Who is the target for Vista Desktop PC's ? ( vs XP desktops)

[- Bobb -]

With this PC I'm on, all the things that I'm trying to do are things that I
suspect that I'll be doing in PC setups etc for new installs on existing
PC's and so far it's very tedious. I understand that new systems will ship
with only Vista and won't need to do this, but I hope the code writers
realize that a lot of folks (especially businesses) will want to dual-boot
( until maybe SP1 ?) before they migrate.

Setting up displays, bootup paths, device drivers are mostly what I foresee
as initial issues. Some folks won't go unless their "certain app or hardware
" works flawlessly. And if it's challenge for them to find Device Manager
or even know what driver it's having a problem with ( like my Unknown
device ), I can see that a lot of my customers would say - "nevermind". I
know it's early but my event log has a lot of errors that I don't know what
they mean (incomplete event text).

What do you think ? Is Vista being built / coming at it from the end-users
POV ? servers POV ? or a code-writers POV ? I know they're gonna have 6-7
flavors of Vista - that's not my question. It's more like " Why spend all
this money ? " from Microsoft's and from the buyer's POV. What does the
consumer get in the new version - how do I sell him on it - tease him now
with "what's coming" ? Not cosmetics like Sidebars ... Aero glass - 'Ooo'
for 5 seconds then the thrill is gone.

Also, what's gonna be " the big app" that'll get the masses to Vista ?
Multimedia ? What will VIsta do that "old Windows" won't. I've been to :

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/features/default.mspx

and really not a lot listed. What do you folks see as "really selling Vista"
?


Bobb

 

[Kevin John Panzke]

You might find that Windows Vista Beta 2 and Windows Server Code Name Long
Horn Beta 2 are Light Years Ahead of Windows Vista Build 5308 CTP (which I
assume that you are a Microsoft TechNet Plus Subscriber, or else you would
already be running Beta 2 by now, if you had signed up for an MSDN Operating
Systems Level Subscription, instead of your Microsoft TechNet Plus
Subscription, just FYI.)

 

[Henry]

Hey the only people I think would want it might be the xbox crowd, it looks
like a game console to me, I don't believe many business will want to spend
money on this, look how many are still using windows 2000, and don't like
xp, what do you think they will think of this, looks to me like Linux will
win more business customers over this.

 

[AMDX2]

MS will say to get it for security. There really isn't anything in Vista
right now that is a killer app etc. Nothing. 2000 to XP is different cus XP
is made more for gaming then 2000 is. Vista though doesn't now nor will it
when it's out have anything over XP that will be big. There's only
disadvantages to getting it I think. Learning curve, higher pc specs needed,
problems like crazy uintill it's been out a while and there's patches for it
and new drivers etc. It's going to take a while for apps to be re written
for it i think.

I'll get it cus I like it and can buy it way cheap using the MS store. I
don't mind the learning curve that much, but I do. I'll make sure tho before
I put it on main pc for good that everything is backed up before hand and I
give it say 2 weeks to try it before having it as the main OS. XP if it does
what you want then there's nothing to get Vista for what so ever.

I don't think anyone will release an OS that you just have to have it. Not
Apple nor MS. If there's a new OS release that has something killer??? I am
guessing 10 years or so with how long MS is between releases. Apple probably
5-10 years.

The one thing that does have the potential is Media Center stuff. Vista will
have this in one of the flavors. If they can make it look good on any
standard and HD tv with being able to read text clearly without any
problems, opening programs and using them, folders, copying files etc,
playing games, music and movies remotely in your couch then in my opinion
that will be the killer gotta have it thing. Currently tho I don't know if
the OS looks good enough to use the whole OS for. Typing docs, spreadsheets,
surfing the web etc. If Vista can look good enough to use on a tv for all of
Vista then I'm going to do that in a heart beat. To me Media Center stuff
will be the killer app. But only if you can do everything that you can do
using a pc monitor. Read everything clear etc.

 

[Gerry Hickman]

Hi Bobb,

Here's my take on it from an "Enterprise" point of view.

1. We certainly won't be doing any "dual booting", that would mean
double the maintenance, double the patching and having to boot into a
different o/s every time we updated something (e.g. Adobe 7.0.5 -> 7.0.7
etc etc). We'll be rolling up all device drivers and creating a "one
button" scripted network install that can be SP'd later. We then test
Active Directory, Group Policy Objects, Logon Scripts, Roaming Profiles
(both ways), NTUSER.DAT and then do an inventory of all program and o/s
DLLs. Once that done, we simply roll it out and that's the end of it.
The only dual boot option we'd consider is in a disaster recovery
context where we'd roll back to the old o/s and then delete the Vista
partition keeping only the boot loader, but we'd never try to run both.

2. In terms of an o/s suitable for big business, I'd say Win2k or Linux
is the ultimate right now. XP and Vista are both backward steps because
everything is too bloated and there's too much hand holding and too many
"home user" features getting in the way. There are also too many
background processes running, most of which are only useful for a
stand-alone PC (not a network).

3. BUT, we will probably still install Vista. It's kind of political so
we can say "hey look we're all up to date". The fact most of our users
will hate the new UI elements seems to be irrelevant. It's also to do
with "having the same as everyone else" so that new staff can just sit
down and don't need any training. It's also to do with making sure we
have something that can work with the latest hardware.

 

[- Bobb -]

Comments inline:

Hi Bobb,

Here's my take on it from an "Enterprise" point of view.

1. We certainly won't be doing any "dual booting", that would mean double
the maintenance, double the patching and having to boot into a different
o/s every time we updated something (e.g. Adobe 7.0.5 -> 7.0.7 etc etc).
We'll be rolling up all device drivers and creating a "one button"
scripted network install that can be SP'd later. We then test Active
Directory, Group Policy Objects, Logon Scripts, Roaming Profiles (both
ways), NTUSER.DAT and then do an inventory of all program and o/s DLLs.
Once that done, we simply roll it out and that's the end of it. The only
dual boot option we'd consider is in a disaster recovery context where
we'd roll back to the old o/s and then delete the Vista partition keeping
only the boot loader, but we'd never try to run both.

Agrred - dual boot only for home / small shops who can't afford a second
server

2. In terms of an o/s suitable for big business, I'd say Win2k or Linux is
the ultimate right now. XP and Vista are both backward steps because
everything is too bloated and there's too much hand holding and too many
"home user" features getting in the way. There are also too many
background processes running, most of which are only useful for a
stand-alone PC (not a network).

Precisely . This is what " I don't get". SOMEONE at MSFT is making big
decisions based on ... WHAT exactly ??

3. BUT, we will probably still install Vista. It's kind of political so we
can say "hey look we're all up to date". The fact most of our users will
hate the new UI elements seems to be irrelevant. It's also to do with
"having the same as everyone else" so that new staff can just sit down and
don't need any training.

But they will : Helpdesk calls " How do I change my screen settings to have
my dog as the background picture?" etc will cost a lot to the migraters.

It's also to do with making sure we have something that can work with the
latest hardware.

True. But only if the pricing is comparable - right ? You wouldn't pay an
additional $100 per license - nor will others. The hw folks COULD write
drivers for Win2k, XP just fine. I think the only people that will really "
want it" are retail users which is only ~ 5-10% of MSFT's income. Hmmmm
..... So far, I don't have a good reason to recommend to my smallish
businesses to buy into it.

I'd say that the reason for Vista is that MSFT really DOES need a new server
( to generate revenue from all the LIVE bells and whistles) ) and they're
just gonna use THAT to come up with Vista. SO it's not that there's a retail
need, just that " if we create it they will come" (since it will be packaged
with the next 40 million new PC's).

Bobb

 

[Gerry Hickman]

Hi Bobb,

Precisely . This is what " I don't get". SOMEONE at MSFT is making big
decisions based on ... WHAT exactly ??

Good question, I have some theories, but I don't know.

I noticed pre-launch Win2k, a massive pile of well-written white
papaers, tools and SDKs landed on my desk from Microsoft. Think AD
infrastructure and enterprise-grade change and configuration management,
that kind of thing. At that point, I was telling everyone to migrate
from UNIX to Windows. The strategy was well planned, well thought out,
and there was so much free stuff too. For me, it was Windows all the way.

Shortly after, Gates moved aside and Balmer took over. At that point,
the ResKits vanished, white papers were replaced with holiday brochures,
technical language was removed from the website and we were given the
"teddy bear" style XP desktop, everyone with default Admin rights and
everything designed to run locally with massive caches. The focus was
all about playing music and watching movies (that you couldn't actually
watch because they were locked with DRM).

I think what happened was that Microsoft decided that "business was
boring" and the exciting stuff (like DRM locked WMV files and sidebars
with gadgets) were the way forward. Probably also hoping to "partner up"
with the big media houses like Time-Warner and Sony. In short there was
a lot more day by day revenue in streaming DRM locked media than
increasing the maximum file system path length or fixing bugs in the LSA
or SCHANNEL.

To me, Vista is more of the same. All I can do is disable as many
background services as possible, turn off all the caches, disable all
the constant downloading, set it to classic view with no Aero and just
hope we get a decent Windows Explorer before they release it.

True. But only if the pricing is comparable - right ? You wouldn't pay
an additional $100 per license - nor will others. The hw folks COULD
write drivers for Win2k, XP just fine. I think the only people that will
really " want it" are retail users

The way I see it, is that everyone will be FORCED to have it whether
they want it or not. Soon, Dell will only offer PCs with Vista and
suppliers will NOT be allowed to sell copies of XP anymore.

Amazingly, I have managed to avoid XP completely! When we get our Dell
PCs I first run FDISK and then put a super fast custom Win2k build on
them. It goes like a rocket on the latest hardware with some driver
tweaks, but I'm not planning to do this again, skipping one o/s is good,
but not two. It's a shame in a way because all our users will suddenly
have slower PCs because of Vista's bloat.

 

[Andreas Masur [MVP]]

On Sat, 27 May 2006 21:28:37 +0100, Gerry Hickman wrote:

Hi Gerry,

[...]

To me, Vista is more of the same. All I can do is disable as many
background services as possible, turn off all the caches, disable all
the constant downloading, set it to classic view with no Aero and just
hope we get a decent Windows Explorer before they release it.

This is so true...we had the same experience with XP. A regular
installation affected the timing of our applications badly. We had to
spent many, many hours to find all the settings and services etc. that
were that time-consuming. I expect it too be worse with Vista.

Sadly, they seem to forget about the real use of the fancy stuff they put
in the operating system in a business environment. My system is put in a
closed cabinet...no display..no one most-likely ever looking at it. I
don't need any aero nor anything else there. Instead of probably having a
small business edition that skips these things, I have to spent hours to
first find the settings and then disables them.

To us, this might become an even more push into the *nix
world...unfortunately the customer wants to have Windows since they know
it for several years (again...our systems are locked up in a cabinet... )

The way I see it, is that everyone will be FORCED to have it whether
they want it or not. Soon, Dell will only offer PCs with Vista and
suppliers will NOT be allowed to sell copies of XP anymore.

That is sadly true...

Amazingly, I have managed to avoid XP completely! When we get our Dell
PCs I first run FDISK and then put a super fast custom Win2k build on
them. It goes like a rocket on the latest hardware with some driver
tweaks, but I'm not planning to do this again, skipping one o/s is good,
but not two. It's a shame in a way because all our users will suddenly
have slower PCs because of Vista's bloat.

I actually have skipped XP as well at home so far. I am working with it on
my laptop though, since I didn't bother to do a custom install and trying
to get all the manufactorer supplied software for managing the laptop back
onto a different install.

Right now, based on the regular timeframe I need to buy a new laptop.
However, I am kind of hesitating whether I should wait for a Vista one
next year instead...since I know I have to deal with it anyway since our
customer wants to have the latest disco-flashing, resource-hogging
operating system.

Ciao, Andreas

 

[- Bobb -]

The way I see it, is that everyone will be FORCED to have it whether
they want it or not. Soon, Dell will only offer PCs with Vista and
suppliers will NOT be allowed to sell copies of XP anymore.

That's true - like XP: new boxes = new OS. But MS would have had that
sale with XP also. But I see no "selling point" for existing users to
run to BestBuy for the " Vista upgrade in a box" for $149. ( Looking at
it now from a stockholder's view) Xp came along at the same time as
DVD-RW's etc and I think a lot 'non-server' sales came about due to the
W2K box 'getting old' AND users getting the latest hardware. Rather than
pay for the software upgrade, I bought a Compaq box at Circuit City for
$299 with a CDRW , onboard multimedia, bought a DVD for it etc . For
Vista, I don't see the need for consumers to do either ( hw or sw
upgrade). Vista won't let them do anything that they can't already do. I
think a lot of corporate folks will do as Andreas - make an XP image for
the new hw rather than supporting 2 OS'es - especially for the mobile
workforce. No need for sidebars, aero etc. So all this work at MS would
be for nothing (from a return on investment viewpoint).

Bobb

On Sat, 27 May 2006 21:28:37 +0100, Gerry Hickman wrote:

Hi Gerry,

[...]

To me, Vista is more of the same. All I can do is disable as many
background services as possible, turn off all the caches, disable all
the constant downloading, set it to classic view with no Aero and
just
hope we get a decent Windows Explorer before they release it.

This is so true...we had the same experience with XP. A regular
installation affected the timing of our applications badly. We had to
spent many, many hours to find all the settings and services etc. that
were that time-consuming. I expect it too be worse with Vista.

Sadly, they seem to forget about the real use of the fancy stuff they
put
in the operating system in a business environment. My system is put in
a
closed cabinet...no display..no one most-likely ever looking at it. I
don't need any aero nor anything else there. Instead of probably
having a
small business edition that skips these things, I have to spent hours
to
first find the settings and then disables them.

To us, this might become an even more push into the *nix
world...unfortunately the customer wants to have Windows since they
know
it for several years (again...our systems are locked up in a
cabinet... )

The way I see it, is that everyone will be FORCED to have it whether
they want it or not. Soon, Dell will only offer PCs with Vista and
suppliers will NOT be allowed to sell copies of XP anymore.

That is sadly true...

Amazingly, I have managed to avoid XP completely! When we get our
Dell
PCs I first run FDISK and then put a super fast custom Win2k build on
them. It goes like a rocket on the latest hardware with some driver
tweaks, but I'm not planning to do this again, skipping one o/s is
good,
but not two. It's a shame in a way because all our users will
suddenly
have slower PCs because of Vista's bloat.

I actually have skipped XP as well at home so far. I am working with
it on
my laptop though, since I didn't bother to do a custom install and
trying
to get all the manufactorer supplied software for managing the laptop
back
onto a different install.

Right now, based on the regular timeframe I need to buy a new laptop.
However, I am kind of hesitating whether I should wait for a Vista one
next year instead...since I know I have to deal with it anyway since
our
customer wants to have the latest disco-flashing, resource-hogging
operating system.

Ciao, Andreas