Reader Comments

Just to compound the misery Apple's OS marketshare is falling, and that's even before Vista is out. http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34491

See, now here we go again. Alan you just dragged Apple into an article that it was never even mentioned in. Why do you continue to do this? It just turns every thread here into a useless discussion about Apple. It's a Windows site. You're a Windows IT guy. Don't you have anything better to talk about than Apple? Is Windows really that boring that all you can do is take cheap shots at the Mac? Next time, if the only thing you can think to post is "Apple's marketshare is falling" walk away from the keyboard. Let a good, on-topic discussion start for once.

Sure there will be a good number of consumers using Vista from OEM & computer purchases, but 200 million is a rather large number to predict for adoption, especially considering how businesses are always slow to move to new OSes. Microsoft must plan to release one or two Service Packs by this two-year mark to alleviate any fears that IT departments normally have concerning new operating systems. We'll see. I really like Vista, but many people in the workplace resist any kind of change.

"Why do you continue to do this? It just turns every thread here into a useless discussion about Apple." Yeah I mean seriously, he's the ONLY guy who has ever brought up Apple on these threads. You know, complaining about the topic choice of someone else's post is about as on-topic as posting about Apple. Anywho, I think its safe to admit the best thing about Vista is DX10. Windows has been the only OS choice for games... and while MS has not outright ignored games, they tend to glaze over them during development. Its nice that DX10 comes with a shiney new OS foundation. I'm not saying that games are the only reason to get Vista, more that the majority of vista will be evolutionary over superstable XP, while DX10 and the presentation foundation will be more revolutionary.

You know, I was excited about the new UI technologies coming from Vista and looking forward to developing with those cool interfaces. Then after trying it I realized that you need to have some design/artistic capability to make it look cool. So unless software developers have UI designers on hand your going to see some pretty crappy looking software, much like alot of web apps.

"Then after trying it I realized that you need to have some design/artistic capability to make it look cool." Its like that with anything really. Thats why MS is traditionally the butt of design jokes. They let 3rd parties do whatever they want... which usually means the crappy ones stink even worse. But its never hurt anyone to let them have the freedom to make their app look however they want. If they want to sell it, yeah you gotta play by the rules to some degree, but if its just your toy anything goes. That was one of my problems with the kIDE stuff for KDE and Gnome... if you write anything in it, its all going to look the same. Yeah my stuff looked "nice" but I'm pretty sure I could have made it look a different type of "nice".

"Then after trying it I realized that you need to have some design/artistic capability to make it look cool." The point of the new XAML technologies is so that designers can work directly on the applications as opposed to the old way of requiring the developers to "translate" the designer's designs into code.

I think Allchin is being very optimistic here. Many analyst reports I saw earlier in the year estimated around 35% Vista adoption by 2008. I think in the corporate world, they're going to wait many years, and that's after SP1 has been released. Vista isn't offering very much over XP or OS X Tiger for most users.

Preseton -- 200 million is actually less than 35% of Windows users. If 200M were 35%, that would mean there are 571 million Windows users in total; I think the number is closer to 1 billion, so 200M is actually a conservative estimate.

1 billion?? What about the 400mn figure we keep hearing?

Even if you look at industry hardware-refresh cycles, and the fact that XP is only supported until 2009, it is a conservative estimate.

I believe Vista numbers will be low because the majority of Windows'  marketshare comes from volume enterprise licenses and companies buying 5,000 copies for their cubicle workers.  Removing that percentage lowers Windows' market share significantly.  Because of the steeper hardware requirements and focus on home users, as well as the unproven tech, corporations will be very hesitant to deploy Vista until it's been out in the wild for a few years (Vista's so-called "virgin" networking stack concerns me).  At least not until some time after Service Pack 1, which is targeted at the end of 2007. I don't know how home users react.  I don't think we've seen signifcant demand or even awareness of Vista.  Most will get the operating system  when they buy a new computer, which many did this year.  I hope Microsoft modifies the inconsistent interface in Vista before GM (the mix of Vista-style dialogs and XP-style dialogs is disconcerting).

Business isn't going to wait over 2 years to adopt. Its one thing to have a conservative IT department, and another thing to have a lazy IT department. 6 months for early adopters, 1 year for everyone else. 18 months for the scardies.

Ha ha ha, three cheers for the lazies!

Will84, you are obviously an end user who has no idea how much money and time it takes to roll out a Windows upgrade. You wouldn't be calling IT departments lazy if you did. Preseton, I think it's obvious how the home users will react. They'll get Vista when they buy a new computer and not before. Home users don't do upgrades, it's way over their heads. Most of them don't even know you can upgrade Windows. They think it's "burned in" to their computer. When XP came out PC sales were in the doldrums. XP was supposed to drive massive hardware sales. It didn't happen even though XP was far superior to the 98/ME versions home users where stuck with before. There just isn't going to be a massive stampede towards Vista. There wouldn't be one even if Microsoft had delivered on the hype.

"Just to compound the misery Apple's OS marketshare is falling, and that's even before Vista is out." Dude, that's using metrics from Net Applications, which only gets its numbers from users registered with the HitsLink service.  The report doesn't even iPod sales correct (it incorrectly reports both the peak sale month and the number of sales, off by several millions). How about we wait until next year before we start comparing the impact of Vista versus the impact of Leopard?

"Business isn't going to wait over 2 years to adopt. Its one thing to have a conservative IT department, and another thing to have a lazy IT department. 6 months for early adopters, 1 year for everyone else. 18 months for the scardies." You are VERY ambitious with your estimates.  Corporations are just now moving off of Windows 2000.  Grant is correct, it costs a lot of money to migrate existing infrastructure to new versions of Windows, and given the circumstances surrounding Vista and its protracted development cycle, enterprises will be more hesitant than usual to integrate this untested release into their existing systems. In your equation, you left out the "smart" IT department, which will stick with the existing, fully-functioning networks they already have in place.  There's little to no reason to upgrade if they already have their 2000/XP users running in non-admin accounts, fully patched and firewalled. We have industry apps here that we can't even upgrade the Dell video drivers for without breaking their printing functionality.  I had to disable that driver update from Windows Update.  There's no way I'm disturbing any of our apps by dropping Vista on them, especially after the pain we went through three years ago to upgrade from 98 to XP. Vista's biggest competition is previous versions of Windows.

"We have industry apps here that we can't even upgrade the Dell video drivers for without breaking their printing functionality. " So let me get this straight: a video driver update causes the printing functionality in your in-house app to break? Something doesn't seem right here. How can a video driver affect printing functionality?

"Will84, you are obviously an end user who has no idea how much money and time it takes to roll out a Windows upgrade. You wouldn't be calling IT departments lazy if you did. " Actually, I was personally involved in rolling out Win XP to about 1200 PCs. Its called imaging and PXE installation. It took us 6 months including troubleshooting, 6 months from Win2000 to XP. if you havn't switched in 2 years, its lazy.

As for the people saying that it won't be a major thing for business - all the major OEM's will be ready to ship PC's the day it's released (maybe even earlier, if it's from the big 5 OEM's). For companies just switching to XP in the last 2 years THAT'S JUST STUPID! If you buy a new computer after January, it's gonna come with Vista and XP will not be a likely option from many computer makers. Also, XP was out since the fall of 2001 and Microsoft's free support is the first 5 full years of release, so at the end of 2007, it's going to end, and businesses will have to pay for support incidents after that. Businesses should be testing the O/S during the beta stages so that they're ready to roll on the release date and can then get the full 5 year terms of free support from Microsoft. The other thing they should be doing is upgrading their current systems to the new O/S early on, because if they purchase new systems after release, they'll have brand new machines that run a new O/S that won't be familiar to the users and may introduce compatibility issues with older O/S's. Those types of compatibility issues are more commonly app-specific and not completely O/S-specific ie. XP will likely talk to Vista just fine, but a program running on XP may not talk to a Vista system (or vice versa) - that's a layman's description, but u get the idea. Businesses need to understand this. IT people should know that too, and should extensively promote it to their clients (cmon, it at least means increased sales potential!). Has anybody ever taken Microsoft's courses on different IT requirements? It never hurts to tell any clients the benefits of being "IT Strategic"! I've managed to convert several clients from "IT Basic" to Strategic after they realize the benefits and the ROI (return on investment).

"Also, XP was out since the fall of 2001 and Microsoft's free support is the first 5 full years of release, so at the end of 2007, it's going to end, and businesses will have to pay for support incidents after that." Actually, mainstream support for XP ends two years after Vista's release, putting it at the end of 2008 or early 2009.

BTW: The Microsoft marketing courses are GOLD! Register as an MS partner (for free) and get access to hundreds of courses. Also, one of the easiest ways to get a Microsoft certification is to go for the Microsoft Small Business Specialist certification. It focuses on marketing and business analysis for the small biz market. The MS products that it covers is Windows Small Business Server 2003 and some of Windows Server 2003. I took an online course from one of the popular online training sites and studies for a couple weeks before writing the test. I wrote the "Designing, Deploying, and Managing a Network Solution for Small and Medium-Sized Business 70-282" exam which is the harder of the 2 possible exams you can write, the other being "Preinstalling Microsoft Products and Technologies Using the OEM Preinstallation Kit 74-134". If you take the 74-134 test, you'll become a "Microsoft Small Business Specialist". If you take the 70-282, you'll be an "SBS'er" AS WELL AS a "Microsoft Certified Professional". One test, two titles. Pretty sweet!

For those more interested, there are four requirements before the SBS title is yours: First you have to register as a partner. That step is completely free, and I'd recommend it to anybody doing IT, even if just for the training. Second, you have to pass one of the two previously mentioned exams. It costs about $120US to write the exam, but lately MS has been offering free rewrites if you fail. I passed on my first try after doing the online course through a 3rd party (it cost extra, but I figure why fail it?) Third, do the "Small Business Sales and Marketing Assessment". This tests your knowledge to assess a business's needs and how to market a solution to it. Very informative! Essentially it's a case study quiz that's not too difficult, and it doesn't cost anything to write it, nor to repeat it. Fourth, you have to subscribe to the "Microsoft Action Pack Subscription" or "MS Empower for ISV's". Basically it's about $40,000 worth of all of MS's desktop and server software for $300US. It's to legitimize your systems for your business and not for sale, but VERY cheap considering. VERY WICKED DEAL!! 10 copies of every Office program Microsoft makes, 10 copies of XP Pro, and 1 of each server product they make ie. 1xServer 2k3, 1xSmallBizServer2k3, 1xServerWebEdition, etc....too many to list here actually. Overall it cost me about $650US or so, I got 2 MS cert titles out of it, plus $40,000 worth of software and hundreds of training courses included for free. Not too shabby a deal. Anyway, if you haven't at least got an SBS cert, SHAME! It's easy to get, doesn't cost a lot, and is very cool to have on a resume if you don't have any other IT stuff on there and are starting out.... I can't stress enough that even the marketing lessons are essential for anyone in IT. Check it out: http://partner.microsoft.com

>>>Actually, mainstream support for XP ends two years after Vista's release, putting it at the end of 2008 or early 2009. You're right about that. My mistake. Rack that one up to Vista delays. If the post-Vista version ships on time, they might actually follow their own policy of 5 years after release. (I'm not holding my breath on that one though, AND it's still not a good justification to stick with XP.)

"how about we wait until next year before we start comparing the impact of Vista versus the impact of Leopard?" Leopard, like all the other OSX variants will have no relevant impact. apple has had several years to overtake XP which they keep bashing as ugly and outdated.... and failed each time. Well, leopard follows the 129 dollar 0.1 service pack + a few features model. Thus like all the other "cats" before it is just a lot of hype to help them rip their users up of another 129 bucks. And just like before apple calls anything it can a new feature, so as usual, they argue hundreds of new feature...while the reality is, leopard has very little value for the money. Anybody hoping leopard will make a dent on vista should rather consider the fact that any version of OSX had better chances against XP. with vista, any sort of relevant lead apple may had goes to zero, and in some cases they are actually strugling behind. So from a user's perspective, getting an apple will be more of a choice of taste rather than a choice of reason.

think most IT department roll up to vista when they upddate most of there system or when Longhor server is out. As for most home use I think new system will be the way they will get it. I think most of the power user will buy copy of vista with in 6 months to 1 year. I get it when I can get a all in one canon priter that has vista drivers, that the only thing stop me from useing vista RC1 full time at home anyone.

I think that Microsoft will probably take even more market share with Vista. Does anyone actually believe that Linux is going to take any new ground this time around?? I mean seriously, none of the dists have really even come close to looking like a polished 1.0 product that offers that kind of usability for the end user. The bundled apps are always third-party made. If anything, I think Macs will be the one to push Linux out of the market, not Windows. That said, I agree that Apple not gaining any real ground on what they purport to be a "superior" OS is really quite funny, and true. Microsoft doesn't bash Macs - Bill Gates has been quoted as saying he likes them too. Also, this whole marketing campaign saying that Macs don't get viruses and spyware is WRONG and irresponsible on Apple's part. Symantec has proven that there is malware "in-the-wild" and the Blackhat conference proved that there are security holes. Denying it to the people that are affected (read: infected) is a slap in the face because by saying its not a problem sounds like you're saying that they're getting a virus or spyware by design (in Apple methodology, it means "fashionable"...to get malware). Security is everyone's problem. Being in IT at all means that you understand that it's part of the nature of the business. Apple should be working on a major new OS (OS11) if they wanna catch up to Windows, not just another point release. BTW: talking about the competition in this post is relevent since it's clearly about market share and the other dirty little word starting with a "p"......penetration!

All he is doing is putting a better face on Ballmer's retarded rant ("developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers"). Allchin is only enthused about Vista's release because he said he's quitting Microsoft after it ships. He could care less if it actually hits that benchmark -- he'll have enough of his MS stock cashed out to enjoy the rest of his years.

"Ballmer's retarded rant?" Please! The new API's and frameworks are wow-ing developers right now even during the beta stage (which is when they should be anyway, so they can finish development and have a simultaneous release with Windows Vista). WinFX is lookin pritty sweet!.... "he'll have enough of his MS stock cashed out to enjoy the rest of his years" That's called capitalism, my friend!

"I think that Microsoft will probably take even more market share with Vista." If it turns out to be as good as we've been told it is.

"So let me get this straight: a video driver update causes the printing functionality in your in-house app to break?" Yes. It is not an in-house app but an industry contracting application whose display formatting goes haywire with a certain version of Dell's integrated video driver. "Something doesn't seem right here. How can a video driver affect printing functionality?"" This isn't hard to figure out. The program uses the same formatting code for its display as it does to print (and both are broken when the video driver is upgraded). It's a legacy application that was patched for 2000/XP support but is still quirky. However, it's an essential app. This is an extremely common situation in the business world. "Actually, I was personally involved in rolling out Win XP to about 1200 PCs. Its called imaging and PXE installation. It took us 6 months including troubleshooting, 6 months from Win2000 to XP. if you havn't switched in 2 years, its lazy." Utterly ridiculous. Just because your business doesn't use in-house infrastructure that breaks with a new version of Windows does not make anyone else "lazy" because they don't rush out and buy a new version of Windows and risk their business months of time and money. If everything already works, can you explain why we should buy a new version of Windows? We've already standardized, so why should we keep giving Microsoft money? That's like telling me I have to replace my 2000 automobile because the 2006 versions are out, even though my old car works just fine. I find your claims of involvement in that kind of Windows transition suspect, given your amateur attitudes. Since people are being so silly here, I though I'd post this. According to NetApplications, Apple's market share has actually risen 24% year-over-year: http://switchtoamac.com/site/apples-mac-os-market-share-rises-24-percent-year-over-year.html