Print - Microsoft Lashes Out at 'Schizophrenic' Forrester Analysts

Microsoft this week lashed out at the "schizophrenic" analysts at Forrester, calling them out on the incongruity of alternatively recommending and then panning Windows Vista in two different and recently released reports. In a post to the Windows Vista Blog, Microsoft representative Chris Flores wrote that his company was disappointed that Forrester was more interested in "making sensationalist statements rather than offering a thoughtful industry perspective."

In April, a Forrester report recommended that "most clients start the migration to Windows Vista sooner rather than later," refuting the widely-accepted if uneducated opinion that Vista is "a risky bet." Not so, the report claims. "As businesses of all regions, sizes, and industries struggle with how to settle this debate, Forrester sees five business reasons for your company to start its migration to Windows Vista soon. ... Returns from early adopters have been impressive."

The more recent Forrester report, issued last week, claims however that Windows Vista has been "rejected" by enterprises and that customers should consider waiting for Windows 7, which is due in 2010. Flores says that Microsoft, "millions of [its] enterprise customers," and "some pesky statistics" don't agree with that assessment. He also calls out the fact that "even Forrester doesn't agree with Forrester," referring to the dueling reports.

More important, perhaps, the early Forrester report showed that Windows Vista adoption was proceeding as fast or faster than did XP adoption at the same time in that product's life cycle. This basic truth undermines the notion that businesses are rejecting Vista. "We've sold 180 million copies of Windows Vista so far, 40 million of which were in the last quarter alone," Flores noted. "There are thousands of enterprise customers deploying Windows Vista by the thousands of seats on a weekly basis, including heavy hitters like The United States Air Force, PPG Industries, and Cerner."

Flores didn't pull any punches in describing the true aim of the more recent Forrester report, an opinion I happen to agree with fully. "There's a mountain of evidence to refute this report, including multiple reports from Forrester and other top-tier analysts," he wrote. "This [more recent report] appears to be more focused on making sensationalist statements, rather than offering a thoughtful industry perspective, based on conversations with IT operations professionals or deep knowledge of enterprise deployment cycles. How is this useful guidance to customers? It's disappointing to see such a respected organization like Forrester take this approach."

Yes it is.

What are you smoking, Paul? I implemented Vista Ultimate 64 Sp1. Vista 64 is by far the worst product ever released by MS. It is full of bugs for which the first two levels of MS support have no solutions. It performs badly compared with XP. Many of us day traders have noticed that, on the same PC XP versus Vista, Vista 64 runs more than 10% slower and has extraordianry I/O rates. Vista (64 bit) conflicts with Office 2007 Word and Excel. Many software firms have no working versions available for Vista 64 yet - Adobe Reader, Adobe Flash Player, Zone Alarm Pro firewall to name just three major ones. Vista is chock full of unnecessary security to, I suppose, protect us from ourselves since the amateur developers of MS know what is best for us right? Yeah, right. Took me days to find out how to turn off all of the ridiculous security. Plus there is that infernal 30x/second checking to see if I am a pirate (never been, never will be), MS wants to protect Hollywood, etal, using my PC's processing cycles and I/O, without my permission and without compensating me for using my PC in a manner for which MS defininately does NOT have my ok to do. This piracy checking is part of the reason for Vista's poor performance. So, Paul, what ARE you smoking?

Whew, good ting you are not an industry analyst trying to spread FUD... Pump up some penny stocks...

Tachyonv: My advice is to just buy a Mac and be happy. Vista is the future like it or not. If people can't handle it, then move to another platform. If people start leaving en mass, then that would send a message to Microsoft. I have to say that I hated Vista when it first came out, but I stuck with it, got used to it, and now I love it. I wouldn't go back to XP for all the tea in China.

tachyonv, You implemented Vista 64 SP1. You don't like it. It doesn't run fast enough for you. There isn't compatible software for it. Why did you change ? Revert to your previous operating system (of course you backed it up didn't you?). I hope you research your trades better than you research your software upgrades. Vista 64 works just fine as long as you ensure that you have the appropriate hardware and software ready BEFORE you install it. It took me 18 months to go from Vista 32 bit to 64 bit, but that involved ensuring that the entire process (hardware and software wise) was seamless, and it was. Go and whine on a site where someone might care.

Ok, now for some reality ... HP: Microsoft counting XP-loaded PCs as ‘Vista’ sales "Business PC buyers are still overwhelmingly opting for XP, computer giant HP has revealed," Dan Warne reports for APC Magazine. "HP's revelation, made at the launch of a new range of business notebooks, flies in the face of Microsoft's persistent PR claims that Vista has sold tens of millions of copies — and is selling at a faster rate than XP ever did," Warne reports. "However, HP explained how Microsoft is coming up with these 'Vista' sales figures," Warne reports. "'From the 30th of June, we have no longer been able to ship a PC with a XP licence,' said Jane Bradburn, Market Development Manager, Commercial Notebooks for HP Australia," Warne reports. "'However, what we have been able to do with Microsoft is ship PCs with a Vista Business licence but with XP pre-loaded. That is still the majority of business computers we are selling today.'" Warne reports, "So, in other words, Microsoft counts a sale for Vista, even though the computer manufacturer has really sold XP." Survey: Windows Vista adoption weakens as IT pros eye Apple Macintosh "A KACE-sponsored survey on Windows Vista adoption represents more bad news for Microsoft's flagship operating system, even as Microsoft prepares to pour an estimated $300 million into a new Vista marketing campaign--news that was announced at Microsoft's 2008 Worldwide Partner Conference," Kurt Mackie reports for Campus Technology. "This survey [of 1,162 IT professionals] found a slip in Windows Vista deployment plans, with 60 percent of respondents saying that they had "no plans to deploy Vista at this time," compared with 53 percent in the 2007 survey," Mackie reports. "42 percent said they were considering alternative operating systems to Windows Vista. The Macintosh operating system was the favored alternative by 29 percent of respondents. Linux-based operating systems were also in the running, but trailed," Mackie reports.

ahhh yesh, the ol' downgrade-option-doesn't-count arguement.... Please do not quote silly headline statistics found on Slashdot - as if they know anything about hardware/software refresh cycles in the enterprise. I wonder if Kurt "Mackie" has a hidden agenda - just like you... Go away...

@sx4sport he's a reject troll that got banned off of eWeak....namely Microsoft Watch, where blowhard Joe Wilcox resides. XP

Really? You think downgrading should count? That is just sad. It's embarrassing that Dell, HP et al need to offer this on *new* machines. For those saying that XP was as problematic when it first came out, there was no downgrading outcry from consumers to go back to Win98. It had bugs, but for consumers it was the first Win OS that did not crash once a day - that made it worth it. But Vista still creates more headaches than it solves; hence the downgrade demand. Ah, the survey (not found on Slashdot) was conducted with 1162 IT pros; they might know a thing about refresh cycles. More from the survey ... "The respondents also appeared to reject the "common wisdom" that people were simply waiting for Service Pack 1 to deploy Vista, with the idea that initial bugs and incompatibilities would be worked out by then. A solid 92 percent of survey respondents said that "Vista Service Pack 1 has not changed their plans for Vista deployment." "Concerns about deploying Vista, pegged at 90 percent in the 2007 survey, dropped to 82 percent in this survey. However, the apparent increased confidence in Vista wasn't matched by deployment trends as 47 percent of respondents said they had "not deployed Vista in any way" compared with 48 percent in last year's survey. ... "At the very high level, XP represent 85 percent of that pool," he said of this alternative KACE poll. "Vista is at about one percent, and Macintosh is at about four percent." Meinhardt concluded that "there is relatively low Vista adoption in the enterprise and indeed Apple is actually ahead of Vista in these businesses." My "hidden agenda" is to call out Paul for his obfuscations and his cut-and-paste "reporting" from MS press releases. And, no, I'm not going away ...

I too wonder why they didn't go crawling back to Win98... Maybe because there was something called Win2000. "IT Pro's" don't do surveys - unless they get free Starbucks or something. Start trolling again when you are old enough to get your fishing license.

Um, most home consumers were not using Win2000, and as for businesses users there was not a clamoring for a downgrade licence to Win2000. So my point stands. "IT Pros don't do surveys." Wow, how can anyone refute such a detailed and well substantiated point. Good Lord, your powers of persuasiveness are overwhelming. Maybe you should contact King Research to let them know that they must have been fooled by 1162 people. I know ... It's tough to argue a point when you can't deal with the facts; all you can do then is to try to deny they exist. What's it like living with your hands over your ears going "la, la, la" all day long?

you are right - can you get Win98 to run on my new puter - I want to go back now! I think I will contact King Research and see why they aren't spiffing us for these fake surveys... Oh great, now I have that darn la la la song in my head again... if only Itunes ran on Windoze 98 so I could download that hot new FIEST track...

The only real problems this Vista 64-bit box has experienced is with pre-existing 3rd party programs or hardware which did not interface well (or at all) with Vista 64-bit. The "fix" was to obtain those programs and hardware which did interface with Vista. MS Office 2007 Suite interfaces correctly. Printers interfaced. Older scanners didn't so had to get updated ones, which was OK because the new ones have medium-format scanning and better resolution. Nephew has a company which needed to upgrade the server and three dozen desktops, his IT Pro recommended Vista. Nephew called to ask what I thought. I asked his reason for upgrading, he said security was number one but "upgrading" was close behind. I told him if his IT Pro had MS credentials then go for it but be ready for serious desktop clients learning curve and check the compatability list for peripherals and programs before changing the system. They upgraded to Vista, bit the bullet on a few peripherals but their prior Office Suite still works. The plus is they put a noose around computer security which was a premium item for them. Anyway, it seems to me most of the problems with Vista (mine also) have been with older peripheral and program compatability. Vista 64-bit works fine on this box, including MS Office 2007. And if I need to use some old program I prefer which isn't available for Vista, then I just boot into W2GPro. Which is not often anymore. Just my 2cw. ;-)

It's good to see we have a new troll. I'd been missing the likes of bonch - glad he returned. In the mean time, the articles about companies not upgrading to Vista is recycled - we had the exact same thing for Windows XP, as well as Windows 2000 and I'm willing to bet Windows NT 4. People making a story about Intel not upgrading is my favorite - the *exact same* story came out when XP shipped. But I guess I'm just ignorant, I have my fingers in my ears, I'm not listening to the facts, and Microsoft is dying.