Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Windows 7's Virtual XP Mode a Support Nightmare?

Posted by kdawson on from the twice-as-many-windows-to-wash dept.

CWmike writes "Microsoft's decision to let Windows 7 users run Windows XP applications in a virtual machine may have been necessary to convince people to upgrade, but it could also create support nightmares, analysts said today. Gartner analyst Michael Silver outlines the downsides. 'You'll have to support two versions of Windows,' he said. 'Each needs to be secured, antivirused, firewalled and patched. If a company has 10,000 PCs, that's 20,000 instances of Windows.' The other big problem Silver foresees: Making sure the software they run is compatible with Windows 7. 'This is a great Band-Aid, but companies need to heal their applications,' Silver said. 'They'll be doing themselves a disservice if, because of XPM, they're not making sure that all their apps support Windows 7.'"

11 of 413 comments (clear)

  1. Since when does anyone take Gartner seriously? by jerryasher · · Score: 5, Funny

    Fear and doubt...doubt and fear.... Our two weapons are fear and doubt...and ruthless uncertainty.

    1. Re:Since when does anyone take Gartner seriously? by amliebsch · · Score: 3, Funny

      I didn't expect a kind of Slashdot inquisition!

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
  2. Needs fixing by The+Bungi · · Score: 2, Funny

    When has [anyone] ever released an OS that wasn't a support nightmare [when it's actually put in the hands of users]?

    All better now?

  3. Leave kdwason ALOEN,just leave k ALONE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just leeeave kdawson alooone. Leave k aloneeee!!!!!!!!!

  4. Dual OS like Dual Core? by dlevitan · · Score: 5, Funny

    So when Intel and AMD couldn't increase the speed of their processors any more, they decided to introduce dual core chips. Does this mean that Microsoft has decided they couldn't slow down computers any more with Windows 7 and is now planning on shipping a dual OS system to ensure slow performance?

  5. Re:This is M$ we are talking about. by NeverVotedBush · · Score: 1, Funny

    I'm still trying to figure out how to get my cup holder to come out when I want it to and not just when it wants to.

    One time it spilled coffee all over my desk. That was the last time I trusted it.

  6. Re:Pardon me... by actionbastard · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Mac OS is a niche market. In the Windows market, reality has a way of kicking you in the balls."

    Obviously you've never been Rochambeaued by Steve Jobs.

    --
    Sig this!
  7. Re:Pardon me... by atraintocry · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yes.

  8. Re: by melikamp · · Score: 2, Funny

    You seem to understand virtualization just fine.

  9. Re:Yes but ... by fractoid · · Score: 2, Funny

    I mean, wow. HOLY SHIT! Some guy hacked OS X in a contest! My fucking god, OS X's security must be TERRIBLE compared to Windows'! The fact that some guy managed to hack an OS X box PROVES it!

    Because that's totally not the point that Mac fanboys wheel out every time someone demonstrates a proof-of-concept Windows exploit. Or was that your point? Sorry, I'm not on form today, think I might have flying pig flu...

    --
    Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
  10. Re:Yes but ... by icannotthinkofaname · · Score: 2, Funny

    What use is an internet built entirely of clients?

    Sharing pirated music, pirated Windows, Linux distros, and porn over Bittorrent?

    That's the first use that comes to my mind.

    --
    Let q be a radix > 1. I am in ur base-q, killing 10 d00ds.