Vista at Risk of Being Bypassed by Businesses 729
narramissic writes "With Windows 7 due in late 2009 or 2010, many businesses may choose to wait it out rather than make the switch to Vista. According to some analysts, Vista uptake at this point really depends on how good Vista SP1 (due in Q1, 2008) is. If it doesn't smooth over all the problems, companies are much more likely to stick with XP. And that holds especially true for those businesses that follow the every-other-release rule." Note for Microsoft: Allow us to natively disable trackpads.
disable trackpads? (Score:5, Interesting)
What's this about? Anyone want to clue me in?
Win 7 VMing of Unsigned code is bigger trun off... (Score:3, Interesting)
The VMing sound like a good idea but knowing MS they will just find a way to mess up or drive ram and cpu use for it to very high levels.
Also one VM per app will not work that well.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:WIndows 7 - better? (Score:5, Interesting)
Your grammar error calls to mind a metaphor.
If you take a badly exposed piece of film and put in the developer too long, you get out
Vista is the same way. The development time is really irrelevant: the fact that they spent a long time on it just means that it has *lots* of shitty features rather than only a few.
Re:and then.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe if they did it well, it might pay off. Windows XP is ancient. For a release, it is very old. They missed on the upgrade the OS thing poorly with Vista. Many are moving on to Apple or Linux instead.
My wife has picked up a Vista laptop to use in class stuff. She needed to play a DVD. After waiting for the boot dialog boxes to quit and closing them all. she started the DVD using an external monitor (dual monitor setup for presentation). About 5 minutes the DVD playback froze. Checking the laptop display to check the error message, it was a permission needed for Java to continue to do something or other. This stop everything and launch some odd process 5 minutes into a presentation is no OK for business. In the future we are not using the brand new Vista laptop for business presentations. It's nagging is unacceptable. In the future we will boot Geexbox or use another laptop to show videos. The Vista one interupts business presentations. I need to test it to see if it supports dual monitors.
M$ need to move corporate keys back to XP system.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Businesses do not like the idea that there vista system must call in to M$ to check there key from time to time or go in to limited functionality mode or use a key sever that calls in to M$ and systems can also go in to limited functionality mode if the sever / network goes down.
And if vista starts to gain more ground this may end become a big problem that limited testing be for a big roll is something that you may not run in to at that time and you may have to hope for a fast fix it your key gets blacklisted by mistake and most of your systems go in to limited functionality mode.
Vista was 3 years late! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What is so bad about Vista? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:The problem with waiting for MS (Score:3, Interesting)
We're already bypassing it (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:and then.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Regarding your wife's laptop - boot dialog boxes? What are you talking about? Do you have a ton of crapware on there? Are you talking about waiting for the BIOS to do its checks? I've played countless DVD's on my Vista box using WMP and I've never had a problem with a single one. I've definitely never had any Java related prompts. Either your DVD came with some kind of DRM / player installer or you're using some craptastic 3rd party player. Either way, I wouldn't blame Vista because you didn't test your presentation beforehand.
Dual monitors? Of course Vista works with dual monitors, so does XP. I'm running two monitors on Vista right now, and I can hook up four.
Re:and then.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Um no. The presentation was tested, then made just fine twice. The third film in the series it decided to ask permission to let Java do something.. right in the middle of a running presentation. To make matters worse, we were not running a browser or any other java application. It was a pop-up plain and simple. It was not network intiated. At the time, there was no LAN connection.
Set-up and testing is not enough. I know all the junk that pops up on an HP machine on start-up is enough to choke a horse, but when you think it is over, more stuff shows up later. Auto scheduled stuff not configured by the end user is the problem. The user did not launch the application or schedule it.
Upgrades Need Justification in Business (Score:5, Interesting)
A 1-gigahertz desktop running Windows XP with ECC memory meets the needs of most businesses. They had a genuine need to upgrade from the MS-DOS-based operating systems (OSes) like Windows 98 when Windows XP was launched. The former is just too unreliable, but the latter approached Linux-level reliability.
Going from Windows XP to Vista does not buy you a quantum leap in reliability. The latter has a nicer GUI than the former, but a nicer user interface is not enough to justify spending another $1000+ on a machine for your secretary.
During this obssessive drive to faster, bigger, and badder computers and OSes, eventually the technology reaches a point at which it exceeds the needs of the customers. We have reached that point -- that knee of the technology curve. Any further technical advancements beyond the knee does not bring new customers to computer company XYZ. The computer-systems market now resembles or will soon resemble the automotive market: a replacement market for broken devices.
I do not replace my Chevrolet Camaro when a new sports car enters the automotive market. I replace my Camaro when it becomes too expensive to repair.
No spokesperson for a computer company ever talks about the arrival of the "knee". It means flat sales and thin margins for the company.
Well, the knee has arrived. The personal-computer industry is now a mature industry like the automotive industry. Welcome to flat sales and used-computer salescritters.
Re:Linux (Score:2, Interesting)
I've just gone through another round in the gruelling marathon to crush MSIE where I work (I do security at a small-medium security dotcom - in the range 250-500 users.) In turns out that whilst we have one major internal app that's IE-only, apart from that everything works in Firefox. This makes it much easier these days for those of us techie types lucky enough to be trusted to run Linux on our workstations. I use rdesktop (and stunnel) to work on our Windows servers, Outlook calendaring still requires me to use that vile PoS, Outlook Web Access, but everything else is seamless. At the moment we're XPSP2 for the vast majority of end-user machines, and we won't even consider allowing Vista *anywhere* until well into the SP1 cycle. And if that sucks... MS' last hope will be Backcomb or whatever the next vapourware Windows client's called. I have a theory about that: I think it's going to suck. And I think some significant fraction of the people not employed to be directly hands-on technical, but who spend a lot of time in meetings with programmers, coders, architects and whatnot are going to start noticing more and more Linux machines on the tables, and will start asking for it themselves.
MS are at precisely that agonising point of the lifecycle Apple were at in the early 90s, before they started doodling ideas for Copland. They need to ditch the legacy baggage - they really need to start from scratch, build a complete new OS with a clean simple elegant design, then hack up support for old software. (MS have it easier in that there's now virtualisation, admittedly.)
But even more than an architectural reset, I think they need a mindset and culture reset. There used to be a bit of a buzz about demerging MS into separate OS, Office, general software corps. Right now, I'm more convinced than ever that the final end-point for Microsoft will be as a vendor of application software, networked app services, and an awful lot of consulting, all running on a Free (or forked BSD-like, more likely) kernel. But that's not going to happen until the current business model has been seen to fail through it's inability to produce software that does what users want - a pretty basic concept - and that's going to take, ooh, at least half-a-dozen major release cycles (two or three decades.)
My employer's lucky in having relatively little investment in massive fat-client l-o-b Windows apps, and instead delivering virtually all our internal custom s/w (ordering, provisioning, customer service & support etc) systems as web apps. OpenOffice is the magic key. The only piece missing is routine mass hardware support, and the wind has finally switched direction on that, just as it has on DRM'd music.
Remember, you read it hear first ;)
Re:M$ need to move corporate keys back to XP syste (Score:1, Interesting)
Pretty well any PC made by the major OEMs within the last two years can have any edition of Vista OEM activated (permanently, XP style) with two lines in the command prompt, a certificate specific to the system manufacturer, and one of the keys that are common to all OEMs.
Oh, how I miss the days of Windows 2000, when Microsoft showed a little trust with their clientele.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:and then.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:and then.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Java was trying to do an update or someting. Vista knows this requires admin privilages. It was the Vista Dialog Box! Vista informed me that Java needed permission
I have had Java update on my Ubuntu machine. It didn't interupt what was running to do so. I have had Ubuntu kindly inform me updates are avaliable to install. This also didn't stop anything else that was running.
This halt the show to provide the OS with an OK for another application to proceed is the problem.
Re:Hey why not just bypass WINDOWS? (Score:3, Interesting)
I can drop right in on a Linux desktop and be productive. Users in general can not. Training is expensive. One-to-one helping out the new guy until the next class is even more expensive. Retraining all users in several basic applications at once? No chance in hell. The chances at unseating the 800lb Windows gorilla from his position is a lot better if you remove the two 800lb gorillas of Outlook and Office sitting in his lap first. I imagine that in five years, maybe I'll hear "The users all use Windows, except IT where we all run Linux" but not the general public.
Re:and then.... (Score:3, Interesting)
In the business world, most businesses not in the graphics or publishing business have transitioned off the Mac in the 90's. They aren't going to go through it again back to Mac just because the current revision of OS does not give them compelling reason to upgrade. They're just going to stay with what they have already.
Re:What is so bad about Vista? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:and then.... (Score:5, Interesting)
I guess my key point was specifically related to upgrading to Vista. It makes no sense, outside of legacy apps, for anyone to still be stuck with anything predating 2000 if you need a Windows OS. Now, on a personal level, I'd say go with XP and 2003. They're a bit easier to support; but if you have a solid 2000 environment and there's no benefits to the new environment, stick with 2000.
I think MS plateaued Windows with XP/2003. Personally, I'd say at this time just focus on perfecting those systems. Apple can siphon off customers with minor releases. I mean, here's a thought. Why not release a $50 minor release every year. It can have a roll up plus added functionality that's been discovered over the past year. If they did that for XP, that's (a) essentially the cost of Vista by now and (b) would have kept businesses happy since they all splurged on that Software Assurance deal which, in retrospect, was a really shitty deal for the companies.
Re:WIndows 7 - better? (Score:3, Interesting)
Ever since XP was released with their activation, it was clear that the end was coming for MS. As others have said, and is obvious to anyone who has installed a major Linux Distro in the last year, Linux is ready. The only thing keeping Windows in it's dominant position now is momentum. Many people still need Windows for specific applications, and some people still game on them. But as people upgrade, many of these people have older systems that they are using as secondary systems. What do you think will happen to all of these system when MS decides to EOL XP, and stops authorizing them. These systems will still need to be reinstalled periodically. These machines are often still plenty powerful enough to run a modern OS. What do you think these systems will run? As more homes have Linux systems, more commercial software will be available for it.
Best Windows Version Ever (Score:1, Interesting)
In one CD I have a fast streamlined Windows XP with Office 2003, Firefox, an antivirus and shitloads of useful stuff.
It's being used in my parents' computer, and that machine now boots faster than my own, which has a much faster processor and more than double the RAM than the older one. The old is a slow Duron and now it can boot in about 15 seconds top!
It's of course unlicensed software so that's why I'm being an AC.
However, there are tools to make streamlined WindowsXP install CDs that business can use legally and it can surely beat Windows Vista in speed, easy of use and easy of installing and by far, very far.
Re:The problem with waiting for MS (Score:3, Interesting)
If a couple of the major software companies out there decided to set a target for a Linux distro for business, call it Biznux, that would work just fine. If you put a few big names on it like IBM, Sun, Adobe, pointy hair bosses would feel comfy. The big companies could just treat it it like an open standards consortium, everyone kicks in a few million and this pay for integration, distribution, testing, etc. Software branded as Biznux compatible will be something that the PHB's will feel comfortable about since they know it will work. Anything open source contributed here can be subsequently ported to other distros as already happens.
There are already other distros that companies feel quite comfy running on servers. The whole Biznux thing I'm suggesting is less about the technical side, it's more about branding, marketing, and customer comfort when talking about putting it on the desktop. Taking the leap away from Microsoft is scary if you think your job is riding on it. There's the old adage "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM." It would feel like a safer decision to make when you can point to all these name IT companies that are behind the project.
It would also be a win for all of the other companies that would promote it. I thought it was funny during the anti-trust trial how the threat Microsoft represented drew all sorts of companies into alliance, even ones that are competitors. It's like seeing the rise of a hegemon in Europe so that lesser rivals band together because they are frightened of a hegemon gaining complete ascendancy.
Re:and then.... (Score:5, Interesting)
So it's not just the "suits" and your local "dipshit" that can be that bloody moronic, the vendors can be too.
Re:What is so bad about Vista? (Score:2, Interesting)
Vista also adds new features, but Microsoft haven't done enough to convince the user-base that these features justify the increased system requirements. Worse still, a lot of users believe that the increased system requirements are down to evil DRM and other shenanigans.
Like it or not, Apple's 'crowd-pleasing' development and marketing works wonders on the average Mac user. Microsoft could learn a lot from Apple in that regard.
Re:and then.... (Score:2, Interesting)
You must change a 'Power Mode' setting to stop software updates during a presentation?! Jesus on a stick!
Why not just hide the user operation mode in something equally intuitive, such as clock or network settings. I got it!, why not bury this feature somewhere that only a win fanboi would ever hope to find it. Then blame the user for ignorance of a hidden capability.
And what, other than stopping interruptions due to poorly architected OS, does 'presentation mode' need to do anyway? Disable display power saving settings? Seems this power mode has been elevated to a catchall presentation mode and does not belong in power settings, if in the UI at all.
You don't work support do you? (Score:5, Interesting)
I see you don't work in "IT Support". If you did you would know how stupid that is. Large and even small companies either hire individuals or hire outsource IT companies for "Support" These individuals that "do" the actual support work are trained Techs or Engineers. They don't need to call MS and never do. When they do get stumped with a problem they either call a cohort in the business and ask them if they know of a fix or go online and in the case of Windoze go to the TechNet site or check the forums of answers. I know this for a fact I work for a company that does Outsourced IT for small to medium sized businesses. We NEVER! call Microsoft! We are engineers and most likely know their OS better than they do so why call and waste time?
Now for Joe and Jane user that works for a company that we support who are they going to call? They call us. That is what we get paid for. We are "Support" not Microsoft. We still support Win95 if needed. MS doesn't. Hell we will even support DOS if needed. We are Systems Engineers where I work. We work on systems. We don't care what it runs on. We will work on it. A MCSE is NOT a System Engineer. A real Systems Engineer maybe better at one system OS than the other but he can work on any of them. All systems are not Microsoft.
So what if Joe and Jane user decide to run Linux or a Sun desktop? Who are they going to call for support? They are going to call us that is what we get paid for and yes they will get support! You might get transfered to a different person but you will gladly get support. We support most flavors of Linux and Solaris. Most of our customers don't realize it but they may have an XP desktop but most of the backend servers that are serving them are running Solaris or Linux.
Actually we discourage the use of Vista and say that we don't really support it. Any Windoze boxes we put online are XP. We beg our customer NOT to get Vista. These days we are encouraging our clients to really look at Sun and Linux. One of our big points is if your going to have to learn a new desktop and a new office suite. Why not make the change to Linux or Solaris and be done with client licenses, malware, spyware, viruses, blue screens O' death, changing desktops, and on and on...
Personally I haven't even looked at Vista. I did watch my boss play with it for a week and then reload XP. (yes he's a Windows engineer) His evaluation? "What a piece of shit." I must admit I have turned Vista off a couple of times to load FC7 or Solaris10 on the machine infected by Vista. Vista is not an OS. It is an infection in itself.
Why will I not learn it or touch Vista? Anyone that has worked Windows support knows the scenario. You work on a system and it fails again it is now YOUR FAULT its broke. If I never touch it, then it is never my fault. What do I tell people when they cry to me about their Vista machine? "I told you not to buy that crap. Sorry I don't work on Vista."
Remember the "The Suit" that is screaming about support isn't the poor bastard that has to work on it. I am.
Re:Speaking of business plans (Score:3, Interesting)
2) According to the statement above, they compared the vulnerabilities detected in corresponding periods after release.
3) The number of vulnerabilities does not equal number of actual exploits, although if you look at the criticality of the vulnerabilities and the time it takes to patch, you get some idea about the company selling the OS, not the OS itself.
4) You don't need to, and generally cannot compare figures to get a valid idea of security there are too many other factors involved.
Can you point to a single instance where a business using XP in a well managed environment would have seen significant issues related to security that a business running Vista would not? Or even a vulnerability in XP that has been in an un-patched state at some point since the release of Vista that is sufficiently significant to justify an upgrade (so one that didn't also affect Vista)? Remember that what we are talking about is a reason sufficiently compelling to business to make an upgrade worth while, a real world benefit.
Re:Speaking of business plans (Score:3, Interesting)
You listed a load of technologies, I pointed out what I thought of them 2 of them didn't seem to bring any benefit, one (the user privileges element) will have a massive impact on the home user, but much less on the corporate. I pointed out that with regards to KPP there are issues that devalue its impact and I stated that ASLR was a good preventative mechanism but not a show stopper. None of that is untrue nor it is factually incorrect as far as I am aware, if you know better then do tell. At the moment all you are doing is complaining that I do not agree with you and suggesting that somehow that is trollish behaviour.
It boils down to a simple statement.
The security improvements in windows Vista, when compared to Windows XP are not sufficient to justify upgrading in most instances as there are many other obstacles that hinder Vista adoption in a corporate environment.
As I indicated Vista may be more secure than XP, but given all the other issues that surround Vista, the amount of improvement is not sufficient to warrant upgrading. This is what I believe to be true, it is neither offensive, factually inaccurate (given the evidence with regard to corporate adoption of Windows Vista to date) nor is it propaganda aimed for or against one group or another. Quite simply unless you can come up with some compelling argument other than "Microsoft state that vista is more secure and there have been less patches, therefore it must be a valuable upgrade for corporates" you aren't going to get very far, trying to shift the argument by making me out to be something I am not simply suggests that there is no other argument to be made.
Further I will repeat it because it is worth repeating, the number of vulnerabilities detected in a program is not the be all and end all of categorising how secure something is, and as such how valuable extra or different levels of security are.
By your logic,
IE7 is less secure than IE6 (IE7 has had more vulnerabilities detected than IE6, 15 vs 13, both with 4 unpatched), so business should be using IE6.
Office 2000, 2003 and 2007 are all as secure as one another (as they all list the same issues since 08/05/2007), so business can use any of those.
2000 server is more secure than 2003 server (21 vs 28 vulnerabilities with 2000 server leaving 1 unpatched and 2003 leaving 2 unpatched), so business should be using 2000 server instead of 2k3.
Oh as for the Vista vs XP vulnerabilities, its 12 vs 26 vulnerabilities, with 1 and 2 unpatched for Vista then XP respectively. Of those 6 (SA27134, SA27112, SA26409, SA25639, SA24659, SA24245 ) affected both XP and Vista, and 6 were purely Vista issues, so I'm not sure if that is good or bad, or if it indicates that the re-write of vista, or the changes in policies are less useful than they could be from a security standpoint.
Can you see why there is more too it? A machine on a home users desk with a hard disk full of random software and no real attempt at security will be less secure than one sat in an office maintained by IT staff. So given that business users have the resources to add additional security, decent policies and management practices to the layers of security that already surround XP, given that they have IT staff to handle and monitor what is going on, and given that they have already paid to do so, do you think that the security benefits of Vista compared to XP are still significant enough for a *business* to switch?