is, I manage 1200 users, and we are happily switching all to Vista (as well as SLED) as we roll out new machines. (This is approximately 400/year.)

Re:Why do people still want this OS?

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

What are the reasons people want to stay with XP?

Performance is a big reason. You basically need new hardware to run it. Even then it is slower than XP on the same hardware. Consistency is another reason. Admins don't really want to support more OS's than they have to, and they don't have the budget to upgrade all of them, so XP on all makes sense. Then there are issues getting old hardware peripherals to work with it. There are issues with older applications that won't run or won't run stably on Vista. Some you can upgrade (another cost) others you cannot so it is a hard block. Finally, there are migration costs and user training (many of whom obstinately don't want Vista for whatever reason).

From an enterprise perspective, looking at a Vista migration means considering alternatives, like Linux which is a real possibility in many ways and a long term cost saver. A lot of companies are just holding off and waiting for it to stabilize and most of the problems I listed to go away. Others see holding off as a necessary step now, since Vista includes even more data and protocol lock-ins that will make migrating away from it even more expensive than migrating away from WinXP. I have nothing against Vista and recognize some of the real improvements, but I would not recommend a large scale migration to anyone for a while yet. A year ago I said, at least wait a year and see how it goes. It's been a year, and I'd still wait a while.

Re:Why do people still want this OS?

[mpe]

The main reason is that there is zero business case to upgrade. Nobody at Microsoft has been able to explain in concrete terms how Vista will increase my revenue or reduce my expenses.

Even if there was such a case then benefits of it would need to outweigh the costs of the "upgrade". Both the immediate downtime required to do the change and coping with everything which either failed or worked in a different way.

Re:Which Scares M$ the Most?

[Macthorpe]

I'm going to go with the hidden 4th option - people who post on Slashdot with that clever little "M$" thing.

I know it gives me the willies just thinking about them.

Activation?

[Mistshadow2k4]

One of the things I'm wondering about is whether a freshly-installed XP can be activated after the cut-off date.

Re:Activation?

[lazy-ninja]

The cut off date is for OEM Sales ONLY. The OS is still live and active. Mainstream support through 2009 and extended/limited support through 2014.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[edremy]

Umm, because Outlook (especially calendaring) is *the* critical app for many businesses?

Sure, I'll replace the most important app for 1000 people with " couple of Linux projects which at least claim to support that."

You'll pick up my mortgage and other expenses when I get canned, right? Please be slightly realistic in the Linux fanaticism.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[Mikesch]

Businesses don't run based on ideals, they run based on productivity. If applications like Open Office fail to open an Office document even 1% of the time then they're useless if that document is really something you need to open. Gimp still isn't a satisfactory replacement for Photoshop. Sound in flash still doesn't work correctly out of the box on Ubuntu systems, there's no mp3 support by default, nor does Quicktime really work. There's still not a decent movie player.

This doesn't even begin to take into account that most businesses I've come across use some kind of custom industry application. CAD applications, specialized accounting applications, lending an loan applications, guess what they're all written for? Windows. Linux still doesn't work for those customers.

If the Linux community wants to advance they're going to have to give up on some of their ideals and actually provide what people are looking for, which is a stable operating systems that run applications people actually want to use with a consistent look and feel everywhere. I ran Ubuntu for over a year and reverted to XP because I couldn't deal with the slowdowns for no reason, application crashes, incompatibilities, mystery feature additions and removals based on the whims of the developers (what's pigeon going to include or disable this week!), and decisions that were made purely for philosophical reasons (no mp3 support by default? please.)

Most of my machines still run some kind of Unix (mostly FreeBSD and OSX) but when I need Windows, I really need Windows and nothing else will do.

Besides, Outlook is still the best email/productivity/calendaring application out there. Nothing I've seen on UNIX even comes close, especially when I need to share data with others.

And just because XP will be end of lifed, the security updates for it will continue for a few years, which is all anyone really needs. If 75% of the market is still on XP, developers aren't going to move to being Vista only any time soon because it'd kill their sales.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[perlchild]

1) Dell already offers ubuntu under certain conditions, it's not like offering or not XP is linked, to the people affected by this(I keep referring people to the dell website, and people come back with the impression they can only get a pc with vista now, despite the fact that its still sold.
2) WinXP will have "support" long past the cut off date. The end of support date for Windows XP was announced before the end of sale date, I can't rememnber what it is right now, but I believe its in 2010 sometime.
3) Even if they didn't have "support" from microsoft, Dell was already handling some of the support for their XP machines, so it's not fair to say it's unsupported, just "unsupported by vendor"

On the other hand, why not just reverse engineer the cut off date from the end of support date Microsoft? if you're going to stop supporting XP by Jan 2011, the only cut off date that makes sense to me to stop selling is is June 2010, not something in 2008.

OK OK... I know, I'm on slashdot, and expecting Microsoft to make sense, when will I ever learn?

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[LWATCDR]

I do like and use Linux.
But there are just some programs that you can not get on Linux yet. Some of those programs you may absolutely need to run your business.
And before you say the classic dumb answer of just pay for someone to write it for Linux and open source it or do it yourself. Not everybody has the time, talent, or money to write code or start a FOSS project.
Not to mention that you may need it TODAY.
Oh and Wine just isn't that good yet.
I sure wouldn't run Solidworks under Wine.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Out of curiosity, what do you think Microsoft would do if you blamed them when the ______ virus causes downtime or chkdsk corrupts your harddrive?
 
It drives me crazy when people bring up this point, especially when people are arguing for a soon-to-be unsupported OS like XP.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[alex4u2nv]

2012!
When Microsoft stops supporting Win XP, the world will crash!
It was predicted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012

Vista (Not Responding)

[Anonymous Coward]

I have 2 Vista laptops (1 from Dell, 1 from Lenovo; bought with Vista B & HP installed).
Both laptops suffer from the constant (Not Responding) bug.

Simply put you will be working away and suddenly your App (any App) will go into (Not Responding) for 5-30 seconds. Then it mysteriously comes out of that state and you can do work again ... until the next time.

Don't give me that "drivers" BS. The drivers are up to date.

The Green Bar of Death is another wonder to behold.

Finally, after having the V-Bus laptop for a little over a year. Explorer.exe stopped showing me the contents of folders.
Remember when you used to have to re-install Windows about once every 18 months? That pretty much stopped when Win2k came out. Well, it appears to be back.

PS:
Since drivers were mentioned. WTF is with changing the printer drivers model? Has printing changed drastically in the last few years? Can I print in 3D holograms now?
Look if driver models need to be changed due to technical advances, I am all for it. But if I am working with the same technology we had sussed out 20 years ago (or at least 15), leave it the fuck alone. Especially when HP refuses to update their drivers.
Christ, at worst write an emulation layer. All I am doing is putting dots on a piece of paper.

Re:Which Scares M$ the Most?

[BlowHole666]

Umm i will assume you are trying to be funny because you do not provide any references to back up your claim of 2 billion Linux devices vs about 600 million Windows devices.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[peragrin]

Are you really that stupid? Try blaming MSFT when exchange crashes. you can't. The most you might get if you pay for it is help restoring the old data, and reinstalling the system.

Not only do you have to pay MSFT for software, you have to pay extra for the privilege of getting help when it fails.

Save your self some money, and only Pay Novell, Red Hat, Mandriva, etc for help when the software fails and get the software for free.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[growse]

So pay for it then. Plenty of companies out there will take money off you for supporting linux.

In fact, if you pay for linux support, you're in a better position than if you pay for Microsoft support, as you have the resiliance of choice in the market. You don't like what Oracle are doing, pay Redhat instead. You don't like what Microsoft are doing? Tough.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[mhall119]

If applications like Open Office fail to open an Office document even 1% of the time then they're useless if that document is really something you need to open. Gimp still isn't a satisfactory replacement for Photoshop. Sound in flash still doesn't work correctly out of the box on Ubuntu systems, there's no mp3 support by default, nor does Quicktime really work. There's still not a decent movie player. Your OpenOffice point is valid, and a serious concern to most businesses. Your Gimp point is only valid to select groups that need Photoshop, who would ideally be using Macs by now anyway. But the rest of your points here are largely a non-issue from a business perspective. No sound on flash? Can't want movies at your desk? Unless you're in a specialized industry where those tasks are part of your job, you probably can't do that anyway.

If the Linux community wants to advance they're going to have to give up on some of their ideals and actually provide what people are looking for, which is a stable operating systems that run applications people actually want to use with a consistent look and feel everywhere. Unfortunately, beyond advocacy, there is little the Linux community can do to bring proprietary applications to Linux. As for consistent L&F, all GTK apps mostly look the same, and all QT apps mostly look the same. Compare that to Windows where the latest MS Office and IE don't look anything like the rest of XP, even coming form the same vendor. Obviously L&F fidelity isn't as big a requirement as you make it out to be.

Besides, Outlook is still the best email/productivity/calendaring application out there. Nothing I've seen on UNIX even comes close, especially when I need to share data with others. I've found Evolution to be on-par with Outlook in terms of features. The only think Outlook does better is Exchange integration. Evolution generally has better LDAP and CalDAV integration.

I have always loved this argument

[zappepcs]

I have always loved this argument for one simple reason. If you name and itemize the last 20 times something went wrong at your company, how many of them were something the vendor did wrong, or something the vendor had to fix for you? How many were end user issues, networking configuration nightmares of your own creation, configuration management that someone at your company messed up? Misapplied patches or patches you 'forgot' to apply?

In truth, support from the vendor does little for you UNLESS the system they supply is so fscking locked up that you can't do anything with it in the first place, and are FORCED to call for help because you can't do anything with it.

Where I work, we are slowly writing code to work around 'no longer supported' binary processes. If there is no 'community support' we just learn how to do it ourselves or write code we can understand to take its place.

When you want to point that finger of blame it still will take 4hours minimum to get the pointing done. In that time I will generally have already fixed the problem and be working the code to avoid any such occurance in the future.

XP MCE Anyone

[Nom du Keyboard]

For the home user XP MCE is a far better deal cost-wise. It gives the most important feature of multi-processor support, while dropping the ability to join an Active Directory domain. A very fair trade-off for the home user.

So is Dell offering MCE as well still?

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[Jurily]

3) Even if they didn't have "support" from microsoft, Dell was already handling some of the support for their XP machines, so it's not fair to say it's unsupported, just "unsupported by vendor" How many critical security bugs has Dell fixed lately?

Windows ME all over again

[brewstate]

Does anyone remember Windows ME? Did anyone "upgrade" to it. Vista seems mildly familiar with a whole lot more momentum. The major exception is MS realized it was a mistake and admitted it was a stop-gap between windows XP and 98.

Re:Windows ME all over again

[Mistshadow2k4]

I don't know, but I remember "downgrading" my first PC from ME to 98. Even as crash-prone as 98 was, it was still a damn sight better than ME, which was highly crash-prone and very prone to freezing up.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[kabocox]

Selling a computer with XP past the Microsoft cutoff date is pretty irresponsible. At least Ubuntu has community support, whereas XP will have no support? Is it really Dell's place to oversee microsoft's business decisions?

Considering all the business and home people that would like XP Professional rather than Ubuntu. I'd say this a great business decision for Dell.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[ckaminski]

They aren't required to support anything, except what you've paid them to support, and sometimes the contract/license terms don't even require that.

It's the whole reason the Linux/BSD market took off. NO ONE can tell you you can't fix that version of Linux 1.0.18 if that's what you REALLY want to run.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[Anonymous Coward]

Selling a computer with XP past the Microsoft cutoff date is pretty irresponsible. At least Ubuntu has community support, whereas XP will have no support? Is it really Dell's place to oversee microsoft's business decisions? Why, because that is what the customer wants? We have already moved our purchasing to used retailers in expectance of this day. We have no plans on installing Vista, and as much as I would love it, Linux is not a viable option at this time.

I applaude this decision and will do my best to support them if they continue selling XP. Microsoft has stated XP will be technically supported until 2014.

Re:Outlook? You must be crazy.

[drsmithy]

KDE's got better for what people actually use. Outlook had something to offer nine years ago but it's been outclassed big time since. The only thing Outlook really had going for it was device sync but most people gave up PDAs when M$ conquered the market. The things were an expensive toy and people did not buy new ones when their old ones got broken.

Just...wow. How can you even try to have a reasonable discussion with someone like this ?

If they won't sell it, we'll steal it.

[Russ Nelson]

I hope that Microsoft realizes that if they don't sell Windows XP, we'll steal it. And by "steal" I mean make fair use of a product not being sold. Copyright exists to protect commerce, not property rights. If someone refuses to sell a copyrighted work, a defense against copyright infringent is to point out that you're making non-commercial use of a work that is not being sold.

Re:If they won't sell it, we'll steal it.

[bipbop]

I'm not a lawyer, so I won't try to refute this, but I will ask for more information. Can you provide a reference to case law or US code on the subject? If not, can you provide any other form of cite for the defense you outline? I'm sympathetic but skeptical.

Re:If they won't sell it, we'll steal it.

[mr_matticus]

It seems that he is confusing Trademark law with Copyright law. It is my understanding that if a company does not use a trademark, they can lose the rights to it. Abandonment of a copyright is not simply "not using it to sell copies" or "not making commercial use of their copyrighted work". Today, parties all but have to declare that they abandon their copyright in order for it to be so.

Trademarks are slightly different, but you have not framed the issue in the correct manner. It's not the non-use of a trademark that itself causes problems, but rather the failure to defend against others making use of it. You can sit on an unused trademark (say, the "Fairlane" name for Ford) if you might have use for it in the future or if it's a temporary gap in use (like when they retired the "Taurus" name for several years). As long as you prevent someone else from using it, it's not considered abandoned. Like copyright, abandonment is more than not using it. But abandonment and losing rights for failure to prosecute ("dilution") are distinct.

"Abandonware" still protected by copyright remains so. If you own a license already, the law allows you to take some otherwise unlawful means to continue using it once it has been abandoned by the manufacturer, but it does not allow you to sell or distribute it simply because the original company no longer chooses to.

The only place the law is really grey is if the company no longer exists AND no one purchased or was assigned the rights. There hasn't been an affirmative ruling on that to my knowledge, but there's a strong case that the copyright has lapsed if the holder and their estate/successor no longer exist.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[bhtooefr]

Unfortunately, beyond advocacy, there is little the Linux community can do to bring proprietary applications to Linux.

True, but the open source community can do something... try to create a perfect open-source clone of Windows.

Like ReactOS.

(Although it's FAR from perfect right now...)

Obviously L&F fidelity isn't as big a requirement as you make it out to be.

Well, the GP was slightly wrong. People don't care if programs have a consistent L&F with each other, they care if they have a consistent L&F with Windows XP and Office 2003. (Note that I said Office 2003 - the user interface is the single largest reason why the company that I work for isn't migrating to Office 2007.)

Re:Wow

[Renegade88]

Not every user? Thus implying more than half the users are programmers? From what I've heard about the quality of the contribution of these people that fancy themselves as programmers, you'd probably be better off waiting for a professional to do it.

Frankly I am tired of this "You can fix it yourself" mantra. A very, very small percentage of users even have the capability and of those, only a small percentage have the motivation and time to attempt it.

Re:Outlook? You must be crazy.

[gstoddart]

KDE's got better for what people actually use. Outlook had something to offer nine years ago but it's been outclassed big time since.

Not having seen this mythical thing, I have no idea what it is like.

However, as a user of Firefox and Thunderbird in an organization which uses Exchange and Outlook calendaring extensively ... sometimes the fact that I can't access the calendar is a nuisance for me. I may be forced to actually start using Outlook on my next machine upgrade. To the best of my knowledge, I can't just use the calendar.

See, the Outlook calendaring feature is so embedded in most organizations, that you can't seriously be offering up a solution to it. Believe me, if I could figure out how to NOT have to bit the bullet and use it, I would.

The reality of it is, there just isn't a replacement for that stuff that you could have any hope in hell of getting a large organization to adopt. The 2000+ people multinational organization I work for sure as hell isn't going to do it. You can't book a frigging meeting room in my company without inviting it to a meeting, and that's all Exchange/Outlook.

Sadly, I think that is one application that FOSS will never be able to kick out out the enterprise.

Cheers

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[mhall119]

True, but the open source community can do something... try to create a perfect open-source clone of Windows. Wouldn't a clone of Windows be imperfect by it's very nature?

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[maotx]

Outlook uses RPC/MAPI to connect to Exchange while most opensource products rely on IMAP or POP. MAPI is the native API for Exchange interfacing and supports feature rich options that IMAP can not support (shared calendars, public folders, etc.) Additionally, Outlook has a wider base for third-party applications and a tight integration with Microsoft Office (duh) that provides options that are hard to resist. Replacing Exchange isn't that easy either as we have a mobile phone environment to support for syncing via "push" (windows mobile) and a PBX that utilizes Exchange's Unified Messaging. Believe me, I tried to find a comparable open source product as I do, and do mostly successfully, with most of our applications, but in most business environments there still is not an Outlook or Exchange killer.

Re:Outlook? You must be crazy.

[willyhill]

I guess I am. And taking my offtopic mods while I'm at it :)

Mactrope (clever play on Macthorpe)
gnutoo
inTheLoo
Erris (oldest one)
willeyhill (the joke's on me)
westbake (clever play on westlake).

Hard to keep up.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[Kashra]

Microsoft Action: Set a date to stop selling a product years before you intend to stop supporting it.
Slashdot Answer: Why the hell would you stop selling it if you are still supporting it? Stupid Microsoft. I would sell it until the same year as I stopped supporting it, this is just a ploy to get more Vista sales by scaring people.

Microsoft Action: Stop selling a product only a few months before you intend to stop supporting it.
Slashdot Answer: Its so irresponsible of Microsoft to be selling a product they don't plan on supporting! This is just a way to milk more money out of the consumer and force upgrades when their OS becomes suddenly outdated next month.

Microsoft Action: Donate $1m to "Save the Kittens" foundation.
Slashdot Answer: What about the mice? Microsoft is subverting the poor mouse by an illegal and monopolistic process of buying out a 'charity' that directly kills mice.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[Kalriath]

No they can't. The license under which Windows source is provided to the mega-companies and governments that get it is for internal use only. If Dell were to actually distribute any source or object code from that to their customers, Microsoft would crush them like a bug.

Re:Wow

[The Master Control P]

I can help add some things to what I as a user want that my Linux desktop doesn't have:

1) Flash without having to install 32-bit libraries. 32-bit is dying, Adobe, and I'm sick of redirecting Firefox windows from my server to my desktop.

2) A friendly and standard file open dialog for Gnome apps. Mplayer, PCB, and the Gimp are the GTK-based programs I most commonly use. Mplayer doesn't have any apparent way to get to hidden directories unless it starts in them, and neither Gimp nor PCB will just let me type my filename in. And why are they all different?

3) A sound-recording application that starts up and will record my line-in or mic when I hit "record." Making me jump through hoops and Google searches trying to find out which block device and stream to point it at is ridiculous; 99.5% of users have at most three inputs: Line-in, mic, and maybe a webcam.

As for what the community should push, I believe that we should push Linux as the OS (And let Apple push Macs and MS push Windows). More important than the OS, we should fight to the death for open standards. Look at image formats: Windows, Mac and Linux have about zero programs in common for viewing images. Yet that doesn't matter a bit for image formats that are open (bmp, png, gif, jpg, tiff, tga) because everyone can implement them the same way. Moreover, Linux for example has implemented them in one library (libpng, libtiff, etc) rather than having every app write it's own decoder. Possibly the best example we have of this is the Internet itself: But for Microsoft's almost successful attempt to fuck it up, any browser would get it's data from any server with zero OS-dependance. And why? Because we have an open standard, HTML, that everyone can implement.

GMail + Google Calender

[BalorTFL]

Google Calender is used internally at Google (among other places) for exactly what you're describing, right down to the fun of inviting rooms to your meeting (and being notified that they won't attend the meeting if you didn't check the room's availability and tried to double-book). I found it to be an excellent solution, with great usability and GMail integration, and as a web-based app, it runs happily on more or less any modern OS. Once the corporate inertia starts wearing off, I think I know where all the Outlook customers will be heading.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[Vectronic]

"extended support phase to Windows XP will take effect in May 2009. In Microsoft parlance, extended support is the period when all support is fee-based and non-security hotfixes are produced only for corporate customers. Until April of 2009, Windows XP Home and Media Center will remain in what is called mainstream support, which offers some no-charge support and free updates that donâ(TM)t deal with security issues."

I'd imagine that pretty soon (if not already) there will be dedicated websites to supporting XP (including custom patches to any security issues)... and if Microsoft is smart, they will allow them to do this... I dont think it would really impede on their business (much) because most business would probably contimplate "upgrading" to Windows 7 or at least Vista by 2009... and if anything, the XP "Community" would still be promoting Windows potentially saving Microsoft the loss of some customers to Linux and/or Mac who might be willing to upgrade (stick with) Windows later on... Windows 8, or Win7 SP2...or whatever...

Microsoft is software's Dr. Death.

[Futurepower(R)]

"Microsoft has stated XP will be technically supported until 2014."

I've always thought that somewhat misses the point.

The fact is, solely to make more money, Microsoft has claimed that its earlier product will die. The death is completely independent of customer demand.

Who would want to partner with such a company? Because that's what you are doing when you buy an operating system, you are partnering with the OS supplier. You are betting that the supplier will be a true partner and will care about your needs, and not choose to be adversarial.

Even though Vista is just Windows XP with new features, Microsoft expects to be paid as though it is an entirely new product, with no relevance to the earlier version.

It seems to me that Microsoft is the Chief of Grief, software's Dr. Death. Other deaths:

Declared dead: FoxPro database programming language

Dead soon: PlaysForSure was corporate-speak for "we will kill it and destroy access to your music any time we want". Apparently the reason Microsoft executives wanted to reassure buyers by saying "Plays for Sure" is that they knew it was not sure.

This is connected with the rise of 3-year-old thinking: "I can do anything I want. You have no power."

The U.S. government is worse: "We can take your money and give it to weapons and war suppliers. You have no power. All laws we don't like are invalid."

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[aix tom]

Amen on the "Retraining" part. So far it looks like Office 2007 might be finally a possibility to push OpenOffice in a few years in my workplace, when a switch to either will mean retraining anyway.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[LWATCDR]

Yep.
People think that Office is the ultimate lock in tool. They are so clueless.
VisualBasic is the best lock in tool ever. Just about every company on the face of the earth has some silly but vital piece of software written in VisualBasic.
If FOSS just created the perfect VB clone you might see many companies migrate to Linux.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[david_thornley]

Look, I'm not a Microsoft fanboi, and don't introduce me to one unless you're prepared to deal with intense gamma radiation.

That being said, let's look at it from a business point of view.

I don't know how much of a large business's revenue goes to computers and related things; does 5% sound reasonable? It doesn't really matter if it's way off, so let's use it. Heck, go with 10%.

Now, how much is going to be saved by leaving Microsoft products and going open source? Licenses aren't the only IT cost; there's also hardware, people, networking, and so on. Suppose that half the computer cost goes to Microsoft and other proprietary software companies. Suppose, then, that converting to free software will cut the computer-related costs in half.

That's a maximum of 5% savings on the upside, and I think I'm being optimistic here. That's a good chunk of money, and most businesses would like a chance to save money like that. It isn't enough to force a change; businesses that aren't in particularly competitive fields often have worse inefficiencies than that.

The downside, of course, is that the free software doesn't work for some reason, and revenues drop off the cliff until the old Microsoft stuff can be re-installed. It may not be likely, but managers will worry about it. Or it may not work well enough for an organization's needs, and introduce inefficiencies that overcome the savings.

Therefore, Microsoft is insurance. For a stream of money the organization can afford, Microsoft provides more or less reliable business functionality. The opinion that Microsoft somehow stands behind their software, or will take responsibility for it, is naive, but the opinion that Microsoft software will usually work well enough is justified. Microsoft cannot do otherwise and stay in business for long. Microsoft is the safe choice, at an acceptable price. As far as internal business politics goes, a CIO who goes with Microsoft is unlikely to lose his job for it, while one who introduces free software on a large scale is endangering his or her career. If something goes wrong, the CIO going with "best industry practices" (i.e., mediocrity) will be largely immune from blame, whereas one going with something innovative is going to be out on his or her ear.

Yes, this is stodgy, unimaginative thinking that likely costs the enterprise a good chunk of change. That's the way large businesses work. They don't want to change a support function that works well enough. It's far better to put creativity and energy into a business's core functionality, the stuff that sets the business apart from the competition. Innovative product design, marketing, and sales will pay off more, and aren't as risky. It makes sense to pay insurance to Microsoft.

This doesn't mean that businesses will use Microsoft forever. It does mean that Microsoft is firmly entrenched, and is not likely to be dislodged by people who don't realize why. It will be dislodged by people who are able to explain to suits why what they've got is better in terms the suits will understand, and with assurances the suits feel they can rely on, and who have software with capabilities the suits like.

As a geek, I don't have to like this situation, and I don't. I do have to live in this world, though, and pretending it's something it isn't is not going to help me in the long run.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[illumin8]

I applaude this decision and will do my best to support them if they continue selling XP.

This is more of a win for Microsoft than it is for Dell:

1. Microsoft gets to "sell" a Vista license with all of these new computers.
2. Dell gets a bundled Windows XP "downgrade" license and just installs XP on the computer instead of Vista.
3. Microsoft gets to brag about how many millions of people have bought Vista and how successful it is.
4. Profit?

This is all a shell game for Microsoft. They can't polish the turd that is Vista so they'll just continue to sell XP but make it look like Vista on the books, so that Wall Street is none the wiser.

And before you think I'm an anti-Microsoft, I just bought a copy of Vista Home Premium SP1 64-bit so I can run a few games in DX10. It runs slower and crashes more often (even with nothing installed I get regular MS error reports) than XP on the same hardware. Right now I find I'd rather boot back into XP SP2 and run most of my games, even though I can only use 3.2GB of memory, than reboot into Vista and endure slower framerates and random shit popping up and crashing all the time...

Make up their minds? Definitely. Answer: No.

[dlim]

I'd say actions like this from vendors like Dell will simplify the issue for Microsoft. Dell can't sell XP. Dell sells Vista and gives away XP. Microsoft tallies another Vista sale, Dell sells a new computer, and the buyer gets XP. If the hardware vendors will pick up the slack, Microsoft has no reason to extend sales of XP.

Reading the Fine Print

[brainee28]

I read about this on Dell's website, and if you read the fine print, Dell will install the image for you, but if you need to reinstall from the XP disk they provide you, they won't support what you installed, only what they installed. Only the pre-installed image at the factory can be supported. However they will support Vista fully if you upgrade. This is a sneaky way of making XP fans happy, but giving them a time limit.

Re:Outlook? You must be crazy.

[cbart387]

You can't book a frigging meeting room in my company without inviting it to a meeting, and that's all Exchange/Outlook. What do you need from the calendaring? Do you just need to receive/send invites? Or do you need to be able to look at people's calendar that they share through exchange? If you just need to send/receive invites... the lightning addon for thunderbird works well for that. At least it did when I used it last summer.

The way this works...

[Barny]

For those wondering :)

If you buy Vista Business or Ultimate, you have the option to upgrade to XP Pro or Windows 2000 instead, this only requires you to have a single license install media for the older OS but it doesn't have to be unique.

So dell simply brought a 1 user mass license for XP and give it out with that nifty "pre activated" thing, to everyone who gets vista business.

This process was explained to me by a MS OEM sales rep, sounds stupid imho, why not just keep selling XP?

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[Techman83]

Besides, Outlook is still the best email/productivity/calendaring application out there. Nothing I've seen on UNIX even comes close, especially when I need to share data with others. Outlook is utter tripe, it causes us more loss of productivity in comparison to our old mail system, but it keeps the _important_ users happy. We still get just as many complaints about it, especially when it fails. It is a great client for a single user, but as a collaborative tool it is second rate at best. For example, signatures, if you use it in 3 places (webmail, work machine, terminal services) you have to set your signature in 3 places. There are software packages you can buy to take care of this, but the fact remains that _out of the box_ it's capabilities are limited. That is only one example. It's only a great client because people have a strange infatuation with it, not because it's a better product. Don't even get me started on the backend.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[KillerBob]

It's a benefit for Dell, because it means that Dell is still selling XP-based computers to consumers who want it. When word gets out that Dell are the only ones selling computers with XP on them, and that not only is it pre-installed, it's going to be supported by phone-in tech. support....

You're right. MS gets to book it as a Vista sale. Because technically, it *is* a Vista sale. But the end user isn't going to care that they have actually bought a copy of Vista, they're going to care that their nice, shiny, brand new computer still has XP on it. It's going to mean more sales for Dell.

Ubuntu Dells too

[El_Oscuro]

I just got a Dell Ubuntu laptop. Along with the expected Ubuntu CD was a DVD for Vista Home premium: "Already installed on your computer". Yeah, right. I wonder if it counts as a Vista sell. Anyway, does anyone need a Dell Vista Home Premium DVD? For sale on ebay *cheap*

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[networkBoy]

And so it shall be, paid for with your "redundant" karma it would appear ;-)
-nB

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[tknd]

The grand parent wasn't saying that was how he decided, but rather that is how companies decide. I agree with what you're trying to say, it is stupid for a company to buy into a worthless support contract because legally the software vendor is not responsible for any problems that occur or are they even responsible for providing a solution. Support contracts are basically there so you have a number to call and whine to when shit hits the fan, and when your boss comes around and asks "why isn't it working," you can say, "well it's proprietary software vendor's X's fault." Which sounds a little better than "it broke."

I know how useless support contracts are because we just canceled one. We had an annual "support" contract with an old and dying vendor with some old and dying software. One day we decided to actually talk to them to see if they could fix our issue. And their answer was "pay us more money and we *might* fix it." We replied "nevermind." A month later I figured out what the issue was after dumping their junk software into a test environment and playing with the inputs we had access to. Eventually I found that it had a shitty algorithm for doing something stupid and we happen to have data that ran into the algorithm's worst case run-time. Altered how the data was being fed and the problem went away. I saved the company ten's of thousands of dollars that day.

Next when it came time to renew our annual support contract with this vendor, we decided to not renew it because not only did we know they were trying to leech huge amounts of money from us, but we also had plans to eventually retire the aging system. Bam, thousands of dollars saved for the company again.

Don't think that MS is the only "bad guy" when it comes to "support" contracts. Every big software vendor does it and everyone makes sure to cover their butts. If you honestly think you can save your company a lot of money just by terminating support contracts and ensuring that you can take the responsibility for supporting the software then by all means do it. But there are some support contracts that I think are stupid, but others that I think are essential. The easy way to figure that out is if the system fails, and you can't bring it back up in a reliable amount of time, then you probably shouldn't take that responsibility because you'll probably lose your job.

Re:Wow

[menace3society]

In answer to 1, handholding every step of the way is a big deal. I learned a bit about Windows server administration a while back, when it seemed like I'd want to be in IT (turns out I don't), and it's pretty easy. If you wanted to change anything, you'd click on Start, then either Control Panels or Programs> Admin Tools, pick the most obvious choice, and then do fairly obvious stuff.[1] Just about anything that couldn't be done that way could be done by right-clicking on the proper place.

Linux could do this, but what I've seen of Linux GUI conf tools is that they are rarely so organized. Someone comes up with a tool to manage or monitor feature XYZ, but it is first not integrated in with all the other tools, and secondly its name rarely describes what it does. Compare: "Network Monitor" to "Ethereal". Which would you expect to use to capture IP packets going through your machine?

To answer 2, I think the best choice is to come up with either a name-trademarked suite (like SuperConf) or a certification standard a la the Unix Specification or Linux Standards Base that distros would adhere to, and then recommend people choose a system that does that, e.g. "Any Linux or BSD distro which includes SuperConf by default will meet the IT department's needs," or "There are a variety of options that conform to the Linux Administration Guidelines [maybe have a version number like 1.1 to excite the PHBs]... RedHat provides enterprise support for a fee, Ubuntu is good for new users, Linspire looks and acts a lot like Windows..." This keeps the distro flamewars to a minimum, but still makes the necessary changes to make Free Software appealing.

[1]: Yes, there's plenty of stuff that's hard to find, but for a clueless computer babysitter like your average MCSE, it's everything you'd need.

Re:Ubuntu Instead?

[drinkypoo]

Just keep in mind that the community has made service packs and shit for Windows 98 and it's all garbage, I tried both the usual sesp21 and the sesp30b and both made my system horribly unreliable.

If you have really reached the point where you are stuck with XP because Vista won't do the job, and you're not currently working on a project to switch your business from Windows to Linux or similar, then you are a sucker. Because Microsoft will just keep fucking you over.