or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Nearly 80% of business PCs ill-equipped for Vista upgrade?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Nearly 80% of business PCs ill-equipped for Vista upgrade?

post #1 of 77
Thread Starter 
Four out of five computers within the workplace are not adequately equipped to make the jump to Microsoft's Vista operating system based on the software maker's stated requirements, one study shows.

A report released last week by desktop management firm Everdream exhibits that 79.9 percent of business machines do not match the recommended requirements for "premium-ready PCs" put forth by the Redmond, Wash.-based software giant. The analysis covered 145,000 desktop and notebook PCs at companies witin its installed base -- especially small to mid-sized businesses -- and highlighted the difficulties many face when upgrading their PCs to the latest Windows OS.

Amongst the largest obstacles to a smooth transition, the report states, are memory and had drive space requirements. Microsoft requires at least 512 MB of RAM to run Vista but recommends a full gigabyte. A mere 30 percent of PCs reportedly met 1GB requirement, according to the report. Similarly, 62.4 percent of the machines did not have the recommended 40GB hard drive storage, including over 18 percent that failed to meet the the required "15GB of free hard drive space" necessary to complete the software install.

"Clearly many companies face stark realities as they consider upgrading their IT assets to Windows Vista in the coming months," said Ed Mueller, chief marketing officer for Everdream. "The costs of getting computers into compliance with Microsoft’s requirements will likely be a huge obstacle to Vista adoption, especially for small and mid-sized companies that have limited IT budget, resources and staff."

Consumers should also be cautious of disparities between labels that appear on some systems," said Mark Minasi, author of numerous books on the Windows operating system. He warns that "a system that is Windows Vista capable doesn't necessarily translate to one that is Windows Vista enjoyable.”

Overall, the data shows that more than 93 percent of companies will face difficulties upgrading at least one their computers to Windows Vista. However, it said just 6.7 percent of machines in its sample would be critically limited by lacking the required processor speed.

Still, Microsoft has already managed to sell some 20 million copies of Vista worldwide since its release on January 30th. Those sales best the 17 million copies of Windows XP sold over its first two months on the market back in 2001. However, comparing the raw figures of the launch sales for the two software releases can be misleading, as the worldwide PC installed base grew significantly in the intervening years.

Based on the growth in the number of in-use PCs over the past 6 years, it could be argued that Vista's sales are off to a slower start than that of XP.
post #2 of 77
Man, what an opportunity for Apple... they need to jump on this like white on rice.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #3 of 77
My company just finished upgrading to xp...a process that's taken 3 years to complete. We won't be getting Vista anytime soon.
post #4 of 77
So what else is new, M$ making another product that sells more hardward, and you wonder why M$ and Intel like each other so much.

Image what would have happen if Apple released OSX that did not work on 80% of the install base.
post #5 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Man, what an opportunity for Apple... they need to jump on this like white on rice.

I don't really see how, as I wouldn't recommend anyone running OSX or even Windows XP with less then a gig of RAM. The fact is most vista upgrades will probably come when ever the companies hit their 3 to 5 year upgrade cycles when the new hardware comes in. Just to point out as well that it's still cheaper to upgrade the computers to vista even with new hardware, then it would be to swap out to Macs, since the only option companies would have to keep their moniters keyboards and mice is a Mac Pro ( too expensive) and a Mac Mini (probably not practical) so they are still stuck with huge cash outlays. This may only be practical if it's a very small business with a small amount of IT infrastructure.
post #6 of 77
Haha.
post #7 of 77
Eh, it was the same thing when Windows 95 came out. A lot of machines had to have major upgrades to run it.
post #8 of 77
My company (a fortune 500 company) is definitely ill equipped to handle it at the moment. I'm on a Dell laptop right now with 256MB of ram! It's dog slow. They're preparing for a hardware rollout sometime around Q3 but from what I hear, they're still uncertain if they're going to roll out with Vista. The machines will all have 2GB of ram and a Core 2 Duo, but I've been told that there's some other performance issues that they're still concerned about, not sure what.

If they roll out with XP, they may be stuck with that license for some time and we won't be seeing Vista for quite some time.

It doesn't concern me though since I'll be leaving in May anyway...
post #9 of 77
What I want to know is where did all that money come from that Microsoft was touting to support the successful sales launch of Vista? They showed sales figures that exceeded XP's launch...who bought all of those copies of Vista?

I don't know how this works, but could it be from companies like Sony and HP? Do they have to pre-pay for all the copies of Vista that they load on the machines that they ship out to stores and warehouses? So maybe we're really not talking about customer adoption of Vista as much as we are about systems shipping to the sales channels with Vista installed on them.

Just trying to make sense of the conflicting reports.

And I have to admit the idea of Vista dominating stored-in-a-warehouse market sort of appeals to me.
"Too much of a good thing is great." Mae West
Reply
"Too much of a good thing is great." Mae West
Reply
post #10 of 77
AI could at least add an interpretation, perhaps mention that these figures are disputed or debatable?

This like a copy-paste
post #11 of 77
You mean all those Windows 2000 computers still in use won't be upgrading any time soon? I guess this applies to all the Win 95 ones also still chugging away...

Unless a killer app comes out for Vista, I doubt any company will be fretting over doing anything this year (or even next).
post #12 of 77
This does not really surprise me, we are in the era of bloated OS's. Even OS X Tiger has a required 256mb, and recommended 512... but with just 512 mb, my new MBP was too slow, and felt as slow as my 1ghz eMac (768mb).

Leapord will most likely require 512mb, and recommend 1gb. Also, it'll probably need a 1ghz G4 or better. That excludes machines older than 2003. This excludes many Apples that people own. The Capitol Hill iMac, the original eMacs, the PowerMac G4 towers, and of course, many iBooks, the TiBook series, and what not. I could be wrong, Apple may still include support for these machines, but I somehow doubt it. Someone can prove me wrong, and that'd be fun

Again, its all bloated software. We get wiz bang graphics, lots of redunant code, and of course our bugs at start. It happens to Vista, and will to Leapord.

Sorry, just a little sick of the Vista bashing. I spend 50% of my time in OS X, the other 50% in XP. Can't say I'm a true Apple Fan, and definitely not a FanBoi. I am however, a person who uses the tools he needs to get certain tasks done. As long as it works, I don't care.

Businesses will not want to buy a whole new set of machines, and at this moment, XP is the most stable of the two. As my father's company says: "Use the previous major edition of Windows, cause the hackers, gamers, and programers will have already figured out the holes, and they'll be plugged up. Just wait till the next major OS release to upgrade to Vista". Btw, they are just now upgrading from Win2k and Win98 to XP. Rah.
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
Go Linux, Choose a Flavor!
"I aim to misbehave"
Reply
post #13 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

So what else is new, M$ making another product that sells more hardward, and you wonder why M$ and Intel like each other so much.

Image what would have happen if Apple released OSX that did not work on 80% of the install base.

Yeah, if we ignore the fact that the processors are probably more than adequate (it is, contrary to popular belief, possible to upgrade RAM and HDDs without buying a new computer), and that Microsoft collaborates with AMD nowadays.

And Vista will surely work on more than 80% of the install base. XP can apparently run on a 8MHz Pentium Overdrive with 16 MB RAM.
post #14 of 77
Heck...I'd say that number of applications that many businesses are running that are not Vista compatible are pretty near 80%. Not to mention a lack of drivers for numerous peripherals out there that businesses are using. None of my AutoDesk software runs in Vista, (Revit, 3ds Max 9) and AutoDesk is pretty quiet about when it will.




BTW: Still waiting for that Zune to take the world by storm.......
post #15 of 77
Is it me, or does it seem that software is becoming a bit more bloated and less efficient in it's memory usage (most concern towards windows OS/Apps) ? It just seems that the more you want, the more we're having to double up on our resources. In a "perfect world", shouldn't we look towards building software/OS tech. to use less resources? (please note this is my fictious world).

It seems the hardware technology today surpasses the software of today, but we are made to believe we just need more hardware in order to run Software at barely par stability.

*Begin vent session* I mean, come on people, we're seeing Doubled-up quad core processors, and videocards worth a downpayment on a car, and yet we THINK we're fast, but we really arent. /vent session
post #16 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by donebylee View Post

What I want to know is where did all that money come from that Microsoft was touting to support the successful sales launch of Vista? They showed sales figures that exceeded XP's launch...who bought all of those copies of Vista?

I don't know how this works, but could it be from companies like Sony and HP? Do they have to pre-pay for all the copies of Vista that they load on the machines that they ship out to stores and warehouses? So maybe we're really not talking about customer adoption of Vista as much as we are about systems shipping to the sales channels with Vista installed on them.

Just trying to make sense of the conflicting reports.

And I have to admit the idea of Vista dominating stored-in-a-warehouse market sort of appeals to me.

Can you say 'channel stuffing'. We'll see if this is the case in a couple of months.
post #17 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by physguy View Post

Can you say 'channel stuffing'. We'll see if this is the case in a couple of months.

That's what I wondering exactly. Did they bump them up to produce a successful launch and a happy, happy, joy, joy bon voyage for Billy Boy?
"Too much of a good thing is great." Mae West
Reply
"Too much of a good thing is great." Mae West
Reply
post #18 of 77
This "Four out of five computers within the workplace are not adequately equipped to make the jump to Microsoft's Vista operating system based on the software maker's stated requirements, one study shows." is not news.

And, it is irrelevant to Vista's uptake and Microsoft's profits.

Business do not upgrade their computers. They buy new ones. (By the way, the same is true for 90+% of consumers.)

When the computers are replaced with new ones, the new ones will be able to run Vista. Some will and some will have XP installed. This is no different from all previous cycles.
post #19 of 77
But this also means there are a lot of PCs just waiting to be upgraded!
post #20 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by davebarnes View Post

This "Four out of five computers within the workplace are not adequately equipped to make the jump to Microsoft's Vista operating system based on the software maker's stated requirements, one study shows." is not news.

And, it is irrelevant to Vista's uptake and Microsoft's profits.

Business do not upgrade their computers. They buy new ones. (By the way, the same is true for 90+% of consumers.)

When the computers are replaced with new ones, the new ones will be able to run Vista. Some will and some will have XP installed. This is no different from all previous cycles.

For the operating system that's only true because its been so long between releases. Plenty of business systems I know of, and home users, have upgraded from 10.2 to 10.3 to 10.4 and will to 10.5 with maybe a memory upgrade. Are these running as fast as new systems??? of course not but they are still very productive, and yet have the latest features that increase usefulness.
post #21 of 77
The problem is, that XP, if configured properly, is fine. There is probably no way to argue productivity gains by switching to Vista in a business setting, and maybe not anywhere else either. Not only is there the hardware upgrade/replacement, there's the software costs, user training time, and technician time as well.

Heck, I'm not sure if OS X.4 is enough of a productivity enhancement over X.3 to justify the upgrade cost either, with respect to a business environment. Leopard might be with automatic file versioning & backup, Spaces and the upgraded Spotlight might work reasonably well (finally), but there's still a potential hardware upgrade cost, anyone with G3 systems are going to be out of luck, last I heard, and many other low end systems will need more memory to work well.

There's a point where the gains don't justify the costs. As such, at the moment, I don't think it makes sense to pay for a new operating system except with new computers, and I think that should only happen when the computer needs to be replaced, not just because there's a new operating system available.
post #22 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by donebylee View Post

What I want to know is where did all that money come from that Microsoft was touting to support the successful sales launch of Vista? They showed sales figures that exceeded XP's launch...who bought all of those copies of Vista?

I don't know how this works, but could it be from companies like Sony and HP? Do they have to pre-pay for all the copies of Vista that they load on the machines that they ship out to stores and warehouses? So maybe we're really not talking about customer adoption of Vista as much as we are about systems shipping to the sales channels with Vista installed on them.

Just trying to make sense of the conflicting reports.

And I have to admit the idea of Vista dominating stored-in-a-warehouse market sort of appeals to me.

I tried to find a link to one analyst's claim that these figures do not mach their channel check.
The main points were:
- their study shows 3 - 5 million Vista retail box sales.
- there were less than 15-17 million PCs sold during first month after Vista launch.
His conclusion: these 20 million include also:
- coupons [for free Vista upgrade] issued since October and reclaimed in February (4 months, not one)
- Vista retail boxes in the channel
- licenses sold to OEMs (their estimate - the remaining 15-17 million), but then, again, it is more like 2 months since they started getting them and include unsold licenses.

He checked back the XP press release and even asked Microsoft for clarification - did those 17 million include OEMs. The answer was YES, but that is not clear from those press release, he explains, and as far as he remembers, the answer to this question few years back was NO.

Anyway, I could not find it. We shall wait and see. Within a [fiscal] year this will show up in the quarterly reports.
post #23 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

This does not really surprise me, we are in the era of bloated OS's. Even OS X Tiger has a required 256mb, and recommended 512... but with just 512 mb, my new MBP was too slow, and felt as slow as my 1ghz eMac (768mb).

I run Tiger on an old G4 iBook (800 MHz), and with 640 MB of RAM it feels pretty snappy- and I am one of those impatient 'speed sensitive' people who thought OS X was unusablely slow until Jaguar (10.2).

I can't imagine a nice Intel-based MacBook Pro with 512MB RAM being too slow with Tiger. You may have other problems there.

Quote:
Leapord will most likely require 512mb, and recommend 1gb. Also, it'll probably need a 1ghz G4 or better.

Speculation is always fun. I speculate that Leopard will run fine with 512, and that even my old iBook G4 (circa 2003-4) will be able to run it effectively. 1GHz G4 minimum for Leopard? I dunno... Tiger, after all, runs on 350 MHz G3s just fine (aka my old Indigo iMac).

We'll know either way come June.

Quote:
We get wiz bang graphics, lots of redunant code, and of course our bugs at start. It happens to Vista, and will to Leapord.

Yeah, but the difference is, a lot of people aren't going to touch Vista with a ten-foot pole until Service Pack 2 comes out. Meanwhile, most OS X releases are good-to-go upon release.

Some ppl might wait until 10.5.1 to upgrade, but that's about it. The 'fear level' with OS X upgrades is certainly less than it is with Windows, its certainly not 'bashing' to state this.

I know my company doesn't plan to touch Vista until 2008, and most of our current hardware CAN run it. So that's not the problem... the software is.

.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
post #24 of 77
I always think it's funny when people say PCs (Dell, HP, etc.) cost less than a MAC.

BUY THE BEST, CRY ONLY ONCE!!!
post #25 of 77
To start, I am a long-time reader of these forums, but a first time poster. I do my best to avoid getting into the muck, so to speak, because I am an Apple "fanboi"... a converted one at that as up until 1996 I was a die-hard Windows user.

With that said:

1) The 20 million copies of Vista that Microsoft reported selling in the first two-months is a GROSSLY misreported fabrication. Very much the same as those used, by and large, to determine market share. 20 million copies of Vista were NOT sold in this two week period to consumers and definitely not in two months.

As has been reported, a goodly part of that number are from upgrade deals that were given out for new machine purchases during the October-December holiday buying period. The remainder is about 70% of what Microsoft sold to OEMs/brand manufacturers/etc. to install in newly created machines which have not necessarily (almost definitely) not sold yet. Especially, considering the number of new PCs reported as sold in the same period.

Similarly, these numbers do not take into account the number of machines that were sold with Vista or elligible for an upgrade, but did NOT keep that system installed or even install it (you know, those pesky Linux/Unix users, multi-booters and NT/XP diehards).

What this basically boils down to is an extremely lackluster launch for Windows Vista... EXTREMELY lackluster.

2) Businesses do tend to buy cyclically and they do tend to replace machines rather than upgrade them. It's all about tax write-offs and bottom lines. And, as far as what they will get next or won't get, it will never be a matter of overall cost of ownership nor getting the better product, which is invariably why Apple will not have an easy time of breaking into those Windows-locked companies.

That decision is always based on the lowest dollar sales cost and the IT guys recommendations (at least to some degree). What IT admin or system tech is going to recommend their company completely retool when they also insure the possibility of losing or putting themselves out of a job.

Does anyone relaize how many people have their careers tied up in being able to, with varying degrees of success, keep a Windows work environment running? Assume for a minute that some other OS came into existence and was the be all and end all for what every computer user wanted and required a third of the admin time that Windows does.

Does anyone really believe a Widnows IT guy is going to go running to the board of directors telling them how great the system is and how much money they'll save in the long run switching over? Hell no, they're going to throw bricks at it and give you every reason under the sun why it just isn't going to work for what they do!

This isn't rocket science, it's basic human nature.

3) Just because it hasn't been said and it does deserve a remark whenever someone talks about Vista... it is NOT original... it is NOT innovative. And, contrary to Bill's many interviews, it is not the first time parental controls have been in an operating system; it does not have a unique photo mangement system; it does nothing unique, innovative, revoltuionary or easier than can be done on a Mac in terms of DVD authoring; and, the idea that the Zune is holding sway in any segment (let alone the high-end) of the music player market is completely LUDICROUS.

Why won't any bonafide reporter call him and Steve Ballmer on any of this crap when they are sitting right in front of them?

Okay, so, yeah... that was a rant... apologies!
post #26 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post

I run Tiger on an old G4 iBook (800 MHz), and with 640 MB of RAM it feels plenty snappy- and I am one of those impatient 'speed sensitive' people who thought OS X was unusablely slow until Jaguar (10.2).

I can't imagine a nice Intel-based MacBook Pro being too slow with Tiger, even with 512. You may have other problems there.

That may be due to different standards and usage patterns though.

It does run noticeably faster if you increase the memory, even my sister noticed the speed difference between 512MB and 2GB on that system.

I'm thinking about upgrading my main computer beyond 2GB because Toast really racks up the swapping counts, it's affecting other things while it does that.
post #27 of 77
the mini, macbook, macbook black and the $999 i-mac all have the same low end on board vampire video card that runs vista 3d desktop slowly
post #28 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by physguy View Post

For the operating system that's only true because its been so long between releases. Plenty of business systems I know of, and home users, have upgraded from 10.2 to 10.3 to 10.4 and will to 10.5 with maybe a memory upgrade. Are these running as fast as new systems??? of course not but they are still very productive, and yet have the latest features that increase usefulness.

Actually, I bought my PowerBook G3 Pismo in march 2000.
Every OSX update I did from 10.1 through 10.4 it became snappier and faster under OSX.
Can't see what 10.5 will do because it died on me after it keeled from a table.

Indeed, very off topic.
alles sal reg kom
Reply
alles sal reg kom
Reply
post #29 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_the_dragon View Post

the mini, macbook, macbook black and the $999 i-mac all have the same low end on board vampire video card that runs vista 3d desktop slowly

Somehow, I don't think that the Vista UI uses more than a few thousand polygons a second to do its fancy 3D UI stuff, and that should be well within the range of what that chip can handle. Even the texel count shouldn't be limited by the GMA.
post #30 of 77
i really tried to give vista (ultimte) a fair shake on my 2 year old dell dimension with 3.4 ghz HT, 1mb ram, and raid 0. the system was actually unable to successfullly be installed (upgrading an existing xp system) with raid 0, so i had to delete it. FIRST big bummer. then after it was up and running (wont even go into details that vista told me i dont have a sound card...) several important programs did not work at all, or only partially, including ms programs such as sql 2005, visual studio, divx, x-lite, etc etc. this was the SECOND big bummer. the other day i wanted to delete a couple of files from the trashcan. vista only kept showing 'computing time to delete' and that was the end of it. this was the THIRD big bummer, which let me to the big question, what did all those thousands of people do for FIVE WHOLE FREAKIN YEARS? sat in one braindead meeting after the next? did the 'managers' only think of their own little fiefdoms? this is and was totally pathetic. this company deserves to go under with a big thud.
post #31 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Man, what an opportunity for Apple... they need to jump on this like white on rice.

Realistically it's not MUCH of an opportunity for them. Switching to Mac would still cost alot more for businesses then Vista, and doesn't solve the problem regarding upgrades.
post #32 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mooch View Post

My company just finished upgrading to xp...a process that's taken 3 years to complete. We won't be getting Vista anytime soon.

Mine too. We're still in the process of upgrading users from Win 2k and Windows NT 4. Infact we just cut off NT 4 purchases recently.
post #33 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

This does not really surprise me, we are in the era of bloated OS's. Even OS X Tiger has a required 256mb, and recommended 512... but with just 512 mb, my new MBP was too slow, and felt as slow as my 1ghz eMac (768mb).

I have Tiger running on a 5-year-old 600Mhz iBook G3 with 384MB RAM and it runs perfectly fine. It's not a screamer, but it gets the job done with no complaints from me. Are you saying that Vista (or even XP) would run just fine on a 5-year-old 600Mhz PC with 384MB RAM? I happen to know that it wouldn't. I've seen it for myself.

Say whatever you want about Windows bashing and fanboys (most of it is true) but at least acknowledge the reality of the situation which is that OS X does a far better job of scaling itself back for older equipment. I have no idea how Apple does it, but it works very well. You can (and should) run the current OS X on older laptops and machines if you need to. It works fine. Windows... well, not so much. You don't really get that option, and you do get stuck in an endless hardware upgrade cycle if you want to run the latest and greatest OS.
post #34 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by palex9 View Post

i really tried to give vista (ultimte) a fair shake on my 2 year old dell dimension with 3.4 ghz HT, 1mb ram, and raid 0. the system was actually unable to successfullly be installed (upgrading an existing xp system) with raid 0, so i had to delete it. FIRST big bummer. then after it was up and running (wont even go into details that vista told me i dont have a sound card...) several important programs did not work at all, or only partially, including ms programs such as sql 2005, visual studio, divx, x-lite, etc etc. this was the SECOND big bummer. the other day i wanted to delete a couple of files from the trashcan. vista only kept showing 'computing time to delete' and that was the end of it. this was the THIRD big bummer, which let me to the big question, what did all those thousands of people do for FIVE WHOLE FREAKIN YEARS? sat in one braindead meeting after the next? did the 'managers' only think of their own little fiefdoms? this is and was totally pathetic. this company deserves to go under with a big thud.

1MB of Ram? Of course Vista didn't run well...

But seriously, I know many people, and only one person has actually "upgraded" to Vista, and no one else has bought a new computer. MS is twisting the facts again...
post #35 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by camroidv27 View Post

This does not really surprise me, we are in the era of bloated OS's. Even OS X Tiger has a required 256mb, and recommended 512... but with just 512 mb, my new MBP was too slow, and felt as slow as my 1ghz eMac (768mb).

Leapord will most likely require 512mb, and recommend 1gb. Also, it'll probably need a 1ghz G4 or better. That excludes machines older than 2003. This excludes many Apples that people own. The Capitol Hill iMac, the original eMacs, the PowerMac G4 towers, and of course, many iBooks, the TiBook series, and what not. I could be wrong, Apple may still include support for these machines, but I somehow doubt it. Someone can prove me wrong, and that'd be fun

Again, its all bloated software. We get wiz bang graphics, lots of redunant code, and of course our bugs at start. It happens to Vista, and will to Leapord.

Sorry, just a little sick of the Vista bashing. I spend 50% of my time in OS X, the other 50% in XP. Can't say I'm a true Apple Fan, and definitely not a FanBoi. I am however, a person who uses the tools he needs to get certain tasks done. As long as it works, I don't care.

Businesses will not want to buy a whole new set of machines, and at this moment, XP is the most stable of the two. As my father's company says: "Use the previous major edition of Windows, cause the hackers, gamers, and programers will have already figured out the holes, and they'll be plugged up. Just wait till the next major OS release to upgrade to Vista". Btw, they are just now upgrading from Win2k and Win98 to XP. Rah.

Mmmm, interesting. I use both and have very different attitudes.

I cannot possibly see a person who uses both refer to XP as stable! What hour of the day is that? Just curious.

Are you sure you are not a MS 'fanboi'? I'll let you off 'wiz' and 'redunant' but the fact you can't even spell 'Leapord' kind of worries me!

Ask daddy for a spell checker on that PC
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #36 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by athletics68 View Post

Realistically it's not MUCH of an opportunity for them. Switching to Mac would still cost alot more for businesses then Vista, and doesn't solve the problem regarding upgrades.

Cost more now but save in the long run ....
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #37 of 77
Quote:
"a system that is Windows Vista capable doesn't necessarily translate to one that is Windows Vista enjoyable.

Now that's awesome.
post #38 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by plaidpjs@mac.com View Post

Does anyone relaize how many people have their careers tied up in being able to, with varying degrees of success, keep a Windows work environment running? Assume for a minute that some other OS came into existence and was the be all and end all for what every computer user wanted and required a third of the admin time that Windows does.

Does anyone really believe a Widnows IT guy is going to go running to the board of directors telling them how great the system is and how much money they'll save in the long run switching over? Hell no, they're going to throw bricks at it and give you every reason under the sun why it just isn't going to work for what they do!

This isn't rocket science, it's basic human nature.

Good post. It points to a wonderful irony.

AND .. maybe this is the Achilles heel in the MS strategy of still having 95% of the market in 5 years and all of those using Vista. For two decades MS has succeeded because so many IT people's jobs depended on all the help normal folk needed due to the horrendous interface and bug ridden OS called Windows. Now, here we are with those very same IT people, at a time when Apple have such a superb alternative machine and OS, digging their collective heels in against the MS new OS!

I have said it before and I say it again... TWA, PANAM ... MIcrosoft.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
Google Motto "You're not the customer. You're the product."
Reply
post #39 of 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Man, what an opportunity for Apple... they need to jump on this like white on rice.

Unfortunately, Apple really doesn't have anything that lends itself to the enterprise market. Even the lowest iMac is too expensive and the Mini is too easy to steal.
post #40 of 77
Quote:
Unfortunately, Apple really doesn't have anything that lends itself to the enterprise market. Even the lowest iMac is too expensive and the Mini is too easy to steal.

Enterprise was always going to be the last nut for Apple to crack. But I think they do have some very good opportunities in the consumer market while Vista spends another year or so getting its act together.

To take full advantage though, they do however have to price more aggressively, and fill a few product-line holes (subnotebook, sub-$1000 notebook, minitower).

Note: Before someone whines, I'm not advocating that Apple enter the low-end market, just that it hits the midrange market a whole lot more aggressively.

.
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
Cut-copy-paste, MMS, landscape keyboard, video-recording, voice-calling, and more... FINALLY
To the 'We Didn't Need It' Crowd/Apple Apologista Squad : Wrong again, lol
Thanks for listening to your...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Nearly 80% of business PCs ill-equipped for Vista upgrade?