Coffeehouse Thread

37 posts

Upgrading to Windows Vista will be too expensive and users will move to Linux

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • rjdohnert

    Steven J. Vaughn-Nichols latest pipe dream and my response

  • eagle

    Anyone who buys a new PC next year will find it pre-loaded with Windows Vista.

    They will take the tour, migrate their files and favorites and away they go.

    They will be WOWED by the visual effects and the audio as their PC will be their home entertainment system.

  • Karim

    Article should be called "Getting DELUSIONAL about the Linux Desktop."  <rolleyes>

    Ok, what is the author's main premise?  Vista uprgades will be too expensive, because the hardware upgrade costs will be prohibitive.  Quote:

    "You also have to have the hardware to run it."

    "...you're looking at a setup where only a screaming gamer's machine of today can run it...."

    "I think you're going to need at least a 3GHz processor and a gigabyte of RAM."


    etc. etc. 

    He says that Linux runs better on lower-end machines.  Instead of upgrading your W2K workstation, why not just install Linux?

    So who does he want to spearhead the Linux desktop revolution?

    "Well, I'd like to see someone with some serious money -- hello Red Hat, Dell, HP... are you listening? -- partner up with one or more of the powerhouse desktop Linux companies and start working on breaking Microsoft's desktop monopoly."

    Reality Check: Dell and HP sell computers.  The more expensive the computer, the more money they make.  What possible motivation would they have to sell low-end PCs pre-installed with Linux, if they can make more money selling you a higher-end PC pre-installed with Vista?

    This is like saying you want to start a communist revolution and you hope that AT&T and National Rifle Club will lend you a hand.

    And Red Hat?  You call them up, and the first thing they want to know is how much money you want to spend for Red Hat Enterprise support.   Woo!  Way to save money!

    He concludes with,

    Desktop Linux is never going to have a better chance than it will in the next eighteen months.

    I doubt that is any more true than anything else in the article, but if it is... R.I.P. Desktop Linux.  Don't expect Red Hat, Dell, or HP to save you.

    Hello Ziff-Davis -- are you listening...?

  • Tyler Brown

    I don't think he's also taken into account the cost of switching to a completely different operating system. Things are done so differently in Linux that it will take some time to get accustomed to doing things the Linux way, and that in itself could far surpass the cost of upgrading to Vista where the experience would be closer to what is currently on XP when compared to Linux.

    Besides, as he's said, there currently is no viable Linux alternative. It still needs to be built.

  • Mog0

    The author appears to be missing the obvious alternative to upgrading to Vista if it's too expensive....NOT upgrading. Why not simply stick with Win 2k/XP?

    In his article he incorrectly states that MS no longer officially support 2k which is unfortunately bulls**t. Win 2K has simply reached a stage in its support that basically means that upgrades (e.g. new versions of media player, IE, etc.) won't be available but security/stability patches will continue exactly the same until mid 2010. Likewise XP will continue on full support until at least 2 years after its replacement is released (i.e. Vista). I'm not sure if the extended support (that 2K is currently on) ends 10 years after release or 5 years after the end of full support but either way that's plenty.

    By 2010 I think anyone who still can't run Vista should really be upgrading!

    I'm not convinced by his assertion that you need a 3GHz CPU with a monster graphics card either as I have read on multiple sites that people have been able to use Vista Beta on tablet PCs and got more performance than XP! As the fastest tablets run 1.5GHz Pentium Ms with really crappy graphics cards I would think that the authors estimates are a little excessive. Added to that, this is only BETA 1. MS have a lot of performance optimization to do yet (which is why they haven't release concrete requirements yet....they simply don't know yet what the final version will need).

  • Tyler Brown

    Beer28 wrote:
    Mozilla firefox, thunderbird, gaim, GIMP, open office2,

    They all work the same on linux as they do on windows. That's why it's still important to make FOSS for windows. It helps ease the pain of transition if you can get people to use it on windows first.

    Although I agree with you Beer, it is rather unlikely that this will be the case. I've just recently started using Open Office, and although I do like it, I believe that if I had the opportunity, I would move back to Microsoft Office. The only reason I've come to use Open Office is due to the fact that I can not afford Microsoft Office on my current student budget.

    I do however use Thunderbird extensively as I believe it is far superior to Outlook Express. With that being said, in the corporate environment that I work in, we make use of Microsoft Outlook. If I had the resources here at home, I would set up an Exchange server and deploy Microsoft Outlook on my systems. Until Mozilla (or some other FOSS organization) steps up to the plate and builds an Exchange compatible mail reader (if thats possible, I don't know if Exchange allows non-Microsoft client connections), I feel that many corporations are going to stick with the Microsoft Office suite just for Outlook alone.

    Moving to Linux on the workstation would mean using FOSS alternatives as you have said. Some critical portions, such as using Thunderbird over Outlook, would make the existence of Microsoft servers in corporations obsolete. This would likely mean implementing Linux servers, which would mean either costly training for the IT department, or re-hiring the IT department from the ground-up.

    It just doesn't add up in the end. Sure you get all of the software for free, and thats great. The problem lies in the training needed for the conversion, and the cost of deploying such a huge change for a corporation. If you're planning on doing so, you're not going to go out and buy extra servers to make the change, as the point of doing this change in the first place is to save money. This means that there is going to be some serious downtime while all these servers and workstations are being converted.

  • jsrfc58

    Tyler Brown wrote:
    Besides, as he's said, there currently is no viable Linux alternative. It still needs to be built.


    I thought he said the Novell may not be the company to build it.  But there are already multiple desktops available for Linux, some great, some not so great.  But the fact is there is a lot of choice there (Gnome, KDE, etc.).

    Beer28 wrote:
    Couple that with the fact that linux and mac do run the same compositing and transparency effects with widgets right now if you have a decent video card.


    Yup...and probably with fewer resource requirements. 

    I don't know if there will be a mass exodus to Linux yet on the home front as the author hopes, though...most people don't have the time or patience to sift through the FUD coming from all sides. How about building some more migration tools? Code/API converters, etc.

    All I can say is...check out a Knoppix disk and spend a few hours with it.

    I think what is annoying to me is when Microsoft does something it's "ooh ahh", even though it has been done before somewhere else...but because of their market size, it looks like they came up with it. 


  • Sampy

    My oohs and aahs at Vista are less "look at all this great and original stuff!" and more "check out all the cool stuff the next version of my OS is getting." I think for a lot of Windows users who don't want to become Apple or Linux users, these are great features to get excited about.

    I don't think it's possible for me to care less about who did something first. I care about who brings it to me in the form I want.

  • Tyler Brown

    Sampy wrote:
    I don't think it's possible for me to care less about who did something first. I care about who brings it to me in the form I want.
    Thanks an excellent perspective on it Sampy. I frankly don't care who conceived feature X first, just so long as I get it in the operating system and that is has been implemented properly.

  • jsrfc58

    Sampy wrote:
    My oohs and aahs at Vista are less "look at all this great and original stuff!" and more "check out all the cool stuff the next version of my OS is getting." I think for a lot of Windows users who don't want to become Apple or Linux users, these are great features to get excited about.

    I don't think it's possible for me to care less about who did something first. I care about who brings it to me in the form I want.


    That's what I'm really still seeing a lot of with Microsoft, though...that sort of "oh crap we better react" sort of attitude. I love it.

    Makes it all the easier for developers like me.

  • wacko

    I also think when looking at Linux especially in a corporate environment the support costs are just crazy. I mean to find people qualified to support Linux is just nuts and then the amount you have to pay them is often times much higher then that of those who support windows.

    A good example of this or at least I have had first had experience with is networking support. I mean supporting something on Linux is far more involved then in windows especially if the persons you are supporting have no idea what they are doing. I think in support costs alone, would be a good enough reason to stick with windows.

    The original author of the article seem to look past those costs, which is not uncommon with most Linux adverts, they try to sell you on that well its free and runs everything etc… but how much will it cost, those who have no clue how to use it.

    I mean I think it’s already been said, “If aint broke, don’t fix it” why would most people other then costs want to move to Linux?  The learning curve for grandpa is far greater and those are the people Microsoft are targeting. I mean it only seems logical to stick with what has worked for the past 20 years. As far as Vista being to expensive, that’s just malarkey, it’s the same damn argument we here over and over and over that Linux is FREE, but as any good economist would know there is no such thing as a free lunch and Linux in the end, costs users more in either personal time or support costs or maybe even both. The reality is that people will pay for what they think works and saves them money/time. 

    The reason Office makes the most money for MS is because people see it as a product to save them time and money. When Linux hit this point and people are able to use it with ease and not have to waste 4 hours getting it to work or paying someone to get it to work then maybe it will groove with what the article says. But, until then the innovation and the perks of Vista will get my upgrade.

  • Manip

    Half of Microsoft's customers don't know what Vista is and have little choose but to buy it even if they plan on using Linux or BSD, the OEM users. Another sub-set have already paid for Vista and just await it shipping, they don't care about the retail price - the business users.

    So if you take out business uses and OEM users, the only people to really get screwed are the power users that feel they have to upgrade and the home users savvy enough to upgrade themselves.

  • Tyler Brown

    jsrfc58 wrote:
    That's what I'm really still seeing a lot of with Microsoft, though...that sort of "oh crap we better react" sort of attitude.
    Although I do agree with you that Microsoft has kind of been playing catch up, they have also been making some stellar advances. I believe moving to a managed API was a very good step as it beefs up the security when applications are executed in the CLR. I think they're doing wonders with the WCF, I've been able to piece together a service, as well as a client to consume the service within a month. I'd say thats pretty good for someone learning how to use the WCF framework, as well as the C# language.

    My point is that although Microsoft is playing catch-up in a few areas, they are stepping ahead of the rest in a few others.

    jsrfc58 wrote:
    Makes it all the easier for developers like me.
    What kind of development do you do?

  • Michael Griffiths

    Sampy wrote:

    I don't think it's possible for me to care less about who did something first. I care about who brings it to me in the form I want.


    Yes.

    That is all that matters.

  • Tyler Brown

    And whats with this BS that Mr. Vaughan-Nichols is spewing about Windows XP Home being crippled?

    Mr. Vaughan-Nichols wrote:
    ...except to make six of them crippleware, ala what Microsoft did with XP Home?


    How is XP Home crippled? When you compare it to XP Professional, what is missing? The ability to log into an XP Home system using RDC. IIS. Thats pretty much it, am I right? So how exactly does this cripple XP Home?

  • wacko

    Tyler Brown wrote:
    And whats with this BS that Mr. Vaughan-Nichols is spewing about Windows XP Home being crippled?
    Mr. Vaughan-Nichols wrote:...except to make six of them crippleware, ala what Microsoft did with XP Home?


    How is XP Home crippled? When you compare it to XP Professional, what is missing? The ability to log into an XP Home system using RDC. IIS. Thats pretty much it, am I right? So how exactly does this cripple XP Home?


    I also think it cannot connect to domain, I do not recall it having domain abilities

  • wacko

    I would agree with Tyler, I am not a seasoned C# Dev myself but I will say MS has made it very easy for people to pick up on there programming languages with the managed API. when I switch to unmanaged c++ I find myself almost lost and then going back to the managed API I wonder how people could have ever lived without it.

    I think they have also made advancements in Customer Connection... You know 5 years ago Sampy would not have even made a post, instead of all these community ran sites we see Microsoft stepping up and showing us there stuff and asking for the feedback. We get programs like the CTP program and Microsoft Connect and of course Channel 9; I don't think you have that same following in the Linux world. So I think on that front we have seen a great amount of advancement.

     

    I think the Product Feedback center is a great example of the strides MS is taking to make sure there customer needs are met.. I mean sure they may be a little behind but when the move, they really show that they listen.


  • Michael Griffiths

    Hmmm.

    I want to say "Microsoft doesn't have a problem with execution, they have a problem with strategy".

    I'm not entirely sure that's correct, however. Bill Gates' job is strategy.

    Perhaps I should say: "Microsoft doesn't have a problem with execution, they have a problem with tactics".

    Have to think about that.

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.