Windows XP Slow to Gain Foothold

Zardon · Sep 17, 2002, 07:26 PM

Consumers may be buying into Windows XP on new PCs, but many corporate users are still putting off plans to migrate to Microsoft Corp.'s nearly one-year-old desktop operating system.
Even last week's release of the first service pack of bug fixes for XP - typically a signal for broader corporate adoption of Windows operating systems - was shrugged off by several IT managers.

A Computerworld poll of 25 Windows users in a wide range of industries found only four companies that are currently rolling out XP across their operations and four more that plan to start migrations in the coming months. Some users who are holding back on XP cited cost, the lack of a pressing business need and recent Windows 2000 rollouts as factors in their decisions.

"We have not moved to XP, and we have no plans to. As far as I am concerned, this is an upgrade that offers nothing to a business customer," said Pat Enright, CIO at Clark Retail Enterprises Inc., a convenience store chain in Oak Brook, Ill.

In particular, users that either have completed Windows 2000 projects or are now rolling it out said they see no reason to jump to Windows XP, which they view as an incremental release over Win 2k.

"The cost is very high to [upgrade], and there's not a lot of perceived value," said Rick Waugh, a technology architect at Telus Corp. in Burnaby, British Columbia.

Jim Cullinan, a lead product manager for Windows, said Microsoft is focusing on communicating the benefits of Windows XP to companies still running Windows NT, Windows 98 and Windows 95. Those benefits include improved stability and enhanced wireless and security management features, he said.

"Most enterprise customers still have held to the tradition of waiting until Service Pack 1 to even look at it," Cullinan said. "IT spending has dried up, and it looks a little bit tighter. But IT spending should be on the rise in the coming months. We feel really good about where Windows XP is."

An April poll of 225 CIOs by Morgan Stanley showed that 60% of respondents had no plans to roll out Windows XP. That view has changed little since then, according to many of the IT pros interviewed by Computerworld last week.

more details in the forum

Zardon · Sep 17, 2002, 07:27 PM

But Bill Lewkowski, CIO at Metropolitan Health in Grand Rapids, Mich., saw a clear need for XP. Lewkowski said the vendors that make the applications his company runs will no longer be supporting Windows 95. "Since we held off on Windows 2000 for a while, we decided we might as well jump to the new version," he said.

Navigant International Inc., a travel services firm in Englewood, Colo., is in the same boat. "Some of our critical software vendors skipped formal Windows 2000 support and leapfrogged from Windows 98 to Windows XP," said Navigant CIO Neville Teagarden.

But more than half of the 25 companies surveyed last week said a majority of their end users still run Windows NT, Windows 98 or Windows 95. "We've been driven by what our vendors will support. So far, they all support Windows 98, so we stay with 98," said Bill Finefield, CIO at the Navy Exchange Service Command in Virginia Beach, Va.

Large companies face bigger obstacles to upgrading because of the sheer volume of PCs involved. KeyCorp, a Cleveland-based financial services firm, has migrated 11,000 of its PC users to Windows 2000, with hopes of moving its 8,000 Windows NT 4.0 users and 1,500 Windows 95 users by the end of 2003. The company has no plans to change its decision to make Windows 2000 its corporate desktop standard, according to Jeff Glover, vice president and manager of KeyCorp's desktop systems group.

Andre Mendes, chief technology integration officer at Public Broadcasting Service in Alexandria, Va., said he sees no need to move to XP, since Windows 2000 has been "unbelievably reliable" on his organization's 800 desktops. Its remote configuration and management features have also let him cut his help desk staff from five to two people, Mendes said.

By CAROL SLIWA

sint@x · Sep 18, 2002, 02:54 AM

Wish my company would switch to Win2k or XP. My laptop still has NT and my wireless nick won't work in it.

Darksider · Sep 18, 2002, 05:56 AM

That article speaks the truth. Where I work, Win2k is what is used on the new PC rollouts. In a corporate environment, I don't really see the benefit of using XP over 2k.

SilentSnipeR · Sep 18, 2002, 04:08 PM

Don't know why bussinesses would use XP, it's full of stuff they'll never use. WIn2k is a good solid platform for doing work.

Louie6666 · Sep 18, 2002, 04:30 PM

I even saw the company I work for take copies of XP off, our newly delivered P4's & put NT4 on! They have neither the time or the inclination to roll out xp, they will not change untill the apps we use demand it....There again our network administrator still thinks a 75meg swap file is adequate(I'm really fed up with out of VM messages) I wish my company would do a case study into productivity using NT4 & XP as I'm sure using XP I wouldn't experience half the BSOD I currently do using NT4!

Yemble · Sep 18, 2002, 05:53 PM

What you really need to appreciate is, that from a Corporate PC Services point of view, most of its user base are stupid (ie. if you give tham a toy with lots of bells and whistles on it, then they will inevitably break bits off it). To this end, the practice of keeping it simple really pays dividends in terms of avoiding lots of annoying support calls.

Basically, you build and perfect a rock solid generic image of an NT4 box with severe access restraints to the O/S and its associated components. The idea is to make it as idiot proof as possible. Then you use this image as a base for all of those hundreds of workstations that require building.

As new hardware gets delivered through the warehouse door, you migrate your old image to the new hardware, save it and off you go again, etc. etc.

This is very easy with NT4 and also reasonably so with Win2000. XP with WPA.... now that's a different kettle of fish altogether! Perhaps if M$ abandoned WPA, more corporate PC Services departments would recommend it!!!

Jeff · Sep 19, 2002, 12:08 AM

My company uses Win2K on pretty much all the machines except for the trainees, they use WinMe (For some strange reason

)

mr pinky · Sep 23, 2002, 12:07 AM

pple have wised up to the fact that you do'nt have to upgrade your o/s all of the time, if it works well why bother getting the latest ms bugfest just because bg says so.
ms are diverting into everything non- os/ because they knew they ca'nt fool pple year in year out relying on windows to keep on raking in profits at past rates,even a slight dip in profits scares the hell out of them.

Shaith · Sep 23, 2002, 01:23 AM

Justification for switching to XP is simple:

It just plain runs better.

Properly configured, XP doesn't BSOD ever. Can't say that for Win2K, and certainly cannot say it about NT4. However, MS didn't really think ahead about XP Pro for a corporate environment, as there's a ton of useless crap as far as corporate IT departments are concerned. Bob in accounting doesn't need to be able to edit movies. He needs a damn good stable calculator with the ability to send data to a server, beyond that he doesn't need the rest of it.

What they NEED is a stripped down XP, devoid of the "user niceties" - streamlined, fast, low memory consumption...

sint@x · Sep 23, 2002, 02:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by shaith
Justification for switching to XP is simple:

It just plain runs better.

Properly configured, XP doesn't BSOD ever. Can't say that for Win2K, and certainly cannot say it about NT4. However, MS didn't really think ahead about XP Pro for a corporate environment, as there's a ton of useless crap as far as corporate IT departments are concerned. Bob in accounting doesn't need to be able to edit movies. He needs a damn good stable calculator with the ability to send data to a server, beyond that he doesn't need the rest of it.

What they NEED is a stripped down XP, devoid of the "user niceties" - streamlined, fast, low memory consumption...

Couldn't agree with you more! Pro version should be the home version and a stripped down pro, as you decribed, should have been released for corporations. Bet you there wouldn't be as many people with corp if they had released it that way!

Sep 17, 2002, 07:26 PM	#1
Zardon DriverHeaven Founder Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 32,480 Rep Power: 179	Windows XP Slow to Gain Foothold Consumers may be buying into Windows XP on new PCs, but many corporate users are still putting off plans to migrate to Microsoft Corp.'s nearly one-year-old desktop operating system. Even last week's release of the first service pack of bug fixes for XP - typically a signal for broader corporate adoption of Windows operating systems - was shrugged off by several IT managers. A Computerworld poll of 25 Windows users in a wide range of industries found only four companies that are currently rolling out XP across their operations and four more that plan to start migrations in the coming months. Some users who are holding back on XP cited cost, the lack of a pressing business need and recent Windows 2000 rollouts as factors in their decisions. "We have not moved to XP, and we have no plans to. As far as I am concerned, this is an upgrade that offers nothing to a business customer," said Pat Enright, CIO at Clark Retail Enterprises Inc., a convenience store chain in Oak Brook, Ill. In particular, users that either have completed Windows 2000 projects or are now rolling it out said they see no reason to jump to Windows XP, which they view as an incremental release over Win 2k. "The cost is very high to [upgrade], and there's not a lot of perceived value," said Rick Waugh, a technology architect at Telus Corp. in Burnaby, British Columbia. Jim Cullinan, a lead product manager for Windows, said Microsoft is focusing on communicating the benefits of Windows XP to companies still running Windows NT, Windows 98 and Windows 95. Those benefits include improved stability and enhanced wireless and security management features, he said. "Most enterprise customers still have held to the tradition of waiting until Service Pack 1 to even look at it," Cullinan said. "IT spending has dried up, and it looks a little bit tighter. But IT spending should be on the rise in the coming months. We feel really good about where Windows XP is." An April poll of 225 CIOs by Morgan Stanley showed that 60% of respondents had no plans to roll out Windows XP. That view has changed little since then, according to many of the IT pros interviewed by Computerworld last week. more details in the forum

Sep 18, 2002, 04:30 PM	#6
Louie6666 Just One Sick-Lizard Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Bristol, UK Posts: 501 Rep Power: 0	XP!! I even saw the company I work for take copies of XP off, our newly delivered P4's & put NT4 on! They have neither the time or the inclination to roll out xp, they will not change untill the apps we use demand it....There again our network administrator still thinks a 75meg swap file is adequate(I'm really fed up with out of VM messages) I wish my company would do a case study into productivity using NT4 & XP as I'm sure using XP I wouldn't experience half the BSOD I currently do using NT4! __________________

Sep 18, 2002, 05:53 PM	#7
Yemble DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Yorkshire, By Gum! Posts: 46 Rep Power: 0	Idiot Users What you really need to appreciate is, that from a Corporate PC Services point of view, most of its user base are stupid (ie. if you give tham a toy with lots of bells and whistles on it, then they will inevitably break bits off it). To this end, the practice of keeping it simple really pays dividends in terms of avoiding lots of annoying support calls. Basically, you build and perfect a rock solid generic image of an NT4 box with severe access restraints to the O/S and its associated components. The idea is to make it as idiot proof as possible. Then you use this image as a base for all of those hundreds of workstations that require building. As new hardware gets delivered through the warehouse door, you migrate your old image to the new hardware, save it and off you go again, etc. etc. This is very easy with NT4 and also reasonably so with Win2000. XP with WPA.... now that's a different kettle of fish altogether! Perhaps if M$ abandoned WPA, more corporate PC Services departments would recommend it!!! __________________ See all, hear all, say nowt. Eat all, sup all, pay nowt. And if tha does owt for nowt, alus do it for thisen.

Sep 19, 2002, 12:08 AM	#8
Jeff Yarr... I be blind! Join Date: May 2002 Location: Calgary, Canada Posts: 3,191 Rep Power: 80	My company uses Win2K on pretty much all the machines except for the trainees, they use WinMe (For some strange reason ) __________________

Sep 23, 2002, 12:07 AM	#9
mr pinky DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: blighty/uk Posts: 17 Rep Power: 0	pple have wised up to the fact that you do'nt have to upgrade your o/s all of the time, if it works well why bother getting the latest ms bugfest just because bg says so. ms are diverting into everything non- os/ because they knew they ca'nt fool pple year in year out relying on windows to keep on raking in profits at past rates,even a slight dip in profits scares the hell out of them. __________________ elvis lives , he works in a chip shop .

Sep 17, 2002, 07:27 PM	Thread Starter #2
Zardon DriverHeaven Founder Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 32,480 Rep Power: 179	But Bill Lewkowski, CIO at Metropolitan Health in Grand Rapids, Mich., saw a clear need for XP. Lewkowski said the vendors that make the applications his company runs will no longer be supporting Windows 95. "Since we held off on Windows 2000 for a while, we decided we might as well jump to the new version," he said. Navigant International Inc., a travel services firm in Englewood, Colo., is in the same boat. "Some of our critical software vendors skipped formal Windows 2000 support and leapfrogged from Windows 98 to Windows XP," said Navigant CIO Neville Teagarden. But more than half of the 25 companies surveyed last week said a majority of their end users still run Windows NT, Windows 98 or Windows 95. "We've been driven by what our vendors will support. So far, they all support Windows 98, so we stay with 98," said Bill Finefield, CIO at the Navy Exchange Service Command in Virginia Beach, Va. Large companies face bigger obstacles to upgrading because of the sheer volume of PCs involved. KeyCorp, a Cleveland-based financial services firm, has migrated 11,000 of its PC users to Windows 2000, with hopes of moving its 8,000 Windows NT 4.0 users and 1,500 Windows 95 users by the end of 2003. The company has no plans to change its decision to make Windows 2000 its corporate desktop standard, according to Jeff Glover, vice president and manager of KeyCorp's desktop systems group. Andre Mendes, chief technology integration officer at Public Broadcasting Service in Alexandria, Va., said he sees no need to move to XP, since Windows 2000 has been "unbelievably reliable" on his organization's 800 desktops. Its remote configuration and management features have also let him cut his help desk staff from five to two people, Mendes said. By CAROL SLIWA

Sep 18, 2002, 02:54 AM	#3
sint@x DriverHeaven Lover Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Somewhere in world of 1's and 0's Posts: 172 Rep Power: 0	Wish my company would switch to Win2k or XP. My laptop still has NT and my wireless nick won't work in it.

Sep 18, 2002, 05:56 AM	#4
Darksider I Play NWN and UT2003 Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 202 Rep Power: 0	That article speaks the truth. Where I work, Win2k is what is used on the new PC rollouts. In a corporate environment, I don't really see the benefit of using XP over 2k.

Sep 18, 2002, 04:08 PM	#5
SilentSnipeR DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 50 Rep Power: 0	Don't know why bussinesses would use XP, it's full of stuff they'll never use. WIn2k is a good solid platform for doing work.

Sep 23, 2002, 01:23 AM	#10
Shaith HardwareHeaven Senior Member Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 916 Rep Power: 0	Justification for switching to XP is simple: It just plain runs better. Properly configured, XP doesn't BSOD ever. Can't say that for Win2K, and certainly cannot say it about NT4. However, MS didn't really think ahead about XP Pro for a corporate environment, as there's a ton of useless crap as far as corporate IT departments are concerned. Bob in accounting doesn't need to be able to edit movies. He needs a damn good stable calculator with the ability to send data to a server, beyond that he doesn't need the rest of it. What they NEED is a stripped down XP, devoid of the "user niceties" - streamlined, fast, low memory consumption...