Slashdot Mirror
Majority of Enterprise Customers Finally 'Migrating Away From Windows XP'
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."
Maybe they are migrating to Canada. I hear that it is a nice country.
I suspect well north of 90%. Anyone know a real number for this?
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).
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.
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".
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.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
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 a whirl.
...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.
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 is a great OS. I'm still using it here and boy, my system is very stable and fast.
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'.
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.
dat processer
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.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
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.
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.
Running XP on a core i3. It works fine!
Or go to Arch Linux if you wanna train your brain :)
'PC Gamers finally migrating Away from Microsoft'
big enterprise sites are loaded with in house tools and all kinds of other stuff that makes changing OS hard
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...
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...
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.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
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.
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.
Did the ReactOS finally go beta?
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
http://saveie6.com/
(Not OP)
Agreed. I still have a few Windows XP systems at work. If Microsoft had not put their meddling noses where they do not belong, we would continue to use Windows XP until the death of the motherboard.
Contrary to what some believe, the enterprise is not stupid. If XP performs the functions required (and for many, it does) and is supported for security fixes (it currently is) and there is no compelling financial reason to encourage migration to another platform, guess what? The platform stays.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
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.
Why on earth would you be happy to update it? It does it's job, is actually MORE secure than more modern systems like Windows XP/7/8 (no exploits from the last 10 years would work on a machine that old), has no bloated, complicated and useless programs running in the back- and foreground, and failed hardware can be replaced at the cost of a few pennies. In fact, you could pull a few 486s out of the trash somewhere and keep a heap of it in your garage for future replacement at virtually no cost.
I meant updating the entire x ray diffraction machine to a new one, not just the computer.
That particular machine is old enough that it needs more operator intervention and maintenance than a new one would. The more modern x ray sources and detectors on a newer one would allow the particular tests this does to be done more quickly. A more capable control system would require less operator time for alignment and setup. (For those who do x ray diff work, it's a rotating anode machine that does our small angle x ray scattering and powder diffraction work. We just don't do as much powder diffraction or SAXS as we do other methods, so it's not as high a priority to keep up to date).
I know of no business-- not even a single one-- hankering & chomping at the bit to move to W8. Indeed, most of them are satisfied with XP and will have to be dragged kicking and screaming away from it come May 2014. The smart ones have already moved to W7, and they're perfectly happy with it. People point to Vista and Millenium Edition as being failures, but I don't think M$ has ever laid such a turd as W8/8.1.
I meant updating the entire x ray diffraction machine to a new one, not just the computer.
I always find this alarming about lab equipment. You have something costing $500,000 but is entirely dependent on a $2000 computer. Not only that the "cheap" computer is both likely to break before anything else and be very difficult to replace.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
is what we're doing, we've jumped to windows 7 on our desks but are still running lagacy items using XP in virtual machines. The hardware is good enough to get decent performance with XP in those VMs.
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
I find it very interesting to read so many people here defending XP in light of its security weaknesses. We're talking about an OS that has a horrible security model out of the box and encourages applications to be designed to run with full admin privileges. If you are a developer stuck on XP and you haven't updated your software to work properly with the newer security model introduced in Vista, well shame on you. You've had way more than enough time... 7 years to be exact.
XP is the "odd one out" now, with regards to how you design a good, secure Windows application. There are 3 newer versions of Windows and the 4th is coming next week, all with a similar, much more robust security model. XP is now the bastard child, different from the rest. Sickly.
And don't forget the 64-bit question. While 32-bit XP was very widely used and adopted, the 64-bit "edition" was an instant bastard child, born out of the unholy union of XP and Server 2003 64-bit. Very few applications support 64-bit XP and with good reason. While it was the first 64-bit Windows on the desktop, its compatibility with existing and even new applications was never a strong point. It was a niche product and never gained widespread support. If you need 64-bit support, XP doesn't cut it. We work with very large datasets, and 64-bit is basically a requirement for much of what we do.
We are about to release the last versions of our software that support XP and I can't wait for the day we drop support completely. It's an additional testing burden when we already need to test all newer versions. Plus, it behaves differently than the rest. Continuing to support XP today drives up costs and limits adoption of newer and better technologies. It had a good run, but now it's time to let it die. There are newer and better Windows versions.
They'll laugh at you when they ask you what is just soo horrible about Windows 8.
XP barely became better than Win98 and NT after SP2.
However, on release, it was touted as faster and smaller than NT (at the latest level of SP). Each SP has undone the size and speed gains to then eventually exceed them.
And please tell me WHY should I move to Win8? It isn't free, so you have to justify why I should spend hard hearned money because Microsoft do not want to keep something that they own still going. If they don't think there's any money to make on XP, will they stop chasing pirates of XP? No. They still see value, but the ONLY value it has is ensuring people cannot have a choice and must move to another newer version of Windows that pays them.
We have the same issues in my company. An IT guy called the people in the lab "to talk about their lab computers" and upgrading to Win7. He was promptly told to forget about it and crawl back under his stone!
I suspect the old machines will be air-gapped, which is something that will impede productivity somewhat, especially when it comes to apparatuses that produce large volumes of data.
You are NOT allowed to support Windows because you are not allowed access to the source code.
So there's a copy of linux from 2001 that is still supported. Either by you or by whatever geek or company you wish to pay for support.
Or were you demanding FREE support?
The classic theme may be slower than the GPU accelerated Barbie Shop XP theme, but what, exactly, is it doing?
Renders the window dressing.
Does the background image
Renders the buttons.
How much of the modern CPU is spent on such things now? Parts per million? Parts per billion?
I find it very interesting to read so many people here defending XP in light of its security weaknesses. We're talking about an OS that has a horrible security model out of the box and encourages applications to be designed to run with full admin privileges. If you are a developer stuck on XP and you haven't updated your software to work properly with the newer security model introduced in Vista, well shame on you. You've had way more than enough time... 7 years to be exact.
XP is the "odd one out" now, with regards to how you design a good, secure Windows application. There are 3 newer versions of Windows and the 4th is coming next week, all with a similar, much more robust security model. XP is now the bastard child, different from the rest. Sickly.
And don't forget the 64-bit question. While 32-bit XP was very widely used and adopted, the 64-bit "edition" was an instant bastard child, born out of the unholy union of XP and Server 2003 64-bit. Very few applications support 64-bit XP and with good reason. While it was the first 64-bit Windows on the desktop, its compatibility with existing and even new applications was never a strong point. It was a niche product and never gained widespread support. If you need 64-bit support, XP doesn't cut it. We work with very large datasets, and 64-bit is basically a requirement for much of what we do.
We are about to release the last versions of our software that support XP and I can't wait for the day we drop support completely. It's an additional testing burden when we already need to test all newer versions. Plus, it behaves differently than the rest. Continuing to support XP today drives up costs and limits adoption of newer and better technologies. It had a good run, but now it's time to let it die. There are newer and better Windows versions.
Part of the reason is habit and once you never do something in a very long long time your brain thinks it is wrong to do it because that means change.
In the case of upgrading after being told for 12 years to never ever update that is bad IT then feels it is unprofessional to upgrade. Why? It is something you never do. That is why etc! ... on a more practical note the reason XP is used is many places the accountants and MBAs have taken over the IT departments and this thing called "The Great Recession" changed the mindset of these beancounters.
Many IT loved Windows 7 back in 2009!. 90% of these corps invested in labs to test Windows 7 images but guess what happened that year in 2009? Stock market whent down 14,000 to 5,000! Corporations had massive layoffs totaling over 10 million.
When you need to make a choice to keep the lights on and feeding employees in these dark years the case of upgrading perfectly working computers goes out the Windows. Now mix in IT workers who have been told change is bad for 12 years and you have a recipe of resistance where the can is kicked. MBA folks get their raises by cutting costs and firing people and will lose their bonus next year if IT invests in technology that they do not really need (in their opinion).
IT needs to sell themselves better as these MBA guys think XP is just as secure. They are not computer geeks. They are money geeks. They do not understand these issues and in their eyes systems magically still work with what they have so why change?
If they can be told another code red can take the company down you can BET YOUR ASS THEY WILL UPGRADE infact they are just starting to do that now. The real quesiton in 2020 is what will compell them to leave Windows 7? I can't think of anything now besides HTML 6 and CSS 4 support from a non sucky version of IE (in that time's standard.) The PC is mature and turning into the mainframe now they gets updated every few decades because they work.
http://saveie6.com/
Yup. WinXP 32bit is my favourite, least hated Windows on a VM. That way, it runs fine on my Mac and Linux laptops for MS Office.
Those machines should probably be virtualized, to make them maintainable again.
Zone Alarm Extreme Security and XP for personal computing is awesome. Microsoft should be backing the general population on their choice as it made Microsoft rich. 32 bit is as fast and robust as most people need. Don't leave us in the dark because we like some things left as they are when it is possible to hunker down XP's security.
I know our staff and others see windows 8 being a nightmare for users. We will migrate to windows 7, but no way are we moving to windows 8. The help desk phones would be ringing off the hook if we migrated to windows 8.
you must really hate him.
Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
are going to be very disappointed.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
I've had the distinct lack of pleasure working with the Windows 8.1 RTM for the past two days. Virtually none of our apps installed correctly the first time, including Visual studio 2010. At one point, a large "help" dialog appeared telling me to swipe in from the left hand side. I couldn't get rid of this thing for love or money. Did I mention it covers about 1/4 of the screen and that you basically have to reboot to get rid of it?
To state the blindingly obvious, interface changes without any significant feature changes are not a value add, they're a value subtract. It doesn't matter if it's the Windows GUI, ASP.net or Powershell.
Got Microsoft stock? Sell.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
We have a small network (~50 desktops), and we don't have volume licences so we are upgrading our desktops from Windows XP to Windows Vista x64 and Windows 7 x64 (depending on the OEM licence that came with each computer).
I know that a lot of people had bad experiences with Vista in the past, but so far our users are really happy with it and wouldn't go back to XP. It seems to be as stable as our Windows 7 PCs. It may be a little bit slower to boot than Win7, but once it's booted it's a lot faster than XP (thanks to the SuperFetch service).
We haven't done it yet. We're trying to, but the IE6 crutch is costing us a fortune.
Time to upgrade that Pentium 3 to Windows 7 (really, if it has at least 768MB or 1024MB memory it's a realistic proposition to do that)
I work with a lot of large to medium sized companies and I know of only one that has even mentioned going to Windows 8.
I am currently on a Windows 8 laptop with Classic Shell, and it is mostly useful until I click on a picture or PDF and it throws me back into tile land.
Even more curious, I have yet to see anybody moving to Server 2012. Pretty much everybody is happy with Server 2008 R2.
The main reason I would see for ditching XP (If it wasn't for the deadline) is to allow for more than 3.3 GB of memory on a client because Windows XP x64 is a red headed stepchild OS that doesn't have any drivers made for it.
We haven't had any problems with Windows XP. If you have problems, you can re-load the OS from a CD.
To me, this Slashdot article seems to be an advertisement generated by Microsoft. Worldwide, there are still hundreds of millions of people using Windows XP, who have no reason to stop.
Many computers are used for business methods and data entry. There is no need or desire for new features.
Hopefully will be retired before that abomination 8.1 becomes an idea for anyone in management to suggest we implement..ugh..
When was the last time you actually did a fresh install of XP? Just the other day I tried doing it on an early Vista-era laptop.
To start with, the XP (SP2 media - it was the only XP license I could find) installer couldn't recognize my SATA drive. Lacking a floppy drive, I had to go searching for ways to get the drive recognized. I was left with two options: Either rebuild my installation media & slipstream drivers onto it or go into BIOS and set my drive controller to a legacy emulation mode.
Once I got the base OS installed, almost none of my hardware was recognized. Neither my wired nor my wireless network controllers were recognized. Sound and video not recognized. There were about a half dozen other unrecognized devices that Windows couldn't even tell what type of device it was. Fortunately, being a laptop, I was able to go to the manufacturers site to locate and download all the drivers on another PC and bring them over on a USB stick. I, knowing that I would need to prepare myself, took the opportunity to grab Service Pack 3. These installed without a hitch.
Finally, having an installed system with the (mostly) recognized hardware & the latest service pack, I tried running Windows Update. You'd think that would work, right?
Nope.
The Windows update components installed on the system tried to connect to a service that no longer exists. All of the links it threw me to troubleshoot the problem 404ed. None of the troubleshooting docs on the MSFT website seemed to help. There were automated "FixIt" scripts that didn't do anything and tried linking me to a website that no longer existed. Somewhere along the way it was suggested I install the .NET framework - the download page barely functioned in my crufty old browser. Eventually I found a post in a forum with a link to an installer for an updated Windows update component which I gladly grabbed and installed.
After installing a functional WU client, I tried, again, to update my system. It spent a good 45 minutes searching for updates to my system. At the end, it returned a single required update - yet another version of the Windows Update client. Download, update & reboot.
The next time I ran Windows Update it, again, spun its wheels for 45 minutes. Finally, it came up with a list of over 150 updates that I would need to install, several of which were marked as needing to be handled individually. At this point, I'm well over 4 hours into the process.
If I'm having this sort of trouble installing and updating XP on hardware that could have originally been purchased with XP, just imagine how much trouble you'd have with something contemporary. This is why IT departments are moving away from XP; getting new systems up and running is already a nightmare. When everything goes EOL in less than a year it's just going to get worse. Even if I had known all the issues that would pop up & how to address them, I would still have been looking at 3 hours to get the base system installed before I even got around to installing any software.
In the end, I gave up on XP and just installed Fedora. It took all of about 15 minutes to install off a USB stick, recognized all my hardware & performs like a charm on this old (ca 2007) machine.
my sig's at the bottom of the page.
They generally have ways of getting the data out at a high enough speed, but it may be over a serial, parallel, GPIB or any of a whole range of proprietary data links. At worst, you can use an older ISA machine for holding the specialty cards, running the control software and then out the Ethernet card to the rest of the world.
The problem is that the software can't be updated. You don't have access to the source and the company that made it doesn't want to. (Updating it would allow old machines to be used still and cut into selling new ones)
Please tell me how you intend to virtualize a proprietary control card that you know nearly nothing about that plugs into an ISA bus and is driven with software that is often hardware dependent, and the company that made it has a disincentive to tell you about. (The standard answer is: We don't support that system anymore, but I'd be happy to connect you with sales.)
These are usually the embedded systems in the machine and do things like running stepper motors or the like that are not terribly standard. The software talks directly to the hardware and thus timing and such is often hard coded into it. Reverse engineering and updating to modern methods is, as always, possible with massive effort, but generally not practical.
Be careful kids, don't use the admin account for your daily jobs =)
So this is finally the Year of the Linux Desktop?
we have a grand total of 3 windows 8 machines, and they're in the hands of execs who wanted a vaio pro. when our core app vendors announce 8 support, (it'll be a while, they just got around to ALLOWING install on 7 to be supported in any way) we might start to consider allowing SOME windows8 at my company, until then, nope. we are buying win 8 licenses, and downgrading to 7. too many things at my company just don't work AT ALL under windows 8.
We're also just starting (this year) to migrate from XP to 7, but more importantly, migrating (wherever possible) from fat clients to web based applications. Not that web is better (in many ways it isn't) but because web apps have a better chance of being platform neutral. After observing the debacles that were Vista and Win8, the decision has been made to start migration to an environment where we are not dependent on whatever hairbrained idea Microsoft wants to foist on us. This isn't "fear", it's self-defense. I'm sure MSFT has dandy reasons for promoting a radical new OS and force consumer adoption of what they think is a cool new slate-based GUI in order to drive a wedge into that marketplace, but sorry, our business is done on computers and we can't afford to play along.
When I started here years back, what webapps we had would only work reliably on some elderly version of IE. We now officially support Firefox, Chrome, Safari and the list of operations converting to web is growing.
The added advantage is that the back end also tends to be platform neutral. If Microsoft wants to play games with the user interface on their server products, well, we have a solution for that too.
In summary, it was the very act of trying to foist a radically different (and unsupportable in a large Enterprise environment) user interface that started the effort to migrate away from dependence on Windows. Good job, Microsoft. It needed to be done, and you've started it going.
No, there's probably not going to be Linux on the desktop (sorry, geeks). But I see a lot more Macbooks and ipads in our future. Not necessarily because they're the best for the job (especially the ipad, which has been a pain to support) but because people want them, and the thought at the moment is that a more varied ecosystem serves to protect us from Microsoft's product decisions.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Agreed on all accounts!