Windows 7 powers 10% of business PCs, growth to explode

[red1776]

This estimate are so unrealistic and fake in nature.

and you know this how?

First u remove the support from XP

What Wagan8r said, and
A decade of support for a piece of software is absurd

and push Win7 forcebly onto users

I will assume you meant forcibly. Being a little dramatic...don't you think? Or were there actually armed Microsoftians who dragged you off and put you on the rack until you purchased a Win7 license?

. It has to do better because there is no alternative left with users like us who still wants to do with XP OS.

Again, what Wanan8r said.
How about use your XP?
How about Linux?

Do we have choice ?

yeah uha

 

[Guest]

i have a question... Actually Windows 7 is the same thing that Windows Vista 6.1 ???

 

[Guest]

Vista is only 7%! Vista was pretty good, i've never understood the bias and hate directed against it.

 

[Breech]

Guest said:
Vista is only 7%! Vista was pretty good, i've never understood the bias and hate directed against it.

Vista SP1 was good, prior to that it could be a mess. Win 7 is still very Vista like so I don't see the need for that OS anymore, especially with all the bad press it received. Doesn't seem that MS wants the name to linger either. I really liked Vista but 7 is even better.

 

[Guest]

Here's the important statistics: http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp

It is important because it is based on PC-s that go into the internet. Offline stations don't need any upgrade much.

 

[Guest]

i have a question... Actually Windows 7 is the same thing that Windows Vista 6.1 ???

It goes like this ignoring 1xx-3xx and 9x

NT3.1
NT3.5/3.51
NT4
Windows 2000 = NT5.0
Windows XP = NT5.1
Windows Server 2003 = NT5.2
Windows Vista / Server 2008 = NT6.0
Windows 7 / Server 2008R2 = NT6.1

 

[Archean]

In addition to red's comments, I'd say if it weren't for businesses, I don't think it would make sense to support any OS for say more then 5 years at best. Technological aspects alone would make it necessary to refresh the OS along with user's requirement (feedback) for improvements in e.g. interface / ease of use / security + stability. Anyway, despite the fact that full economic recovery won't be coming any time soon (I've seen some projections which say that things will be like this till 2014) I am noticing businesses 'reducing their headcount, and improving their processes with improvements in technological aspects of their work' so it perfectly make sense to roll out new OS. In fact, I think due vista's monumental failure to impress earlier on, Win7 is being adopted at bit faster rate when you compare it to what happened with earlier OS upgrades.

 

[uttaradhaka]

I don't understand this. The release cycles of Windows are far too frequent. So, by the time the majority of companies upgrade to Windows 7, it'll be close to the release of Windows 8. So, there is no feasible way of large companies to keep in sync with the release cycle of Windows.

I think this is an issue that is going to come to the fore in future.

Also, some people raised a valid point saying that there are alternatives available to the OS such as Linux ( variants of it). These are far cheaper and more versatile. Yes, you are going to have to let your employees get accustomed to it, but at the end of the day its a better overall investment.

Also, think about the inherent security in Linux and you start to get a very favorable picture.

 

[Archean]

Also, some people raised a valid point saying that there are alternatives available to the OS such as Linux ( variants of it). These are far cheaper and more versatile. Yes, you are going to have to let your employees get accustomed to it, but at the end of the day its a better overall investment.

You are probably only taking into account that 'productivity software like office are being used in business environment' for which your argument make some sense; but factually, that isn't the case, most larger businesses either develop or deploy (3rd party) solutions to run their processes, and these are generally windows based; hence Linux is just not the option; they do however, can choose to use it in their server mix.

A good example which I can quote is, we use AutoCAD extensively in our organization, along with several other engineering software, and NONE of them have Linux/Unix version. So how do you justify jumping the ship and adopting something which is pretty much useless for you? I am sure you can find many examples like this around you as well.

 

[Arris]

I'll need to get my work to update me to Win7 so I can do testing with IIS6+7 on my local machine, as XP (currently running on this 3 year old machine) only comes with IIS5. Annoying things like no PowerShell scripting snapins for WMI to deploy and configure IIS. Few other advancements would be nice. If they really wanted to force upgrades they should stop rolling out .net updates for XP

I do somewhat agree with klepto12. The top level menu of my "All Programs" in my windows start menu is

Development
Office
Admin tools
Accessories
Startup

I know where everything I need is. Although the old XP list of "recently used" programs is something I've come to like now, but the text based lookup of stuff in the WIn7 menu is still a little messy. I'm starting to think that we'll be forced to use these "quick" methods rather than having a structured menu. It's like instead of storing a phone number in your memory where you can retrieve it as you know where to find it, having to start thinking of it digit by digit. Urm... 5... Urm... 4.

 

[Arris]

Archean said:
You are probably only taking into account that 'productivity software like office are being used in business environment' for which your argument make some sense; but factually, that isn't the case, most larger businesses either develop or deploy (3rd party) solutions to run their processes, and these are generally windows based; hence Linux is just not the option; they do however, can choose to use it in their server mix.

A good example which I can quote is, we use AutoCAD extensively in our organization, along with several other engineering software, and NONE of them have Linux/Unix version. So how do you justify jumping the ship and adopting something which is pretty much useless for you? I am sure you can find many examples like this around you as well.

If you are in some sort of service capacity you also end up keeping the majority of your systems on the same tech that your clients are running so you can troubleshoot and test things to make sure they will work correctly on your clients systems. Your hands are tied by the business environment in general. My company uses an IBM software suite that is years behind the latest version purely because that is what our clients were using. When working with large companies it takes them a long time to roll out any sort of updates. I still remember the delays from client IT departments in getting clients to update to IE7/8 from 5/6...

 

[Archean]

Exactly, something similar is being done in our Finance/Accounts department as well, despite that their new system is windows based, they still use DOS based database developed in late 1980s, which can't be ported to new systems without breaking it down obviously (ironically they can only print its output on those damned dotmatrix printers). I may be wrong, but I've noticed generally people here tend to base their comments on the fact 'what may or may not be good, today' hence, ignoring the fact which you have pointed out.

 

[dlen]

I am waiting for an offer for Poland. All the countries have promotions like Win7 Family Pack or students version, but Poland is excluded from that.

 

[Archean]

There are lots of countries which are not in that list dlen, which is pretty stupid thing on part of MS.

 

[Relic]

I'm curious to see how companies even consumers will react if Windows 8 starts being pushed in a couple years considering we've kind of grown accustom to a long development time.

 

[sMILEY4ever]

Cueto_99 said:
Xp still holding 75% of the market share? that must mean it keeps being the most stable, and less resource hungry OS..

Well, it is. I've been using it for some time now and I'll only change when I'll buy a new pc.

 

[Archean]

I think pricing of the product will be detrimental in this respect, if it is right (along with compelling improvements) people may not complain. I don't think people would like the idea of buying 200$ OS every 2-3 years.

 

[kevin1212]

Fact is that if XP is doing everythin they want, why do a costly upgrade? No question that 7 is better for us indivuals, but businesses wouln't look at it that way.

 

[Razerblade]

I'm quite surprised XP is still that high up. I know a lot of businesses that are running Windows 7 now. Our company has been rolling out windows 7 from the start and haven't had any issues with it. I think more businesses will migrate to Windows 7 once SP1 has been released.

 

[theruck]

windows 7 is the most annoying OS ever built. the so called security features mean, that you are instantly asked by a popup window or bar if you really like to do this or that.if you change something they do not like, they will annoy you so hard that you do it the "right way" bravo microsoft, windows 7 was the reason i moved to mac after 15 years with MS operating systems. and i am happy for that

 

[Leeky]

I apologize, you are clearly far my intelligent that I am. A shiny and pretty Start button is far more important than the ease of use. After 8 months of trying to adapt to the new Start menu means I am a failure at adopting the "ever expanding computer industry". The fact that I am fully utilizing and am happy with using the newest operating system from Microsoft does not indicate ones computer savvy-ness. </sarcasm>

My problem is the organization method, the requirement at using text based searches to quickly find what your looking for can be annoying at times, sometimes you just want to browse the menus with your mouse. The fact you have to click each folder when your looking for something visually. You must expand that folder, then click it again to collapse it. If you don't collapse it you end up with multiple folders opened up and the start menu doesn't get any larger, so you end up scrolling in a tiny window. There is far too much clicking and typing required, these are considered extra steps to most, not ease of use. The whole system is just clumsy and annoying as far as I am concerned. I gave it over 8 months to try and get used to it... that is PLENTY of time, and I still utterly dislike it. The question isn't understanding it, it is the question of ease of use; and I do not find it easy to use.

I don't agree with the same degree of frustration, but I do get the points your making about the new start menu.

I've worked around this method by using the text box that appears just above the MS logo when you click it. Just type what you want e.g. Word, Excel, Firefox, even the name of a file, it'll find it immediately.

I barely even touch my start menu now, I just type what app I want and hit return on the keyboard and it starts. It really does work that well, it'll even load unseen settings, like "msconfig" and most likely other commands you'd normally seek access too. Try it, it works wonders and in my experiences makes it so much easier to aid those needing help with W7.

Maybe this would reduce the dis-pleasure your experiencing, and also come in very handy once you roll out W7 and all your help guides need updating thoroughout your company.

 

[madboyv1]

sMILEY4ever said:
I've been using it for some time now and I'll only change when I'll buy a new pc.

That's generally what businesses do too.

kevin1212 said:
Fact is that if XP is doing everythin they want, why do a costly upgrade? No question that 7 is better for us indivuals, but businesses wouln't look at it that way.

Except Windows 7 has much better group policy control, or rather, expanded group policy control, is slightly easier to deploy en masse and lock down en masse, and in general more secure than XP even without UAC. There are plenty of advantages for businesses too, just that cost for new hardware and software weighs more heavily.

I've worked around this method by using the text box that appears just above the MS logo when you click it. Just type what you want e.g. Word, Excel, Firefox, even the name of a file, it'll find it immediately.

That's what I said I do often. =o

Archean said:
I think pricing of the product will be detrimental in this respect, if it is right (along with compelling improvements) people may not complain. I don't think people would like the idea of buying 200$ OS every 2-3 years.

Large businesses that aren't buying new hardware (in which the operating system comes with) usually purchase volume licenses and pay significantly less than retail. Even smaller businesses can get Software packages for multiple systems for significantly less than retail.

theruck said:
windows 7 is the most annoying OS ever built. the so called security features mean, that you are instantly asked by a popup window or bar if you really like to do this or that.if you change something they do not like, they will annoy you so hard that you do it the "right way" bravo microsoft, windows 7 was the reason i moved to mac after 15 years with MS operating systems. and i am happy for that

... You DO realize that can be turned off with ease, don't you?

 

[Appzalien]

I like XP Pro for its versatility. I can copy my disk to the hard drive and integrate all the updates to the files and then make a new boot disk. I know my way around the OS so well that when I tried the Win7 beta I was disappointed with the stupid GUI moves they made. Whats wrong with "add/remove programs"? why in the world change its name unless your just being stupid. To me, that's "change for change sake" and I say, "if it ain't broke don't fix it". But MS in its infinite wisdom decided changing the GUI to some power users dream was more likely to sell then leaving things the same for the majority of users. Those *****s are going to push people to Linux faster than any Linux improvements have ever done. They're morons and can't see it.

 

[theruck]

yes either i lower the security level to custom not to be asked about running programs downloaded from internet which will make the explorer bar asking me for fixing security or i will be asked for pressing "open" button everytime i click on such a program icon.
combine it with company security policies applied through GPO and you have a hell on earth and as a bonus lower productivity and more employees or users pissed off

 

[theruck]

windowsx 7 is just great. it says "WELCOME" even if you enter wrong password and after 30 seconds it tells you that your password is wrong. so where do i come well?