Intel Not an Early Vista Adopter, to Microsoft's Chagrin
What will the Mac guy say to the PC guy in those cute commercials now? Well, for one thing, the Mac guy is going to have plenty of ammunition with Intel's announcement that it is sticking with Windows XP for the time being. All kidding aside, Intel's decision to hold off on adopting Vista as the de facto operating system is not really a big deal. The company is only echoing what other Fortune 1000s are doing. Most large businesses don't rush to hop on the bandwagon of the latest and greatest of technologies unless there is a specific and demonstrable reason for doing so. And with Vista, that reason does not exist. Many studies show that larger enterprises wait as long as 18 months before considering an OS upgrade, and let's be realistic here -- these are not the best of economic times to be performing a hardware and software refresh. While Intel's delay to move over to Vista may be bad news for Microsoft, it turns out to be good news for XP users, proving that XP still has plenty of life left in it and can continue to meet the needs of most corporate users, regardless of Microsoft's end-of-life announcements for the OS. |
Comments (2)
Real companies need to transfer files. The file transfer speeds in Vista are outrageously out-of-line, even after SP1.
Fix that, MS, and you might have a chance.
Posted by Mattly | June 30, 2008 11:19 AM
I've played around with 2008 and Vista for some time now and find not all that much is different from Server 2003. 2003 was a clearly better OS than XP. XP was the game players desktop version which simply had more drivers written for it than the Server versions.
Microsoft was perhaps lax in it's initial hubris to so quickly say "So what, it's a server and shouldn't be playing sounds and games with high speed video". This obnoxious posture has finally returned to bite them in the bum. Things that don't work on Vista or Server 2008, guess what they mostly didn't work on 2003 either.
So if we follow the thinking of 2003 evolved into 2008 and 2008 was used as the underlying platform upon which Vista was built, we can understand that the dual platforms from back in the Windows NT/Windows 95 days has been scrapped.
Vista is not the grandchild evolved from XP and they are killing off the dual OS - dual parallel platform lines to simplify their business model and have one clean OS line derived from the Windows NT/2000 grandfather OS. Much more stable, more reliable, more secure with the ONE problem that it is not as Gamer friendly and not as open to people running viruses and oddly coded junk code as the old gaming desktop platforms.
Before bashing Vista, ask yourself, have you run it for months and which software is it, that you need so badly, that won't work on it. Just as with when we went to DirectX people WILL eventually learn to replace or do without those very few applications. Most of them are poorly written anyway.
The number one workaround for me at my house is to (A) set it in properties to run in compatibility mode and (B) make sure to also set it to run as Administrator. Even if you are logged in as administrator all apps by default launch as a "limited user" for security purposes. Very secure. No more crying about security holes!
Posted by George Milton | July 2, 2008 5:39 PM