Apply today for a FREE subscription to CIO Magazine!
Fri, Jun 27, 2008 11:17 EDT
|
Posted by: Laurianne McLaughlin in News Topic: ApplicationsBlog: Inside Tech
Current Rating: |
Intel just came to the same conclusion about Vista that so many of you enterprise IT leaders have made. From Steve Lohr at the New York Times came the delicious tidbit this week: Intel will pass on upgrading most of its employees' PCs to Microsoft Vista. They're going to stick with Windows XP, having found no compelling reason to upgrade to Vista on a large scale.
When we asked you months ago, "Should Microsoft Throw Away Vista?," CIO.com readers made their feelings loud and clear: Many of you are going to pass, or stall as long as possible. "I wanted to love Vista," one reader wrote. "Windows Vista is a lemon," said another. And the beat goes on.
But Intel passing on Vista is another thing entirely: This is half of the Wintel empire. This is half of the team that ruled the 1990's. This team co-wrote many of the core technology rules for corporate America, and for any technology vendor that wanted to play there.
And the same week that Bill Gates steps away from Microsoft leadership officially, we hear that Intel is passing on Microsoft's problem child, Vista.
It's like a pie in the face for Bill Gates, who at least was not in Belgium this week, where he has been famously and literally greeted with pie in the face before.
I read a lot of Bill Gates stories this week and realized that I regretted never having had a chance to interview him or meet him. The closest I came was once passing him in a hotel lobby, enveloped in a posse of handlers, at a Comdex show in Las Vegas, him looking typically tired and rumpled. (Comdex shows, to be fair, made everyone look tired and rumpled.)
I did once have a chance to meet former Intel leader Andy Grove, when I was covering microprocessors back in the 90's. Even in a small group setting with some cranky reporters, the energy and intellect seemed to fly off the man. Intel was, and still is, a formidable organization of extremely smart people.
At that time, the Wintel duo of Grove and Gates seemed unstoppable. Inevitable. Destined to shape technology history for years to come. Yet here we are, in 2008, and Intel faces one of the same problems it had in the 90's: There is still no "killer app" to get people excited about buying a new PC. Consumers buy new phones, cameras and BlackBerries more often than PCs. At the same time, more large enterprises are starting to salivate about the idea of replacing hundreds of desktop computers with virtual desktops, virtual machines living on a server in a back room.
And Intel is under the same IT budgetary pressure as everyone else, asking themselves if they can really justify the cost of the Vista upgrade for technology reasons.
Back in the days of Gates and Grove, I think Intel would not have passed on Microsoft's new star operating system,
Dear Microsoft,
Any attempt to force us to upgrade to Vista and interfering with our business, will lead to an immediate halt to any future PC purchases until we can assess the best course of action.
We will increase maintenance and try to keep the machines we have purchased in the past running a bit longer. (Sorry Dell, HP this may also cut into your sales)
We will also be reconsidering Microsoft's position as partner and platform provider for our organization.
We will let you know our decision.
Now, please wait outside in the waiting room, you know, out there next to Novell.
Sincerely,
Admin
This is nuts. First, I could really care less about who the author did or did not get a chance to interview. That has little bearing on my technology selection. Boo-stinking-hoo. How about something worth reading with valuable information in it.
So what if Vista is a bust. MSFT pumps out so many initatives and technologies that there are bound to be good ones and ones that need more work. Anyone who has been in this game long enough embrasses and understands that's why you have requirements, due diligence and pilots. That's WHY we love technology in the first place - the growth, the possibilies, the advancement...To "pick sides" is short sighted for sure! I neither like or dislike MSFT - I simply recognize them as a provider of technology that has the finacial where-with-all for R&D. I get so sick of this 'bring them down' crap. Zzzzz - move on!
We won't be moving to Vista anytime soon either. However, we will continue to explore MSFT technologies along with all the others. From the CIO seat, they have delivered some technologies that have increased my functionality at a lower cost and made me look like a star. The technologies that didn't cut it, I didn't pick - period. But it's always worth taking a look.
Now if we could hear some things that would improve my game - I'm all ears.
Our initial and only Vista attempt: fresh install from a new DVD on a dual core IBM Brand desktop, 3 Gb ram, 3 Ghz processor. The very first “Update Windows” resulted in a BSOD. Then a BSOD when ever the screen saver launched – again with no apps other than what installed from the DVD. We have hundreds of PC’s and just don’t have time for that. We’re going to run XP till desktop productivity applications won’t let us. … We’re also experimenting with Linux, which seems to have less problems than Vista - the obvious alternative Gates & Co is pushing us.
IT Manager
The TCO of PCs these days appears to be increasing again as security and incompatibility issues add dramatically to the hours necessary to just keep a workstation in operation. With major ERP vendors either slow or reluctant to upgrade their applications to Vista compatibility (maybe they had a magic mirror), we intend to stay on XP until the current crop of PC's fail altogether. The older bell curve of productivity versus cost has flipped upside down. Originally (80's) it seemed as though we visited PC's weekly for one thing or the other. Then in the early to latter 90's, they were productive and viruses, hacks and incompatibility issues were relatively simple. Now the software, operating system and applications, are so complicated and the base operating system takes a couple of service packs to get stable, we are again spending more time visiting each machine, AND, with the extra costs of encryption, automatic update software, etc. and the folks to manage those extra but necessary additions, our per machine costs are again climbing. We are reluctant to try any new enterprise software at this point until the base machine O/S issues have been resolved, or at least smacked back to a dull roar!
It would be me if I still was an active CIO. In my last job of a 30 year career, I wondered what I was going to miss from Redmond in the future.
I was "forced" in to Vista when I needed a new laptop, a Sony Vaio, and never gave it much critical thought. I had time now and so let's see what this Vista was all about. My experience since May of 07 trying to sort out the Vista issues at home, would have led to a stroke in an 850 PC shop. Cancelling the Enterprise Agreement on my way out, was the best decision I think I ever made. It stopped any thought of Vista adoption at least. It is incomprehensible to even try to imagine rolling out Vista. And for what? What is the compelling reason to migrate to Vista from XP? Please don't say security. I spend at least 20% of my time on malware issues with Vista, and the rest on driver and other various maintenance and "buggy behavior" issues. Once in a while I do get some work done.
I never remember spending so much time having to tweak and have my head "under the hood" ever. Again, can someone tell me the compelling reason to adopt Vista at the corporate level? It is pretty, and ...? This has to be be bigger than the ME fiasco, but only time will tell. 2010 can't get here quick enough.