Jim Louderback leaves PCMag and Ziff Davis after 16 years as an editor and on his way out tells us what he really thinks of Microsoft Vista. In his words, "The litany of what doesn't work and what still frustrates me stretches on endlessly."Need new computers for your small business but are unsure what OS to put on them? Take a hint from Dell. For a while, Dell pushed Vista but after hearing customer feedback, is now offering XP machines again. The sound and fury of Microsoft ceasing support of XP in early 2009 may make you quake in your virtual boots; however, that seems to be myth and support will continue until at least 2014. See Microsoft's Support Lifecycle Policy and their backtracking on short-support for Windows XP Home (XP Pro is in a different product category and enjoys longer support).
But what if you need machines now? Which OS can you choose and be safe?
Dell's new business machine, the Vostro line, is offered with either XP or Vista operating systems (talk about listening to your customers!). Offered for businesses who don't want Vista – or for whom Vista doesn't work with their required software applications – Vostro boasts not what is on it but what was left off: trialware. It comes with a 30-day money back guarantee with no restocking fee, a 1-year online backup system and North American telephone tech support [some features cost extra]. It sounds like someone is reading those Dell consumer surveys we fill out and good for them.
You can make your hardy XP machine Vista-like with cool cursors and enjoy the experience without upgrading. After doing a Vista Business upgrade on a pretty darned fast Windows Home machine and watching the % meter for 20 hours inch forward, I am pretty against upgrading at all; do a clean install because you're going to have to reload a bunch of software anyway (hey, Adobe/Macromedia, what IS it with Dreamweaver 8 running under Vista?).
When clients inquire about Vista (often when staff starts buying home computers with Vista and want it at work as well), we dissuade them unless the entire office moves to Vista and MS Office 2007, which is, I guess, what Microsoft wanted in the first place. For many customers, we're planning 2008-2009 tech upgrades for everything, including operating systems, office apps, and yes, server software (SBS 2007 has to come out some day!). Because many computers need upgrades to handle the new OS, the cost is significant, especially for small businesses.
We have a short list of guidelines for small businesses moving toward Vista:
- Take an inventory of your machines and determine which have to be replaced and which can be upgraded to use Vista.
- Seriously consider not buying OEM copies of Office or Vista from the hardware manufacturer and buy managed licenses instead. If your current old computer has Office 2003 OEM from, say, Dell, you can't install it on a new computer. It's considered part of the machine. Your lawyer may vary; check into it.
- Upgrade all machines to at least 1Gb of RAM. Consider more. Check out the video card at the same time: does it work with everything Vista offers?
- Will your current network software support Vista machines? (Trust me, we have NT networks that we still work on.)
- Do you NEED or WANT Vista now? What are you going to do with (or what will it do for you) that makes the pain of cost and planning worthwhile?
- Don't try to push a doorstop of a computer onto the receptionist so turning the machine on takes 12 minutes and opening Word takes another 15. That's not a technology plan.
- Got any Macs in the house?
- Office 2003 works fine under Vista. Office 2007 is way cooler (but doesn't create .doc files unless you've got a savvy user so sharing files is a daily frustration). It takes a good long time to upgrade from 2003 to 2007 so consider formatting all machines and then clean-loading Vista and Office 2007 and wait for all those users to complain about their missing software, license codes and other crying-jag inducing moments.
- Have a technology upgrade plan. Hire a professional. This isn't your father's upgrade.
- Lock 'em down. Don't let small business users start tweaking or you won't be able to support the mess of machines on your network. The business owner owns the computers. Let folks change colors but that's enough for a while.
Small businesses facing a technology upgrade should proceed with caution, take their time and consult professional computer engineers who do this every day. You'll learn a lot (and save unexpected costs) from their experience.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
8-30-2007 @ 4:20PM
Todd said...
Actually, small businesses facing a technology upgrade should just call any of the big OEMs ( Dell, HP, IBM ) and order laptops, desktops and servers running Linux.
Why would any reputable "consultant" push Micrsoft licensing fees down someone's throat knowing there is a near zero cost alternative?
http://www.dell.com/content/topics/segtopic.aspx/ubuntu
Reply
8-30-2007 @ 4:30PM
Sue Polinsky said...
Todd, while I have a Ubuntu box (and another older Fedora one) to go with my Windows machines (because we support all sorts of users), I'm pretty sure that most small businesses would be a hard sell to move to a non-Windows OS for daily use. A few years ago, I spearheaded a drive for the first RedHat Academy in our public school system and I respect Linux (and use it) but recognize that most of our clients just aren't going to do it yet.
[see this link for more http://www.redhat.com/about/news/prarchive/2003/press_academy.html]
We use Linux for machines we get ready for community centers (with Open Office) and kids are receptive. My focus is the reality of small business and I don't think Ubuntu is a viable choice for many at this time. I'm willing to wait and smile.
Reply
8-30-2007 @ 5:35PM
CT A said...
Stay with XP. I know what I'm talking about. Vista has terrible networking and at times it has memory leaks. You're better off with a stabler version such as XP.
Reply
8-30-2007 @ 5:36PM
Peter said...
Regardless of what you do for desktops, you should seriously look at Vista for notebooks for the security features alone. Bitlocker and UAC go a long way to protecting mobile workers and your data.
Bitlocker is great for machines that might get lost or stolen, and we all know how many that is. UAC is great because you can (relatively) easily have office users run XP as regular users (non-admins), but you are often forced to have mobile workers run as local admins so they can do some maintenance and make changes to their own machine. Vista and UAC allow you to let them be local admins in a MUCH safer fashion.
Reply
8-31-2007 @ 5:42AM
Alex Leonard said...
I recently posed the question of whether I should move back to XP from the copy of Vista that came pre-installed on my laptop. After writing the article, I decided I'd drop by the Windows Vista discussion boards on the Microsoft website and ask the same question.
I was amazed by the response I got. After a host of people telling me that if I wanted to move then go, I decided to re-phrase the question to ask people what advantages they felt Vista gave them over XP.
About 2 people answered with the rest basically telling me that I should move.
The main reasoning behind a considered step back to XP was just the slugishness of my brand new system - an AMD Turion x2 with 2Gb RAM in the new HP 6715b. When I was buying this system I thought it would be well capable of working on Vista. I was disappointed.
I definitely get the sense that people should wait until service pack 1 or 2 before thinking of migrating. They should definitely wait until they get a faster machine as well.
Regarding business security etc. Without a doubt, Vista is a lot more secure. BitLocker must be an enticement for corporations wanting to protect data on lost laptops as well. However I think the hardware needs to be decent.
IT departments need to be aware of various methods to tweak Vista to speed up performance as well. While things like Aero are attractive enough, I don't think they really warrant usage on anything but a top of the line new system. Even then, there has been a study done showing how the new UI interface is a lot slower to use for basic tasks.
I think businesses need to ask some serious questions before considering moving, they need to look at their required applications and always ask the question "Will this help our productivity?"
Reply
8-31-2007 @ 5:45AM
Alex Leonard said...
That last comment was meant to include links to my own Vista article and the study done on Vista's UI speed:
http://www.pixelapes.com/index.php/2007/08/27/should-vista-get-another-chance.html
http://computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyName=windows&articleId=9011819&taxonomyId=125
Sorry about that.. I didn't realise that I couldn't use the anchor element in comments!
Reply
9-01-2007 @ 6:30AM
Saxmeister said...
I have an unusual hardware advantage for comparisons here at home. I've 2 desktops and 2 notebooks. Without breaking down their entire inventories of hard and soft ware, the basic facts are the two desktops are 10 years apart in technology (i.e., a PIII-450MHz vs. an AMD 64 x2 Duo 4200+) and the two Gateway notebooks are both average current technology boxes (i.e., 1.60GHz Intel Dual Core T2060 vs. 1.73GHz Intel Dual Core T2250) with nearly the same hardware throughout with the exception of hard drives, monitors & a 2nd PCI Root port on the less expensive model. A quick look at the desktops...the old one was built for W95. For W95, the pc is well configured with 256MB RAM & a pair of Ultra IV-ATA drives. But with the OS upgraded to XP, this configuration struggles. The new Gateway desktop was loaded with XP Media Center with the option for a free upgrade to VISTA Home Premium. However, it's current hardware runs the OS comfortably with no noticeable bottleneck beyond the speed of the drives and the Broadband CABLE Internet. Even with the video sharing system memory (2GBs), the new desktop runs efficiently under XP MedCtr. Seeing how even small differences in hardware affect the efficiency of VISTA on my notebooks, I expect a switch to VISTA will yield a noticeable performance on my new desktop compared to it's current OS operations and to how my best notebook operates under VISTA.
Now if the difference in demands of Microsoft's XP OS over the demands of Windows 95 can be used as a predictor of the increasing demands VISTA will have over XP MedCtr, the current efficiency of the XP configured PC will fall when VISTA replaces XP on this computer.
So what are my prioritized demands for this desktop computer? Stability, Reliability, Speed, Capability to run all my current applications, and ability to run all upgrades and new applications. Will the current system meet these requirements? What new or improved functions can VISTA bring to my requirements and those of the other users on my home network?
I am satisfied with how the best notebook runs under VISTA and see no need to change this machine. However, if after I optimize the other notebook and my satisfaction of how this computer performs on VISTA does not improve, a rather inexpensive RAM upgrade will be tried. I see no need to backstep to XP when VISTA brings convenient and powerful wireless networking tools. Alone, these networking tools make wireless and wired networking operations easier to configure than does XP.
The addition of an affordable and highly recommended program called, "Network Magic" removes nearly any need for manual configurations. This is especially helpful for non-techies, like my 76 year old mother who uses the Internet when managing her finances. The only drawback she's had with her Gateway Notebook is learning the VISTA interface. Even this retired techie understands the importance for someone in the family to know how to network XP & VISTA manually. And I'm not stuck doing things the old way to the point that I can't appreciate the convenience of a program like Network Magic.
So when will VISTA become the OS of choice for my desktop pc? Probably when my demands outstretch the capabilities of XP which will occur when I am more familiar with VISTA.
I learned an expensive lesson being an early adopter when I bought my car in 2005. It is a new model for this manufacturer's label. The mfg. took a whole bunch of the good and reasonably priced systems from their "upscale" name-brand car and engineered them to fit in their "common" major-brand car. The car received high review marks and was a classier design than the model it replaced. Two years later, the mfg. has decided to discontinue the new model and is bringing the old model name out of retirement. I should have been more careful and learned a lesson when I ought the BetaMax VCR or the LaserDisc player after DVDs had already been on the market for a number of years. Duh! So when is the right time to adopt a new product? I may never get it right. I guess I'm playing it safe by using both Operating Systems. Now what's that Linux package, UBUNTU?
Reply
9-03-2007 @ 9:03PM
Dan said...
My school's college of business just upgraded all computers two labs to Office 2007, and did so in a matter of days with no problems, so I don't really see why you would upgrade to Vista and use Office 2003 over just upgrading Office to 2007, where I think businesses would see more benefits with very little changes needed. Anyone else notice any really issues deploying Office 2007 on XP machines.
Reply
9-03-2007 @ 9:05PM
Sue Polinsky said...
It's a question of cost - Office 2007 doesn't necessarily give small businesses any remarkable advantage over Office 2003 so without an educational discount (like your college's biz department probably gets), it's a huge expense to upgrade to 2007 and cost always has to be a consideration in a tech plan.
Reply
9-15-2007 @ 9:03PM
Sue Polinsky said...
Bob, without trying to be snarky, without a bunch of more information, I can't answer this question (which is one I get asked a *lot* so it's a good query. However, off the cuff, I don't think you need 64-bit if you're talking about an operating system.
The main questions are:
1. What do you do? (what do you use your computers to do; what applications; what software?)
2. How much telecommuting do you do? There are simple PC connections or maybe you want a VPN.
3. How geeky are you and your users? In other words, how much convenience do you want or how technical an app can you live with to connect?
(Then there's another 60 minutes at least of walking around and talking to the users and seeing the setup.)
Tell me whereabouts you are and maybe we know someone we could recommend to help you with this networking.
Reply
9-17-2007 @ 12:18AM
Bob said...
Which operating system should I use for networking among up to six people in a small office plus having the capability of connecting to my office computer from my home computer?
Is 64-bit necessary or will 32-bit be adequate?
Reply
10-17-2007 @ 2:09AM
Charles Clark said...
Our company policy prohibits the use of any Microsoft product that has not been on the market for a minimum of 5 years, as Microsoft always needs a minimum of 5 years to work bugs out of its products, and we prefer reliability over all else. From what we have seen, Vista offers nothing new we need. Network Magic (networkmagic.com) handles all our networking needs regardless of OS. Security is not a grave concern as company policy prohibits the storing of any confidential information on computer hard drives and requires such info be stored only on removable drives that must be checked out and returned each day by each employee. We do not play music or watch movies on business computers. And since security and Microsoft mix as well as oil and water, we find it absurd to suggest that Vista offers any more than the lowest level of security. Microsoft has a better reputation for its hamburgers than its security. We reject Microsoft Office products as well, preferring the free OpenOffice.org. We are pleased Microsoft has tried to duplicate the Apple OS and named it Vista, but since this is Microsoft's first attempt at copying an Apple OS, we urge caution. We "upgrade" only when the benefits of upgrade exceed or at least justify the costs. Plain and simple.
Reply