Your plans with Windows Vista

[Stargate199]

Vista will be released in less than a week. What are you planning to do. I currently do not have a computer that can run it at the time being, so I will just have to play with it at Microcenter to see what it is like. Note: As of today (1-26-2007) Windows XP support has been extended for another 5 years.

[jdhurst]

Vista does not yet support business critical software and is over-hyped cool in many cases. The structural changes are desirable, but without being able to connect remotely to my customers, the OS is useless at this point. I have downloaded free, or at an upgrade charge, about one-third of my applications that are now Vista-compatible. The rest are not out yet. I expect they will be over time, and I expect patches to Vista will be out over time. So I voted for "New PC". The timeframe for me is in the second half of 2007.

There are structural changes (IPv6) not yet needed but desirable for the future. The security underpinnings should be helpful, but XP is already secure if you pay attention. Then the big Wow! or Cool! factor has never been shown to make money, rather it tends to waste productivity (the whole interface thing is neutral at best).

So from a purely practical perspective, Vista will be a hard sell for businesses, and even for those of us who need to move because some client will, Vista needs to work first.

Caution is the order of the day. ... JD Hurst

[JHEM]

I have two machines setup for Vista and XP (T41P and T60P) using separate HDs for each OS.

I'll be getting my finalized RTM DVDs any day now from my MSDN subscription and will be reloading Vista anew on each system to see if all the bugs have been addressed.

James

[egibbs]

In a few years, when I replace my current TP, I guess I will get one with Vista as XP will likely no longer be offered. Unless Desktop Linux is really ready for prime time by then.

Until then I see no reason to switch. My company will probably wait at least 2 years to make the switch, and many of my current apps will probably require paid upgrades to work properly under Vista. So why mess with something that ain't broke?

Ed Gibbs

[tomh009]

So from a purely practical perspective, Vista will be a hard sell for businesses, and even for those of us who need to move because some client will, Vista needs to work first.

Larger organizations will effectively be forced to move sooner or later, as XP will not be supported for ever. But they will gain some significant manageability benefits from Vista as well, so I don't think you will see substantial resistance there. (Fluff, hype and cool is neither here nor there, it just doesn't factor into the decisions.)

But large corporates have evaluation processes, standards and machine images, and systems further along in the upgrade cycle won't effectively support Vista, so the migration will take time, just as it did in moving from Windows 2000 to XP. 2008 will IMHO be the watershed year for corporate customers to begin large-scale Vista migration.

[RUSH2112]

I selected "Other" since I will not be exactly shelling out any money for it...I'll just leave it at that.

[K. Eng]

I'll be sticking with XP SP2 for now. It just doesn't make sense for me to shell out $ when I already have an OS that is reasonably secure and doesn't crash.

Office 2007 on the other hand, appears to be a more worthy upgrade. I'm still using Office 2000, and I hate rooting through endless menus to find stuff. The ribbon interface seems a lot simpler.

[gator]

I extensivey used Vista RC1 (exclusively) on my work computer for the last 2 months and I did not like it. There are some good features I accept, but nothing spectacular to make me switch from XP. I am sticking with XP on all my machines.

[jdhurst]

<snip>
Larger organizations will effectively be forced to move sooner or later, as XP will not be supported for ever. But they will gain some significant manageability benefits from Vista as well, so I don't think you will see substantial resistance there. (Fluff, hype and cool is neither here nor there, it just doesn't factor into the decisions.)

But large corporates have evaluation processes, standards and machine images, and systems further along in the upgrade cycle won't effectively support Vista, so the migration will take time, just as it did in moving from Windows 2000 to XP. 2008 will IMHO be the watershed year for corporate customers to begin large-scale Vista migration.

Information Week (Jan 24, 2007) notes that Microsoft is extending Corporate support until 2014. That gives lots of time for transition. I saw the biggest transitions to XP starting in 2003, so I expect to see the same for Vista in 2008 or 2009. New computer rollouts will have an impact in the sense that anyone having to upgrade a fleet of computers in 2008 will likely move then.
... JD Hurst

[ronbo613]

The computers I have now, two PCs and my Thinkpad, are running mint with XP. They do everything I need without too many problems at all. My P4 3.4C, 2G RAM, X800XT with 1.5TB of 7200rpm drives that does all my heavy lifting would save me some work time with a Core2Duo setup, but I won't go for Vista until the main bugs are worked out of it and the hardware available for Vista and DX10 is ready for prime time. Photoshop and Premiere prime time, not Doom5 prime time.

[GomJabbar]

I am still waiting for my benefactor to appear.

In the mean time I will stick with my T42 and XP Pro. I can see down the road where I will probably donate my T42 to one of my daughters - then I will be in the market for a new ThinkPad with Vista. Maybe next year.

[JHEM]

Information Week (Jan 24, 2007) notes that Microsoft is extending Corporate support until 2014. That gives lots of time for transition. I saw the biggest transitions to XP starting in 2003, so I expect to see the same for Vista in 2008 or 2009. New computer rollouts will have an impact in the sense that anyone having to upgrade a fleet of computers in 2008 will likely move then.

Remarkably, my daughter's employer is still using W2K on their laptops, let alone holding onto XP.

The latest word on MSDN NGs WRT W2K support is that "Windows 2000 + the latest Service Packs will be in mainstream support through June 30th of this year and then move into extended support through June 30th of 2010" for corporate customers.

James

[sugo]

XP for longer battery life.

[leoblob]

The latest word on MSDN NGs WRT W2K support is that "Windows 2000 + the latest Service Packs will be in mainstream support through June 30th of this year and then move into extended support through June 30th of 2010" for corporate customers.

What exactly does this mean? Will us 'regular people' (non-corporate) still have access to WIN2K updates after June 30th...??

[JHEM]

The latest word on MSDN NGs WRT W2K support is that "Windows 2000 + the latest Service Packs will be in mainstream support through June 30th of this year and then move into extended support through June 30th of 2010" for corporate customers.

What exactly does this mean? Will us 'regular people' (non-corporate) still have access to WIN2K updates after June 30th...??

Nope! http://support.microsoft.com/kb/891861

James

[leoblob]

I think I'm a bit dense, or not asking the right question... ?? I've installed that update roll-up... there have been a number of security updates since then, which I've fetched and installed, too.

On that M$ page about the update roll-up, it says, "After you install Update Rollup 1 for Windows SP4, the computer will be up to date from a life-cycle policy perspective until the end-of-life date for Windows 2000. The end-of-life date for Windows 2000 will be no sooner than January 1, 2010."

So maybe my question is, between June 30th of this year and Jan 1, 2010 - that's a 3-year interval - will there be any more security updates (like you get when you hit the Windows Update icon)? (I do understand there will be no more new Service Packs)

[Temetka]

I'll upgrade....eventually. In about 6 months or so. Unless my school gives me a copy.

[JHEM]

will there be any more security updates (like you get when you hit the Windows Update icon)? (I do understand there will be no more new Service Packs)

There will continue to be security updates for W2K, but that's all.

James

[leoblob]

Thank you

[k2jsv]

I plan on sticking with XP until I am required to get a new computer. Even then it's iffy, because I own now 4 valid keys for Windows XP. So as long as whatever computer I buy (meaning, buy parts for and build) if it supports XP I will install XP. I'll wait a while to see if they can take care of the new system type bugs and work on program compatibility before I buy a copy.

[anthean]

I'll stick with XP/Linux until I buy a new desktop (later this year) and new Thinkpad (next year).

[ronbo613]

I would really like to try Linux.

[tomh009]

I would really like to try Linux.

It's out there -- all you need to do is download and install.

[ronbo613]

I've checked it out a little, I need to get a little spare time to fool around with it. I like the open source concept.

[underclocker]

I'll buy it and learn it, probably sooner than I'm hoping...

[anthean]

Regarding Linux, I have been using it on my desktop just as a lark, and since I was happy with DOS, I don't mind using the shell when necessary. Not everyone will feel that way, however.

My main complaint is that the media players aren't quite up to snuff--for example, the latest Linux Flash player is 7, while version 9 is available for both Windows and Apple. And I've noticed that some stuff I watch has a real problem keeping video and audio in sync. Playing DVD movies can also be a challenge, too. Obviously, there is no Microsoft Media player, and Real Player doesn't play DVD movies either (unless I am missing something).

I suppose I would have a different list of criticisms (or praise) if I had to use Linux for real work.

[RUSH2112]

Since this seems to be going on a bit of a Linux tangent, let me throw in my $0.02.

I began learning Linux in early 2004. At this point, I am probably an upper-intermediate user in terms of skill. I've used it exclusively at times, and at other times in conjunction with XP.

I would be using it right now instead of Vista, except it doesn't get along with my X60s at all, despite all my efforts and research. There were too many small problems to list. I will probably eventually give it another shot on here in a few months, hopefully everything will have been worked out by then.

Overall, Linux is a great OS. Lots of choices, lots of customization. You also get what you put into it. If you don't mind tinkering and learning, go for it. If you want everything all there and set up for you, well give Linux a shot but you're probably better off with Windows or OSX.
This is not withstanding distros like Ubuntu which have lessened this learning curve and present a pretty much ready system. I used to like Ubuntu, up to about 5.10. After that, it became a bit too newbie-friendly. I had to turn off all the fool proof things, install Fluxbox and all. I prefer to start with a more basic system and install what I want (but I was too lazy to spend the time configuring Gentoo)

All in all, Linux is a definate alternative to Windows if you have the time to play around. Believe me, I would love to be using it right now instead of Vista, it just doesn't get along with my system too well.

[Nevadabob]

Well my personal X24 won't handle it, so that won't be an issue.

In regards to my desktop systems, I'll wait...I'll watch...I'll learn and I'll wait some more.

No "need" to rush into it.

[snessiram]

I don't think I will buy windows vista soon, except maybe if I can get it really cheap (student license or so). At this point, it seems sort of pointless because of the unsupported applications and such, but I guess it wont take to long for that to change.
Windows xp runs fine and I have no security problems whatsoever (and no virusses since I switched from norton AV to the free AVG), probably also due to the fact that I'm into computers (studying informatics at the moment), so I don't see that as a reason to switch either.

I also run linux on my thinkpad. First Xubuntu, then debian with xfce (which is then nearly the same as xubunu) and now xubuntu again (because I didn't want to go through the hardware trouble again).
I must say I like working in linux. It performs faster then windows xp, although media playback (video in specific) isn't so great and there are a number of program's that don't exist on linux.

Next to my thinkpad, I bought an ibook G4 12" 2 weeks ago. Since then I really love working in osx. I think the "space" management etc. is really amazing (I fist was really afraid I wouldn't be able to live with an XGA screen, but even photoshop has still quiet a lot of "space")

So at this point, I actually just us OSX, windows XP and linux. Every one of them has its advantages and disadvantages.

[lilserenity]

Stick with XP on my T40, it's a solid, good OS. I don't need any fancy glitz.

The reason for choosing other?

Because I also have two Macs, one running System 7.6.1 (Oh ain't she hardcore, come on! ) and the other Mac OS X 10.4.8 (Tiger) which includes a fair bit of Vista's glitz such as Exposé (bit like Flip 3D), Dashboard (Sidebar) and Spotlight (Instant Search).

I use Spotlight a lot but the other glitz I rarely use, not to say it's not useful, it's just not absolutely necessary.

And that is how I see Vista, glitz. XP just works, it's taken time but in five years I, do like it a lot.

Yes I know there are big improvements, and the same can be said of Tiger to Panther. The main thing is a lot has changed under the hood with XP vs. Vista and Panther vs. Tiger... but from an end user point of view, it doesn't make much difference.

In fact the reason I use Tiger is because a fair chunk of Mac OS X software uses 10.4, whereas at this stage everything is XP compatible. Particularly IE7 which is one reason why I'm not using Windows 2000, as a web developer, I need this to test the websites I work on.

Ok, that's enough ramble

Vicky