Survey Finds Few Intend to Upgrade to Vista

thefickler writes "A recent Harris Poll has found that while most online computers users are aware of Microsoft's Windows Vista, few are intending to switch over to the new operating system anytime soon. The Harris Poll of 2223 US online adults in early March found that 87% were aware of Vista. Unfortunately for Microsoft, only 12% of Vista-aware respondents were intending to upgrade to Vista in the next 12 months."

Early Adoptor == Burned

[ackthpt (218170)]

Alas, where I work we will be enthusiastically embracing Vista. My supervisor was very upbeat when she
told me I would be getting a new computer loaded with Vista and that I needed to familiarise myself with it
because everyone else would be getting Vista, too.

I'm an old school computer guy. I don't "upgrade" until I have to or there is sufficient benefit to be
gained. I learned this from a crafty old fellow who felt so, after being burned several times.

As to why, I see Vista as little more than a ploy to hold market share and gain some profits, as the existing
XP profit cycle has likely flattened. There will be a few bells and whistles, but the security aspect tells me they know
less about writing operating systems than their predecessors of 30 years ago. I think they still just don't get it. I also feel it's been rushed.

After all these years Windows is still a big mysterious black box, wherein things happen of which we know little and therefore
have little say in behaviour of or control over.

Besides, I've always been a fan of having the actual code at my finger tips. ;-)

Re:Early Adoptor == Burned

[by Anonymous Coward]

On the other hand, I happen to need to buy a new computer for my son going off to college and being a mere consumer (i.e. powerless to get an OEM to sell me an XP system instead of Vista), I will be buying a stand alone copy of XP from a website to replace the copy of Vista that will come with the machine. My copy of Vista will end up sitting on the shelf. Yes, I know I'm paying Microsoft twice but what can one do? My son needs a Windows based computer and the university doesn't support (and doesn't want to support) Vista.

Truthfully, I don't want Vista on the computer. However, I wonder how many other people find themselves in this predicament of basically being forced to pay Microsoft twice?

Re:Early Adoptor == Burned

[by Anonymous Coward]

"Downgrading" your license is possible, depending on the license [google.dk].

Re:Early Adoptor == Burned

[Grishnakh (216268)]

I will be buying a stand alone copy of XP from a website to replace the copy of Vista that will come with the machine. My copy of Vista will end up sitting on the shelf. Yes, I know I'm paying Microsoft twice but what can one do?

Ever heard of BitTorrent?

Actually....

[tacokill (531275)]

Actually - read your EULA.

A Vista license allows you to "downgrade".

Re:Actually....

[xs650 (741277)]

"A Vista license allows you to "downgrade"."

A Vista license is a downgrade.

Re:

[kypper (446750)]

...and you think Microsoft forcing us to have Vista verses XP on OEM computers is honest?

If someone buys a complete package machine, they should be able to choose what operating system it runs. Forcing them to pay for something they don't want justifies the piracy, IMHO. Give them the option, then come riding in on your high horse. Otherwise, quit bitching; you got your money.

Re:Early Adoptor == Burned

[CmdrGravy (645153)]

I too recently bought a PC without any operating system installed, it took me around 5 mins to find somewhere on the web where I could do this.

I think that if people don't care that they are being forced to buy Vista and if they can't be bothered to seek out alternatives then there is no problem with all the places where they are likely to shop taking advantage of that. So long as the rest of us can excercise our own choices to not have any particular operating system thrust upon us, which we can, then all is well.

Re:Early Adoptor == Burned

[pcmanjon (735165)]

QUOTE "It's because of people like you that we have WGA and other such anti-piracy features. I'm still puzzled as to why people who are too damn cheap to pay companies their dues think that they're superior than us honest consumers."

There isn't much of a need to pay for XP if you've bought vista. Consider if a trade. Buy Vista (which is Windows tax with the new laptop) -- chuck it -- download XP and use that. Vista probably costs more than XP, so in fact Microsoft profited.

It's not like he's going to buy the vista/laptop, THEN download XP and use it on a 2nd computer.

I use to pirate Windows, but then I started using Linux primarily. Now I am legit I suppose. Although I did purchase a laptop loaded with XP, and I haven't bothered installing Linux on it.

No need to pirate

[novocastrian (653554)]

Most manufacturers offer their computers with Vista installed, but all it takes is a phone call or email to get them to put XP on it instead. I bought a Dell laptop a few weeks ago with XP & it was very easy to arrange.

Re:Early Adoptor == Burned

[Cope57 (752357)]

I would rather pay for Linux, than use Windows for free. But since the Debian Linux distribution I am using is available for free, I can contribute to the distribution in any way I feel it appropriate. cash donation (tax deductible), equipment, etc...

Re:Early Adoptor == Burned

[Thaelon (250687)]

Microsoft depends on piracy to increase the number of computers their products are on. People using torrents are just helping them out.

Re:Early Adoptor == Burned

[Grishnakh (216268)]

I don't understand: WGA is supposed to stop piracy, but it doesn't seem to have done much about the people on BitTorrent. So what is it for again? And why are you complaining about it? It seems like a non-issue to me.

switching

[falconwolf (725481)]

Well, I won't pay Microsoft any money until they stop treating their customers like criminals

I am a Windows user however for this reason, Microsoft treating it's customers like criminals, I am switching. For my desktop I got a PC with Linux preinstalled and for a laptop I plan on getting a Macbook Pro. Not unless and until MS gets rid of Activation and WGA/WPA will I willingly buy either a PC with Windows installed or Windows on disk in a box. I see no reason I should even need Windows again, other than what I am already using, but if there's any software I need but for which there are not versions for Linux and/or Macs, I looked and found none that does not run on either, then I will use Crossover/WINE to run them in.

Falcon

Re:

[Charcharodon (611187)]

I think you are buying far too much into the negative hype around Vista. The only way you'll be having problems with your Vista laptop is if you plan on buying a bargan basement no frills machine that has minimal hardware specs. Even Xp would be hard pressed to run properly on it as well. That or if your son has a full range of periphrials that are 3-4 years old (printers/scanners etc.). Alot of companies are still dragging their feet on driver support for old gear, but that is nothing new.

If the univ

Re:Early Adoptor == Burned

[greginnj (891863)]

I think you are buying far too much into the negative hype around Vista. The only way you'll be having problems with your Vista laptop is if you plan on buying a bargan basement no frills machine that has minimal hardware specs.

You're bending over backwards to be tolerant, here. Remember how Dell was selling 'Vista-capable' machines that were "Great for ... Booting the Operating System, without running applications or games" [dell.com] [ yes, caps in the original, like the os was some sort of deity...]. Sorry, it's flash, but this is the original -- click on 'Hardware' then on 'View Hardware Requirements'.

So Dell is willing to call such a machine 'Vista-capable', and Microsoft was willing to certify it as such. What the hell do I want with an os that does nothing but boot? Dell and Microsoft conspired to screw us both: Dell wanted to unload low-end overstock hardware, MS wanted to limit the availability of pre-installed XP to boost Vista's numbers. Not everyone wants a gamer machine -- if I buy a low-end box that is 'Vista capable', I shouldn't end up feeling like a fraud victim.

Re:Early Adoptor == Burned

[Lehk228 (705449)]

XP offered many REAL improvements for the user over windows98, not the least of which being real user logins and security.

granted most of thses "improvements" have been in unix since the 70's but still, at least they exist.

vista is no more than windowblinds+truecrypt except not as good as either

Re:

[morcego (260031)]

Thankfully, around here we can still get Dell, HP and almost anything else with XP.
Which sucks, since I would love mine to come with FreeDOS (their version of No OS) but,
unfortunately, they (HP) only offer it on low end systems (Celeron/Sempron), and I'm getting a X2.

Re:

[by Anonymous Coward]

There will be a few bells and whistles, but the security aspect tells me they know less about writing operating systems than their predecessors of 30 years ago.

Not too realistic when you are comparing the security of software from 30 years ago (in a much different environment) to a global commercialized network with millions of computers being used by your Mother, Father, Grandparents, Etc..

After all these years Windows is still a big mysterious black box, wherein things happen of which we know little and t

Re:Early Adoptor == Burned

[dingDaShan (818817)]

It seems that Microsoft didn't make XP bad enough. If it was, people would want to upgrade. See windows 98 for example.

Re:

[Charcharodon (611187)]

Thirty years ago computer security was not leaving the phone receiver plugged into the modem (literally having the entire handset plugged in, not just a cord) and making sure the door to the computer room was locked.

I wonder if you are still using wood #2 pencils since there is no "real benefit" to those new fangled plastic and metal mechanical pencils.

Re:

[Suhas (232056)]

Why would I want to upgrade to Vista? I upgraded my work PC from 2000 to XP a few months after it came out and felt cheated. Like the saying goes, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. No Sir, I will keep using XP on my work PC and will upgrade to fiesty fawn at home.

ORLY?

[kv9 (697238)]

Unfortunately for Microsoft, only 12% of Vista-aware respondents were intending to upgrade to Vista in the next 12 months.

fortunately for Microsoft, the OEMs provide good business.

Re:ORLY?

[rackhamh (217889)]

Seriously... probably a more appropriate question would have been "How many of you intend to buy a new computer in the next 12 months?"

Re:ORLY?

[rackhamh (217889)]

To clarify... the article says:

The poll revealed that 39% of those intending to move over to Vista planned to upgrade their existing computer so it would meet Vista requirements, 35% planned to buy a new computer with Vista preinstalled, 17% planned to purchase a new "Vista-ready" computer, and 8% said that they would install Vista on their existing computer without any upgrade.

But the meaning of these numbers depends a lot on how the questions were asked. If you ask these questions:

1) Do you plan to upgrade to Vista?
2) If so, how do you plan to upgrade? ... then you'll get very different answers from the following:

1) Do you plan to buy a new computer?
2) If so, which manufacturer do you plan to buy from?

The phrasing of the article (focusing on "Vista-aware respondents") indicates that the numbers aren't a good indication of how many people will actually be upgrading. Tons of people who don't know about Vista will definitely be upgrading, whether they plan to or not.

Re:

[dedazo (737510)]

Hi twitter [slashdot.org]. Back to using the sockpuppet account?

The point remains, the vast majority of users don't want Vista.

Is that a fact or did you imagine it just now? So what you're saying is that you have the pulse of several hundreds of millions of Windows users. Correct? And they don't want Vista. Correct? Can you show us some data to back this up?

When they find out they can only get a new computer with Vista, the likely result is to not buy a new computer.

How do you figure? I'm a little fuzzy on how this

Re:ORLY?

[Clever7Devil (985356)]

I had a short conversation today with a customer service rep from Dell regarding buying a new laptop.

System Initial Question/Comment: Is it possible to get a laptop with XP or no OS?
System You are now being connected to an agent. Thank you for using Dell Chat
System Connected with ATG Anibal
ATG Anibal Thank you for contacting the Dell Employee and Student Purchase Program. My name is Anibal, I will be your personal assistant today. I will be glad to assist you with your questions.
ATG Anibal To be sure that I can further assist you, may I have the name of the company or institution that you work for?
Me ::Deleted my company name for obvious reasons::
ATG Anibal Yes , those are latitude notebooks. Those are the ones that will give you xp as an option
Me Alright... can I get no OS?
ATG Anibal No, is not an option.
Me So, just so I understand what you're saying. If I want to buy a Dell Laptop I also must buy Windows with it?
ATG Anibal That is correct
Me And if I want to buy an Inspiron laptop, I also must buy Vista?
ATG Anibal That is correct, unless you go with latitude notebooks
Me Thank you for your help.

"Is not an option" was my favorite part. YA RLY

Re:ORLY?

[ozmanjusri (601766)]

So what's the lack of average Joe interest in Linux reflect?.

Of the people I've talked computers with and who are aware of Linux, the common responses are:

1. Application lock in.
2. Format lock in.
3. FUD (many varieties of misinformation).
4. Unfamiliar UI.
5. Not sufficiently better/different (can't be bothered).
6. Lack of peer support (asking mates how to fix something).
7. Lack of hardware vendor support. (Sorry, I don't care if there's smoke coming from your peripheral. We won't help because you're using an unsupported OS).

My crowd's not particularly computer geeky (film/video and engineering, mostly), so it's not a huge sample size though.

I just switched... BACK

[Alphager (957739)]

I just switched my Desktop and my Laptop back to XP. Vista did not offer much good to me, and there were several annoying UI-things:
-Aero is a joke. The ~5 mm glassy effect (which does not improve productivity at all) comes at a way too hefty performance-cost.
-Vista dumbs the user way too down.

Example of an everyday-task gone wrong: When using a laptop and traveling much, my ip-adress will often fluctuate. To show my IP-adress under XP, i doubleclick on the connection-icon in the systray and change to the second tab. Under Vista, i doubleclick the connection-icon and end up in the Connection-Center. From there, i have to choose the common Task to manage connections. There i have to rightclick on the connection and click on properties. THERE i have to click on the advanced-button.

- The driver-situation is embarassing.
-SSH dynamic port forwarding does not work under Vista (used putty and plink; neither did work)

What i really liked in Vista was the combined search/run-field in the startmenu. But i can live happily without it when the rest of my system behaves.

Re:I just switched... BACK

[geekoid (135745)]

You can't open a command window and type 'ipconfig' ?

Re:I just switched... BACK

[RedWizzard (192002)]

You can't open a command window and type 'ipconfig' ?

Of course, but that's not the point. The point is that the GUI method of getting that functionality is much less efficient in Vista than it was in XP.

Fixed (was Re:I just switched... BACK)

[by Anonymous Coward]

I just switched my Desktop and my Laptop back to 98. XP did not offer much good to me, and there were several annoying UI-things:
-Those ugly Theme things hog way too much CPU.
-XP dumbs the user way too down.
- The driver-situation is embarassing.

What i really liked in Vista was the smart icon arrangement in the startmenu. But i can live happily without it when the rest of my system behaves.

Fixed. It's just like Windows XP all over again.

Another 5 years and everyone will be bitching about the switch to Windo

Re:

[krotkruton (967718)]

I've never been a big fan of upgrading Windows either. I've still got 2 computers running 2000 because it's always worked best for me. My University gave Vista away for free to all engineering majors, so I thought I'd give it a try on my best comp. Long story short, Vista works for everyday tasks and video and what not, but I frequently have to restart because of some network problem that keeps happening, my graphics shear and distort randomly, and the driver problems prevent me from playing games and do

Re:I just switched... BACK

[SEMW (967629)]

When using a laptop and traveling much, my ip-adress will often fluctuate. To show my IP-adress under XP, i doubleclick on the connection-icon in the systray and change to the second tab. Under Vista, i doubleclick the connection-icon and end up in the Connection-Center. From there, i have to choose the common Task to manage connections. There i have to rightclick on the connection and click on properties. THERE i have to click on the advanced-button.

IIRC, one of the resons behind the Vista Sidebar was to make oft-accessed information just like this very easily accessible. Sure enough, a quick Find More Gadgets search reveals:

My IP [live.com] -- "a compact gadget to display your current IP address"

Alternatively:

Wireless Network Controller [live.com] -- "a gadget to display your wireless network's current status and details. The gadget displays the SSID and Signal Strength; click on the SSID to open the Details flyout for all the network details such as Signal Quality, Security Status and IP Address."

Another alternative [live.com]; And another [live.com], etc. [codeproject.com].

Re:I just switched... BACK

[SEMW (967629)]

It's just in the way, even on a widescreen monitor - who would willingly sacrifice that much real estate?

It's not always on top, and doesn't take space away from applications -- by default, anyway, it just sits on the desktop, so the only thing it's nudging out of the way are desktop icons. Though there is an option to have it always on top, I can't see that many people would use it -- for exactly the reasons you say. So if you want to see your gadgets, you just winkey+M (minimize all) to see your desktop.

Alternatively, if you want it to work like Dashboard (i.e. gadgets appear temporarily over the top of your current applications), the shortcut is winkey+space, which brings the sidebar and any desktop gadgets to the front (and in focus), from where you can use winkey+g to cycle through them.

In fact, if you hide the sidebar altogether and just use desktop gadgets, and use winkey+space to bring them to the front when necessary, you can pretty much exactly emulate the functionality of Dashboard.

BTW, For what it's worth, the first version of MacOS to have gadgets was released in April 2005. The initial release of Konfabulator was in February 2003 (November 2004 for the Windows version). Windows Sidebar, meanwhile, was demonstrated as a Microsoft Research project called Sideshow in the summer of 2000 and first turned up in a public Longhorn build in September 2002, 5 months before Konfabulator and over 2 1/2 years before MacOS 10.4.

But then, BeOS had widgets way back in... er, whenever-it-was; certainly way before 2000.

Come to think of it, BeOS also apparently had Spotlight/Vista-style instant search [slashdot.org] a good 10 years before Spotlight and Vista.

So -- everything's ripping of BeOS?

Meh.

Re:

[lav-chan (815252)]

... What are you talking about? You can do that in XP too. The 'search box' is just accessed a little differently. Two options:

1. Start > Run... > cmd /k ipconfig

2. Win+R > cmd /k ipconfig

Wow!!

[tgatliff (311583)]

So is this where the "Wow" starts? :-)

Upgrade is not MS game

[iamacat (583406)]

Most people buy a PC and run the same OS for its lifetime (which is around 5 years if you want current programs). "How many people are planning to buy a PC with Vista as opposed to any other computing device" survey would likely return 90%.

I have until 2010 to upgrade

[Windcatcher (566458)]

...from Win2k to ReactOS.

irrelevant

[fermion (181285)]

Almost no one pays for a physical product to upgrade their MS OS, it is simply too expensive. Much cheaper just to buy a new machine. It is not surprising that those who bought a computer a year or two ago are not going to plunk down an equal amount to upgrade the OS.

And this likely does not matter to MS. From some estimates I have seen, MS makes 80% of it's money from license only deals, and most growth comes from OEM sales. Therefore, MS seems to be most concerned with keeping the OEM in line, doing whatever is necessary to keep the desktop monopoly.

In any case,here are the facts as I see them. MS sold millions of copies of MS Vista even before the product was publicly released. Many were already sold through the commercial licensing program. I seem to recall that every one of those contracts were an implicit sale for MS Vista, which is why MS had to get out the OS, at least to corporate, by december. In addition, many machines that have been shipping since December are also an implicit sale of MS Vista, not to mention most machines that are now shipping.

I suspect that the retail software channels are kept awake at night figuring out how to convince the unwitting MS consumer that MS Vista "slim" edition is superior to MS Windows XP, but I doubt seriously many higher ups at MS are.

the great philosopher asked...

[SummitCO (1043824)]

What if a monopoly made a product and nobody bought it?

Re:the great philosopher asked...

[zappepcs (820751)]

except in this case, the Monopoly is generated by the fact that just about anyone that buys a new computer will have that product installed on it by default. The fact that its incredibly difficult to get a new big name pc without Windows pre-installed is in itself wrong.

I hope that this current situation actually does translate to lower new pc sales for the big name manufacturers, giving them pause to think about shipping with GNU/Linux or no OS at all, and do so at an equitable cost structure. Equitable cost structure is one where computers are cheaper without software pre-installed. Yes, I know that this is problematic because of the licensing deals the manufacturers are currently stuck with in order to even supply Windows at a good price.

It's all about the spin baby...

[Cervantes (612861)]

It's all about the spin baby...

"In other news, a recent survey says that over 10% of all adult computer users are intending to switch to the new Microsoft 'Vista' operating system. This is great news for the software giant, as it indicates that Vista is being embraced by more than the 'early adopter' crowd.

Amazing how different that sounds, eh?

Err, forgot where I was, sorry. I mean "M$ sucks. Boo. Boo-urns..."

Too much negative hype

[MikShapi (681808)]

The amount of unsubstantiated negative hype going around about vista is apalling.

Let's look at the facts:

1. For all intents and purposes it's a Windows XP + stuff. aka a glorified service pack.
2. Quite obviously it will displace XP in corporations, educational institutions and home with time.
3. Unless you're using domain logons, It is MUCH MUCH MUCH MORE SECURE than XP because UAC is on by default, palatable to power users (I've been working with it for several weeks now, it's ok) and teachable to non-tech users. Overall, it's worked out much better than you could have done on XP. It is not OpenBSD and shouldn't be compared to it, it is probably less secure than Gentoo with KDE. Nevertheless, compared with XP's work-as-root model, it's worlds apart. I'm not suggesting it's either bulletproof, bugless, unexploitable or mature. But A security model, ANY security model, is better than XP's *NO* security model.
4. Laugh at UI all you like, but a good UI is something everyone can use to get more done. Both joe averages and powerusers alike. Vista's UI serves as a welcome improvement over XP IMHO. I'm talking about useability improvements ala sidebar, "open containing folder" stuff etc, not eye-candy a-la aero which I frankly couldn't less.
5. It guzzles 700MB RAM on neutral right after loading. Who gives a flying fuck? My kde desktop at work eats 200MB. the number is *meaningless* unless it indicates, say, an excessive overpricing of the machine. is 200MB a lot? 10 years ago, we'd have all said it was. Does that make my gentoo/KDE desktop bloated crap today? no. On the same coin, when 1GB of RAM is next to free, 700MB is just another meaningless number.
1GB of DDR2 lappie ram costs 70US$ on ebay. Sure, if you have a P3, run XP. But if you run any form of hardware bought anywhere in the last 5 years, plug some RAM and you're good to go.
6. Microsoft will stop selling and supporting XP at some point anyway. So it's not like Vista will be some doomed stop-gap measure until something significantly better comes along, like Windows ME was. Vista is here to stay for the next 5 or so years until another "service pack" along the same lines appears.
7. If whatever DRM is built into the system prevents you from doing what you're used to do with a computer, use Linux.

Case in point:

If you're screaming "Vista's shit!" and have an old computer with XP you don't want to spend more money on, you're likely making the right call, but are an idiot for screaming out the shit bit. I have a 2005 Toyota echo and screaming how the 2007 model is shit because I don't need it (having the 2005 one) would make me the same kind of idiot.

If you're screaming "Vista's shit!" and you're using Linux/MacOS, you're either a clueless fanboy or someone who's tested both ends and can draw up pros and cons of each and stake a legitimate fact-based preference.

If you're screaming "Vista's shit!" and thinking you'd rather be getting XP with a new computer, you're a total clueless idiot. Especially if your spiel contains the word "security" in it.

Vista is a welcome improvement on XP. Give it some time to mature, give IT departments time to evaluate and learn to work it, it'll be ok.

Is it worth upgrading from XP? depends. Depends if you value a better security model (and eye candy). I've serviced many people with many malware computer problems who paid me lots of good money to fix said problems. Wild guess says a security model for them will pay for itself, from the money it costs them to periodically fix their shit. Locks tend to be cheaper than periodically re-outfitting a robbed house, and people tend to be able to do math when it's their money.

Re:

[DogDude (805747)]

Actually, the UI is pretty damn cool, and has lots of good new stuff in it. I like it. I wouldn't pay an extra $200 for it, but I'll gladly take it on the mew PC's I buy.

Re:What does it offer?

[Chazmyrr (145612)]

Right. So aside from maintaining a separate frame buffer for each window, providing a toolkit that allows resolution independant user interfaces, forcing developers to stop assuming that only one user is logged on at a time and that that user is an administrator, moving most of the device drivers out into user space where they can't crash the rest of the system, improved scheduling on multiple cores, improved memory management, non-destructive re-partitioning, a version of DirectX where vendors can't claim their hardware is compliant when it really isn't, full disk encryption, 3rd party credential providers that don't replace system libraries, Media Center, and a desktop that doesn't look like ass, what does Vista actually offer?

Maybe it doesn't offer you anything. That's fine. Don't assume that's the case for everyone else.

Re:

[igb (28052)]

Oracle Collaboration Server for calendering, plus Cyrus IMAP for mail. Provides a full service to Outlook users, other IMAP client users (with either a web client or a native OSX/Linux/Solaris/Windows client for the calendaring). Pretty cheap, certainly as compared to Exchange. We like it.

the WOW starts now lol

[GraphiX2004 (997956)]

the WOW starts now...

WOW nothing works no more!
WOW it wont let me playing this media because of DRM
WOW my entire system has stoped working because it thinks im a pirate
WOW i no longer control my pc it controls me.

WOW i have to pay for this?

Re:

[GFree (853379)]

Vista - won't touch it with a 99 1/2 foot pole when the day comes that i have the money to upgrade

Screw that, spend the money instead to upgrade to the full 100 feet. 99.5 just ain't good enough!

Re:

[SEMW (967629)]

but even the most recent ones (bought about a year ago) don't have the required hardware (TPM) to run it

FWIW, you don't need a TPM module to use the drive encryption; you can store the key on a USB flash drive (though you'd be well advised to make a backup flash drive and keep it in a safe in case the main one breaks).