Has Microsoft given up on Vista?

Time for something new?

Some History
The last time Microsoft had a version of Windows that did this poorly was when they tried to introduce Windows NT 3.1. After almost 3 years of hype and vapor-ware announcements, the actual system came out. It was slow, it needed huge amounts of hardware, and it didn't run most of the predecessor's (Windows 3.1) applications.

It was such a horrible failure that Microsoft dropped the NT kernel and dropped back to a more DOS/Windows flavor for Windows 95. Windows NT 4.0 was released after SEVEN years of hype, and still didn't have all of the features promised in the original NT release. It wasn't until Windows 2000 that Microsoft finally delivered on the promise of a "Better UNIX than UNIX" which was a reference to SunOS 4.0 that had been capturing market share in the corporate workstation market until the vapor-ware announcement of "NT for New Technology".

But Microsoft needed more money so very shortly after the VERY successful Windows 2000 release that was actually an upgrade promised to corporate customers who purchased NT 4.0, Microsoft released XP and demanded that every corporate customer accept the XP licenses AND pay increased "support" fees, initially 3 times the previous rate, but eventually negotated down to about 50% additional.

The seeds of rebellion
And almost immediately, customers seriously started looking at Linux and many CIOs were ordered to come up with a "migration plan" that would let them switch to a non-Microsoft operating system if Microsoft tried another "forced upgrade".

At that point, Microsoft made another vapor-ware announcement of "Longhorn". They promised dozens of new features, almost all of which were already included in Linux, and over the next SIX YEARS, Microsoft castrated Longhorn and turned into a Steer, then they renamed it Vista and even the "cool new features" turned out to be a mirage, because it required special hardware that most PCs didn't have. As a result, "Vista Ready" machines were sold that couldn't support Aeroglass.

I'd rather have a Mac
Meanwhile, back at the local shopping centers, Apple had replaced their old "Finder" operating system with a BSD based operating system they dubbed OS/X. By the time Vista came out, apple stores were filled with people who would wait 30 minutes to an hour for a "test drive" and after 3-4 visits were placing their orders for iBooks, iMacs, and Mac Minis. Even the reviewers who liked Vista usually ended with "but I'd rather have a Mac".

Linux and Stealth tactics
And then there was Linux. By the time XP came out, Linux distributors had come up with "Live-CD" systems that not only let users "test drive" Linux, but they made it possible to check a new machine that they were thinking of purchasing, to find out if it was "Linux Ready" or not.

Machines that didn't run Live-CD versions of Linux -- "Linux Hostile" machines often sat on the retailer shelves for months, and stores ended up marking down the prices as much as 70%, just to get rid of the unpopular machines. The "Linux Ready" machines sold much more rapidly.

Microsoft fights back
Microsoft tried to use Vista to force retailers to carry "Linux hostile" machines, but these machines also ended up getting 70% markdowns, and the Linux-ready machines didn't like Aero.

With Linux-Ready machines widely in circulation, Linux users weren't quite ready to give up Windows completely. They needed to be able to switch between Linux and Windows without rebooting. The simplest way to meet this objective was desktop virtualization. Linux had Bochs, tere was VMware that worked on both Linux and Windows, Xen let Linux users boot standard Windows XP systnems on drives configured for "dual boot" mode.

Microsoft tried to counter with VirtualPC, but running Virtual Linux on Windows made both systems run very slow. On the other hand, when running Virtual Windows was running on Linux or OS/X, it seemed to run faster, because of the efficient memory management and disk buffering of Linux and Unix.

Desktop Virtualization
VMware made the switch even simpler, offering VMWare Converter, which could convert the OEM installed Windows system into a VMWare image that could be saved to an externanl USB drive.

The user could then install Linux, wiping out the Windows installation, then move the VMWare image back to the Linux configured filesystem, and then the user could run both Linux and Windows at the same time. The VMWare player made it possible to run this 'appliance' without having to pay the higher price for VMware workstation.

Corporate Linux desktops
Companies who liked this type of configuration could then use a commercial VMWare enterprise management system to create master Linux and Windows XP or Windows 2000 "appliances", and automatically install standard images over the corporate network.

The comical irony is that corporate customers who wanted to do this had to purchase a Vista machine that was configured with Vista Home Premium, pay for an upgrade to Vista BASIC so that they could DOWNGRADE to Windows XP professional or Windows 2000.

Linux provided the security, including NAT firewall, anti-virus could be done on either Linux or Windows, and since Windows was primarily being used for special applications that weren't available on Linux - yet, like Quicken, Visio, and Project, the 5-10% slower performance of virtualized Windows wasn't that much of a problem.

Current Migration efforts
Remember that migration plan that CIOs were told to have by the next release of Windows? The CIOs had it, and when Vista came out, they storted to implement it.

The first systems to be migrated were point of service systems, like cash registers, teller work stations, sales counters, and other environments where a sales representative entered the information while the user was standing across the counter.

Thte next systems were the call center workstations, which were used by phone bank operators who would use the workstation while talking on the phone with the customers.

The irony is that since neither of those types of workstations require access to the public internet, and are usually well-monitored, they wouldn't show up on most browser surveys.

Many companies are now giving employees with general purpose desktop and laptop systems the option of upgrading to Linux with virtualized Windows, but some, like IBM are putting their foot down and telling employees NOT to upgrade to Vista, Office 2007, and to stop using Microsoft-only applications as much as possible. IBM is not only offering Lotus symphony, which is file compatible with Open Office, using ODF format, to their employees, but they are also offering it for free to clients and customers, or almost anyone else who wants to try it. If they want commercial support from IBM, that's available for a very reasonable price.

There's something fishy here
Microsoft knows that there are a whole bunch of machines being SOLD with Vista, but they are also noticing that the number of vista Registrations is not as high as it should be. They know that something's up, and they see new XP registrations from "signature" virtual hardware configurations, so they know something's fishy.

Steve Ballmer has publicly stated that the biggest threat to Microsoft today, is Linux. Microsoft may have to learn to "play nicely" with Linux as a matter of policy if it wants to maintain revenue levels by selling licenses to corporate Linux users.

It's time for a change, and it's happening now.

The irony is that even if this is "The year of the Linux desktop", we probably won't realize it for another year or two.

There is still an ad for Vista

One where they show them Vista on a PC (probably
one with multiple GIG of memory, state of the
art graphics card, etc.) without telling them
what it actually is. Once they know, they fall
all over themselves, giving the impression they
intend to rush out and buy 10 copies. ;)

Businesses will still upgrade to Vista

But at their own pace. I have been rolling out some new Dell Optiplex 755 systems for the past 4 weeks and the procurement includes both Windows Vista Business and XP Professional media. The systems are preloaded with XP because we are just not ready for Vista, some of our custom applications need to be updated. But Vista is definitely on our agenda, but it will take some time before we start rolling it out and it will most likely be incremental.

Waiting on Windows 7 to skip Vista does not make sense especially for businesses, since the same kernel will be used which means, any incompatibilities today moving from XP to Vista will also be there when trying to move from XP to 7. The strategy for most enterprise roll outs is to use a proven and tested product, which Vista will be by 2010, by then the second Service Pack should also be out. I don't see a mass deployment of Windows 7, its the same case for most versions of Windows in the past.

We need to also understand how businesses procure licenses and software from Microsoft. Thats through Software Assurance and Enterprise Agreement. Which means Vista is on their schedule, not Microsoft. We are talking about an OS that Microsoft plans to support until 2016.

In a Word No!!!!

What do you get for spreading such garbage. Look into the history of 98..2000...XP. Now look at Vista. Do you see a correlation? Any similarities? Or are you so dense you need a handhold to see the obvious?
Research before you post!

Consumer vs Biz Market

Vista-preinstalled continues to dominate new computer sales to consumers.

Business was slow to upgrade to Windows XP, and was slow to upgrade to Vista. Now, with the economy crashing all around us, business isn't going to want to spend an extra dime to upgrade anything.

At this point MS should

At this point MS should really keep XP around up to when Windows 7 is released.

With a little bit more than a year for Win7 release, I am sure that many users (especially in Corporate world) will hold the upgrade-to-Vista even if MS will stop the XP sales right away.