- Jul 1, 2008
- 4,491
- 0
- 22,780
41 Percent Businesses Planning for Windows 7
- Thread starter Marcus Yam
- Start date
- Status
cruiseoveride
Distinguished
- Sep 16, 2006
- 847
- 0
- 18,980
I'm glad sites are finally pointing this out. For days, I have been seeing headlines from microsoft hating sites such as PC World saying "6 out of 10 businesses wont upgrade to windows 7!" Its amazing how you can use numbers to say whatever you want.
Geeez..... try again and get your percentages correct....
20000 companies got a survey and of those only 1000 answered.
You say 41% of those will deploy... so that's 2% of the 20000 surveyed.
2 percent... not 41 percent.
20000 companies got a survey and of those only 1000 answered.
You say 41% of those will deploy... so that's 2% of the 20000 surveyed.
2 percent... not 41 percent.
mdillenbeck
Distinguished
- Jun 11, 2008
- 504
- 0
- 18,980
Hmmm... Windows XP actual versus 7 projected - is that a fair comparison? How about do both projected plus XP actual, that way we can see if Microsoft was equally overconfident about XP when it was about to be released.
My school will probably be going 7, but I can tell you it will not happen during a school year. Thus, it will be summer 2010 before we have a go at it.
As for companies, if XP does everything they want it to then why should they invest money at this time in products that does nothing for them?
That's the problem with these companies - they forget the nature of their business. If you make the "perfect" document maker, then people will not need to buy a new version. How many gimmicks can you really add before it becomes useless bloat? Same thing with an OS, which makes the Google OS an interesting concept. Rip the bloat out and minimize.
My school will probably be going 7, but I can tell you it will not happen during a school year. Thus, it will be summer 2010 before we have a go at it.
As for companies, if XP does everything they want it to then why should they invest money at this time in products that does nothing for them?
That's the problem with these companies - they forget the nature of their business. If you make the "perfect" document maker, then people will not need to buy a new version. How many gimmicks can you really add before it becomes useless bloat? Same thing with an OS, which makes the Google OS an interesting concept. Rip the bloat out and minimize.
aft_lizard01
Distinguished
- Jun 26, 2009
- 35
- 0
- 18,530
[citation][nom]Stats[/nom]Geeez..... try again and get your percentages correct....20000 companies got a survey and of those only 1000 answered. You say 41% of those will deploy... so that's 2% of the 20000 surveyed.2 percent... not 41 percent.[/citation]
Do you honestly believe that tripe you just typed? I am guessing you do.
I will tell you this after having worked for Gallup for a short time I can tell you point blank that the majority of people do not answer or want to be bothered with a survey. Yet quite often the results are fairly accurate. When you see presidential polls there is at least 10 times or more people who didn't answer the phone or just hung up, that is just the way it is. Yet because of methodology you can pretty accurately predict the results of an election to with in a margin of error.
Do you honestly believe that tripe you just typed? I am guessing you do.
I will tell you this after having worked for Gallup for a short time I can tell you point blank that the majority of people do not answer or want to be bothered with a survey. Yet quite often the results are fairly accurate. When you see presidential polls there is at least 10 times or more people who didn't answer the phone or just hung up, that is just the way it is. Yet because of methodology you can pretty accurately predict the results of an election to with in a margin of error.
Exactly. Most businesses have already gone through the Vista assessment a while back, and now pitted VS Windows 7, it's REALLY like Vista what should of been like. The beta was GODLY stable, the RC fixed a couple of compatibility issues and with the advent of RTM, most of the work is like "déjà vue".
Also, it's a little bit less hungry than Vista, and we're far and beyond what PCs were when Vista was about to come out.
From a business standpoint, the only BIG factor remaining is license pricing; those who have CLM agreements (or any other licensing scheme) already are probably fully covered for the full fleet upgrade. Getting things to work in Windows 7 isn't nearly as bad, what with Vista being the test bed & general "we know what's coming down the pipe" feeling devs have experienced and prepared for.
Waiting for an SP for this particular OS really isn't needed... and this coming from THE guy working on getting this OS prepped for release in one of the biggest dept (if not the biggest) in the Canadian Fed govt.
I just wish x64 was on my plate... #$^#$%#@ 32 bit crap.
Also, it's a little bit less hungry than Vista, and we're far and beyond what PCs were when Vista was about to come out.
From a business standpoint, the only BIG factor remaining is license pricing; those who have CLM agreements (or any other licensing scheme) already are probably fully covered for the full fleet upgrade. Getting things to work in Windows 7 isn't nearly as bad, what with Vista being the test bed & general "we know what's coming down the pipe" feeling devs have experienced and prepared for.
Waiting for an SP for this particular OS really isn't needed... and this coming from THE guy working on getting this OS prepped for release in one of the biggest dept (if not the biggest) in the Canadian Fed govt.
I just wish x64 was on my plate... #$^#$%#@ 32 bit crap.
belardo
Splendid
- Nov 23, 2008
- 3,540
- 2
- 22,795
Lets see... Windows 7 runs on older hardware, better than Vista. It's more refined, not as slow.
As one of the regular Vista "haters". I have Win7 on a 1995 AMD 939 system with 2GB of RAM and it runs great. Some software issues are needed to be worked out still
But the computer boots up faster than XP, shuts down in about 3 seconds. I had the entire task bar full of programs running at the same time. Yet switching programs and moving windows about wasn't a slow-motion experience.
I'm working on a NEW Vista computer... slow slow slow. Worked on one last weak, usual unpleasant experience.
I'm not completely happy with Windows7. It still does some stupid vista personality stuff. But its good parts are nice.
Even one of my clients with 15 computers & notebooks with ALL XP / Office 2003 will be upgrading to Windows7/Office2010. We totally skipped Vista/Office2007. Some of the newer boxes are Win7 ready, actually - perhaps overkill since ALL new systems have 4GB of RAM. While I expected Win7 to be better... I didn't expect it to bet THAT much better. A 2GB Win7 system *IS* fine for most people. The older PCs will be replaced... since they are 3~5 years old (by 2010).
Vista has about 22% of the PC Market. XP rules... for now. But I see Windows7 easily hitting 25% in its first year... if not 40%.
As one of the regular Vista "haters". I have Win7 on a 1995 AMD 939 system with 2GB of RAM and it runs great. Some software issues are needed to be worked out still
But the computer boots up faster than XP, shuts down in about 3 seconds. I had the entire task bar full of programs running at the same time. Yet switching programs and moving windows about wasn't a slow-motion experience.I'm working on a NEW Vista computer... slow slow slow. Worked on one last weak, usual unpleasant experience.
I'm not completely happy with Windows7. It still does some stupid vista personality stuff. But its good parts are nice.
Even one of my clients with 15 computers & notebooks with ALL XP / Office 2003 will be upgrading to Windows7/Office2010. We totally skipped Vista/Office2007. Some of the newer boxes are Win7 ready, actually - perhaps overkill since ALL new systems have 4GB of RAM. While I expected Win7 to be better... I didn't expect it to bet THAT much better. A 2GB Win7 system *IS* fine for most people. The older PCs will be replaced... since they are 3~5 years old (by 2010).
Vista has about 22% of the PC Market. XP rules... for now. But I see Windows7 easily hitting 25% in its first year... if not 40%.
Why do people keep talking about XP like it the best thing since sliced bread?!! I bet 90% of the businesses that use Windows XP today didn't do anywhere close to a majority roll out until at least 2005. That's right, I said 2005!!! That's 4 years after it was released!!
Even if only 10% of the businesses migrate to Windows 7 in the first year, it's still a huge win for MS. Especially if those 10% are successful and profitable. Then you'll most likely see at least another 30-50% over the next year, once they see their competition outdate them by nearly a DECADE!!
Even if only 10% of the businesses migrate to Windows 7 in the first year, it's still a huge win for MS. Especially if those 10% are successful and profitable. Then you'll most likely see at least another 30-50% over the next year, once they see their competition outdate them by nearly a DECADE!!
Not surprising at all, well I am surprised the ration isn't higher; like 8/10.
I do not see the point of upgrading to windows7 on the professional side, especially if your office runs custom applications or GNU tools.
I use server '08 daily on a terminal machine and hit has several problems.
The only thing I like about the os is the explorer navigation which prevents tons of backtracking through directories, other than that XP/Server03 is better. It is faster, more reliable and versatile. (supposedly '08/NT 6+ runs VirtualMachine environments better but I haven't compared them in that area)
apache_lives
Splendid
- Dec 10, 2002
- 6,873
- 1
- 26,160
apache_lives
Splendid
- Dec 10, 2002
- 6,873
- 1
- 26,160
[citation][nom]apache_lives[/nom]roflmao 41% are upgrading to vista II[/citation]
wow negative 2 votes sofar because as dags said "I don't believe in numbers projections, just in actual numbers" - win7 is based on vista, so that makes it vista based OS release (core wise) number II (numbers
) - how does that deem -2 (sofar)?? I didnt even say that was a good or a bad thing - i like vista!
wow negative 2 votes sofar because as dags said "I don't believe in numbers projections, just in actual numbers" - win7 is based on vista, so that makes it vista based OS release (core wise) number II (numbers
) - how does that deem -2 (sofar)?? I didnt even say that was a good or a bad thing - i like vista!
eyemaster
Distinguished
- Apr 28, 2009
- 750
- 0
- 18,980
Most big organizations will want to move to Windows 7. It's not all about what Windows itself does, it's about manageability. When using new windows servers and taking the Active Directory tree and it's tools, including GPO's, there's no real reason to stay with Windows XP.
Stop being shortsighted by thinking individually and think "organization". Central points of management, that is important. Some of the better tools for the AD and GPO's work better with the new OS, and more will come out.
Stop being shortsighted by thinking individually and think "organization". Central points of management, that is important. Some of the better tools for the AD and GPO's work better with the new OS, and more will come out.
Humans think
Distinguished
- Jan 15, 2009
- 178
- 0
- 18,680
OK 41% is an OVER-statement. Sure this number will get near half or even less when small businesses and enterprises get into the picture.
Business management 101: Cost-effective enhancement of productivity is what enterprises want. Why replace an operating system from a proper working system? Does it provide more productivity? Short answer no. Only real reason for upgrading the OS is by providing ground-breaking technologies or security that comes at a smaller price than third party software. For example if Win 7 is safer than Win XP is irrelevant if the enterprise still needs to pay for antivirus software bills, if it was safe enough that antivirus software became obsolete, enterprises would transition to Vista/7 or whatever. For example giving money to get a better logistics third-party program with the same amount of money is preferred, because you gain profits in return
Keep it clean - Keeping a uniform environment: for example 90% of PCs in a company run Win XP or even 2000, functional costs (given to computer specialists) are lower if you maintain one type of OS and have a centralized update system that needs only one man to do the job, you save up bandwidth and employ less workforce
Another parameter: hardware. Microsoft got one thing right this time and at least it doesn't require extra costs as far as hardware upgrades are concerned when going from Vista/XP.
Buying new hardware: When you buy new hardware because of enterprise hardware demands if the system is not "intentionally" handicapped by not provided OS updates by the OS company then you just use a license from the corporate volume licensed old OS at a small price and you are ready to go.
Some guys at this forum have forgot common logic somewhere on the way, or they simply were not born with that. Sorry guys but I would really feel sorry for you if you were running a business or sth. "Forgetting" foundational laws of how economy works and greed is what brought the US economy in this harsh condition in the first place.
Sorry for the large post and @THE Canadian guy: would you still feel the same way if you actually had to pay a lot of taxpayer's money to complete the transition?
Business management 101: Cost-effective enhancement of productivity is what enterprises want. Why replace an operating system from a proper working system? Does it provide more productivity? Short answer no. Only real reason for upgrading the OS is by providing ground-breaking technologies or security that comes at a smaller price than third party software. For example if Win 7 is safer than Win XP is irrelevant if the enterprise still needs to pay for antivirus software bills, if it was safe enough that antivirus software became obsolete, enterprises would transition to Vista/7 or whatever. For example giving money to get a better logistics third-party program with the same amount of money is preferred, because you gain profits in return
Keep it clean - Keeping a uniform environment: for example 90% of PCs in a company run Win XP or even 2000, functional costs (given to computer specialists) are lower if you maintain one type of OS and have a centralized update system that needs only one man to do the job, you save up bandwidth and employ less workforce
Another parameter: hardware. Microsoft got one thing right this time and at least it doesn't require extra costs as far as hardware upgrades are concerned when going from Vista/XP.
Buying new hardware: When you buy new hardware because of enterprise hardware demands if the system is not "intentionally" handicapped by not provided OS updates by the OS company then you just use a license from the corporate volume licensed old OS at a small price and you are ready to go.
Some guys at this forum have forgot common logic somewhere on the way, or they simply were not born with that. Sorry guys but I would really feel sorry for you if you were running a business or sth. "Forgetting" foundational laws of how economy works and greed is what brought the US economy in this harsh condition in the first place.
Sorry for the large post and @THE Canadian guy: would you still feel the same way if you actually had to pay a lot of taxpayer's money to complete the transition?
Lies, bloody lies, and statistics.
How much did ScriptLogic ca$h in from m$ for all this B$?
From basic math set theory - the inclusion-exclusion principle:
If 60% of businesses are planning to NOT use $even, that doesn't mean at all that 40% are planning to use it...
Letting logical fallacies aside, isn't you tongue getting a little sour, yummy boy?
"Windows 7 to penetrate businesses quickly"
Is business a new synonym for a$$hole, in m$'s vision?
How much did ScriptLogic ca$h in from m$ for all this B$?
From basic math set theory - the inclusion-exclusion principle:
If 60% of businesses are planning to NOT use $even, that doesn't mean at all that 40% are planning to use it...
Letting logical fallacies aside, isn't you tongue getting a little sour, yummy boy?
"Windows 7 to penetrate businesses quickly"
Is business a new synonym for a$$hole, in m$'s vision?
ethanolson
Distinguished
- Jun 25, 2009
- 318
- 0
- 18,780
I don't have much faith in these statistics, especially since there's a good-spin bad-spin war going on here. I suspect adoption will be strong.
We've got an interesting problem in my office here. We have two IT personnel and one of them is an XP loyalist to an extreme. The other (who happens to not accidently screw up peoples' computers regularly) is very open minded and sees benefits to Vista and runs it himself. Since we have about 20 apps running to do our jobs, XP is having a lot of trouble expanding to meet the load without "chunking it." As a result, we have rolling, semi-annual reimaging of our 160 users' systems. That's ridiculous! I, along with a select few others, moved to Vista last year (understanding that IT won't help us for the time being) and have since had far better productivity and no overall system downtime. There are a few quirks, but nothing as bad as the flat-out crashes and application hang-ups/corruptions we occasionally experience with XP. Having run 7 at home, I'm sold on it. It's even better than Vista because it doesn't have those weird slow-downs (like when you double-click My Computer) and other stuff that is just strange with Vista.
My conclusion is that XP can't expand to meet my company's modern loads as well as Vista was designed to do but the underlying system architecture, while more secure and stable, is slowing some everyday tasks down. However, I can reload apps like Outlook in seconds instead of half a minute like my XP brethren, so overall I'm very pleased and I AM NOT going back to XP because I just don't call IT for anything anymore. As soon as we qualify 7 next year, I'm pretty sure everyone is going to it. Funny thing is, Vista has been qualified in our organization for nearly two years but our branch IT support is split on the matter and we have therefore stuck with XP for the most part.
I think our extreme XP loyalist may feel his job will be gone if we went to Vista. I haven't asked him about 7, but I think corporate politics will override him if he still wants to stick with XP at that point.
We've got an interesting problem in my office here. We have two IT personnel and one of them is an XP loyalist to an extreme. The other (who happens to not accidently screw up peoples' computers regularly) is very open minded and sees benefits to Vista and runs it himself. Since we have about 20 apps running to do our jobs, XP is having a lot of trouble expanding to meet the load without "chunking it." As a result, we have rolling, semi-annual reimaging of our 160 users' systems. That's ridiculous! I, along with a select few others, moved to Vista last year (understanding that IT won't help us for the time being) and have since had far better productivity and no overall system downtime. There are a few quirks, but nothing as bad as the flat-out crashes and application hang-ups/corruptions we occasionally experience with XP. Having run 7 at home, I'm sold on it. It's even better than Vista because it doesn't have those weird slow-downs (like when you double-click My Computer) and other stuff that is just strange with Vista.
My conclusion is that XP can't expand to meet my company's modern loads as well as Vista was designed to do but the underlying system architecture, while more secure and stable, is slowing some everyday tasks down. However, I can reload apps like Outlook in seconds instead of half a minute like my XP brethren, so overall I'm very pleased and I AM NOT going back to XP because I just don't call IT for anything anymore. As soon as we qualify 7 next year, I'm pretty sure everyone is going to it. Funny thing is, Vista has been qualified in our organization for nearly two years but our branch IT support is split on the matter and we have therefore stuck with XP for the most part.
I think our extreme XP loyalist may feel his job will be gone if we went to Vista. I haven't asked him about 7, but I think corporate politics will override him if he still wants to stick with XP at that point.
igot1forya
Distinguished
- Jun 27, 2008
- 590
- 0
- 18,980
If you're a viable company, it should say "100% plan for Windows 7". But this does not mean 100% will actually make the switch. %100 of people plan to die, not everyone knows when. Of course, I don't plan on dying either... I"M INVINCIBLE!!!
computabug
Distinguished
- Mar 17, 2009
- 458
- 0
- 18,780
[citation][nom]cruiseoveride[/nom]What do you see mystic crystal ball..."41 Percent Businesses filing for bankruptcy"[/citation]
Lol! How did this guy get 12 thumbs down?
+1
Lol! How did this guy get 12 thumbs down?
+1
hannibal
Distinguished
- Apr 1, 2004
- 2,879
- 251
- 21,190
One thing is that XP support is going to end eventually, so Vista sevice pack 3 ala windows 7, seems to be more reasonable solution to busines environment than upcoming windows 8... But in anyway nice start figures for win7 if they become true. I like many other where thinking something like this after win7 sp1. This proves that most companies think this as an Vista (goodenough) sp.
scryer_360
Distinguished
- Jan 13, 2007
- 564
- 0
- 18,980
I said it very early on, go back to my posts here when XP Mode was first announced: XP Mode will make Windows 7 Enterprise and Ultimate very attractive for businesses. They need the new OS so they can be compatible with new hardware and software as it arrives, but they need the ability to run their existing applications as well. XP Mode for the win.
apache_lives
Splendid
- Dec 10, 2002
- 6,873
- 1
- 26,160
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question How can i reactivate my windows 10 after changing my motherboard?
- Started by eziowar
- Replies: 1
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 3K
-
Question Window 10 Keeps sending me back to download screen
- Started by fern213
- Replies: 4
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram