Asus CEO doubts business will upgrade pcs for win7

[saaya]

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1533799/intel-flog-million-lynnfields

looks like like asus def has a better idea of whats going on that intels ceo :D
intel recently predicted lots of business would upgrade their pcs for windows7... which was wishful thinking for sure :D

[labs23]

At this time of economic instability, companies spending less, is going to be obvious.

[saaya]

At this time of economic instability, companies spending less, is going to be obvious.
tell that to intels ceo :D oh wait, hes busy polishing his jaguar collection ^^

[skinnee]

I work for a company with 60,000 global employees, every client machine (desktop or laptop) and 90% of the servers are on a 3 year lease cycle. We won't be ramping up anything, just continue the way we've been doing it.

However, we are looking at Win 7 now since Vista was not worth the deployment effort and MS is all but requireing we move from XP.

[saaya]

I work for a company with 60,000 global employees, every client machine (desktop or laptop) and 90% of the servers are on a 3 year lease cycle. We won't be ramping up anything, just continue the way we've been doing it.

However, we are looking at Win 7 now since Vista was not worth the deployment effort and MS is all but requireing we move from XP.
its a shame there is no third party company providing service and updates for xp... that would be quite a business opportunity i think... cause for businesses, who really needs more than xp?

[Chickenfeed]

cause for businesses, who really needs more than xp?

Microsoft, they want more money from upgrades and support :p:

I'm not surprised by his stance though. Its more realistic than Intel's. Of course it is in Intel's best interest to say so even though it's more than likely false. They want to deplete their LGA775 stock as well as move LGA1566.

[iTravis]

It takes lot of time and efforts for one company to move from one OS to another and we're not even talking about cost. But I'm sure down the road if Windows 7 can live up to its hype then it's just a matter of time before we see they vanish XP and Vista.

[Dragy2k]

It takes lot of time and efforts for one company to move from one OS to another and we're not even talking about cost. But I'm sure down the road if Windows 7 can live up to its hype then it's just a matter of time before we see they vanish XP and Vista.

like stopping support for msn messenger that nearly everyone has on there machine , forcing them to upgrade claiming virus vulnerability ....i like to have to choice.
i believe trillian is affected too ?

[Aielman]

I work for a company with 60,000 global employees, every client machine (desktop or laptop) and 90% of the servers are on a 3 year lease cycle. We won't be ramping up anything, just continue the way we've been doing it.

However, we are looking at Win 7 now since Vista was not worth the deployment effort and MS is all but requireing we move from XP.

We're much the same here. The enterprise I help manage has 46k desktop/laptops deployed on a 5 year refresh, and the release of Windows 7 won't drive any more purchases than we already make.

However...we skipped Vista, and will likely begin to deploy Windows 7 within 6 months of release with the goal of complete conversion within 18 months of release.

We also plan to increase our client base by at least 17k computers in the next year (large school system going to 3 to 1 from 5 to 1 ratio) and they will all be Windows 7, if only because we don't want to downgrade new purchases.

peace,
Aielman

[saaya]

why, after a decade, is there still no god-damn linux based xp lookalike that works like xp, has propper driver support and can do almost everything xp can do? instead all the linux distros try new and cool stuff but nobody really cares... most people are used to windows, so why do they try to reinvent the wheel over and over instead of just using the same menu structure as xp? kinda like firefox for expanded to the whole os?

linux could have grown so much in the vista years, and even now with wi7 out theres a lot of potential... but they dont even seem to try to grow the user base, bah :/ no wonder ms holds a strong grip on the us market and forces people to upgrade to their new handcuffs they will then only be relieved from to try on the latest and greatest newer handcuffs they came up with... :D

[inCore]

We're much the same here. The enterprise I help manage has 46k desktop/laptops deployed on a 5 year refresh, and the release of Windows 7 won't drive any more purchases than we already make.

However...we skipped Vista, and will likely begin to deploy Windows 7 within 6 months of release with the goal of complete conversion within 18 months of release.

We also plan to increase our client base by at least 17k computers in the next year (large school system going to 3 to 1 from 5 to 1 ratio) and they will all be Windows 7, if only because we don't want to downgrade new purchases.

peace,
Aielman

That's exactly what I was going to point out. Windows 7 has a bigger chance to be succesful because Vista sucked so hard.


why, after a decade, is there still no god-damn linux based xp lookalike that works like xp, has propper driver support and can do almost everything xp can do? instead all the linux distros try new and cool stuff but nobody really cares... most people are used to windows, so why do they try to reinvent the wheel over and over instead of just using the same menu structure as xp? kinda like firefox for expanded to the whole os?

linux could have grown so much in the vista years, and even now with wi7 out theres a lot of potential... but they dont even seem to try to grow the user base, bah :/ no wonder ms holds a strong grip on the us market and forces people to upgrade to their new handcuffs they will then only be relieved from to try on the latest and greatest newer handcuffs they came up with... :D

Exactly. I keep hearing all of this "yes, but you get used to the text commands and there are seriously not that many to learn" and I'd like to point out that I don't give a damn. With Windows you need no text commands. In Linux you do. To hell with Linux.





At least until they can make it act like Windows.

[reasons]

why, after a decade, is there still no god-damn linux based xp lookalike that works like xp, has propper driver support and can do almost everything xp can do? instead all the linux distros try new and cool stuff but nobody really cares... most people are used to windows, so why do they try to reinvent the wheel over and over instead of just using the same menu structure as xp? kinda like firefox for expanded to the whole os?

linux could have grown so much in the vista years, and even now with wi7 out theres a lot of potential... but they dont even seem to try to grow the user base, bah :/ no wonder ms holds a strong grip on the us market and forces people to upgrade to their new handcuffs they will then only be relieved from to try on the latest and greatest newer handcuffs they came up with... :D
The quote, "linux is not windows" comes to mind. I understand that a look alike would be awesome, and they do exist. Look up USP (or some three letter acronym) which mimics the start panel.



Exactly. I keep hearing all of this "yes, but you get used to the text commands and there are seriously not that many to learn" and I'd like to point out that I don't give a damn. With Windows you need no text commands. In Linux you do. To hell with Linux.



At least until they can make it act like Windows.
I know plenty of Ubuntu users who have never touched a terminal. I don't understand why people wouldn't want to but that is just me. :p:

[saaya]

The quote, "linux is not windows" comes to mind. I understand that a look alike would be awesome, and they do exist. Look up USP (or some three letter acronym) which mimics the start panel.
do you know why windows has been so sucessful? cause it has the most user friendly interface... im not saying its user friendly, but its the most user friendly... or lets say one of the most user friendly ones... and you know what? they copied it from apple...

there, everybody knows it... and you know what? nobody cares! then whats up with linux people not wanting to copy windows? thats what everybody wants! and its not copying windows, its doing things in a way everybody understands, and not in a way only linux people understand...

its as if bycicle driving hippies are inventing hybrid and electric cars and want everybody to use them, but instead of a car seat there are bycicle seats inside... wtf?
thats what THEY are used to, but if they honestly want normal people to ever touch those things they gotta get them a comfy car seat and stearting wheel they are used to... there are geniuses out there doing amazing things coding wise for linux, but they cant get something simple and obvious as this done... its insane :lol:

how hard can it be to beat windows xp in compatibility and support? and especially at the price MS is charging for it!

[reasons]

I don't want to turn this into a linux vs windows thread so I'll leave it after this post.

User friendly is all POV. Most people grew up with windows thus it makes sense to them. Can't teach an old dog new tricks. Should an OS have to cater to that? Not in my opinion (because that's all any of this is). I don't understand what is so hard about learning a new user interface. Default gnome is simple enough, it has a menu that says "applications, places, system". If that isn't intuitive I don't know what is. *Insert press start to shutdown thing here*.

The hippie thing is moot point. The car has always had seats and a bike has bike seats. Linux has been around long enough (early 1990s) and the unix it is hacked from was one of the first, if not the first, main OS of CS history.

How hard can it be to beat compatibility? You reverse engineer a driver because the manufacturer doesn't want to release code for it or what you need to code one up yourself. A great example is FreeBSD and nvidia for amd64. They've spent years trying to get 3D for those users, no dice. Just now they have a kernel nvidia supports and are getting a driver. Compatibility is just as much up to the maker as it is to the user.

/linux vs windows

On topic:
For an average office I don't really see the need to upgrade anything OS or hardware wise. A C2Duo and XP will get most work and home tasks done just fine. People only buy more because they are enthusiasts and have the money. A business doesn't waste money and defiantly aren't enthusiasts.

[saaya]

why should people learn a new way to do things? even if its simple... why?
many businesses and people dont upgrade office cause the small changes done from one version to another are a too big annoyance for them already!
and one doesnt exclude the other, its not like an os has to have only one gui to begin with... there are many hacks to make win look like osx or modify the gui... and linux can do the same... all im saying is, there should be an option to have a win like gui in ubuntu or another distribution, only then will linux ever be considered a propper alternative...

and to get back on topic :D
yes, totally agree, dont see why people would want new hw or a new os at WORK... for home use, sure...
for work, maybe upgrade mem from 2gb to 4gb, and maybe toss in a quad if somebody does media related work... and maybe an ssd... and a bigger or secondary monitor... but upgrade to 1156 or 1366? and win7? im sure there are people who can make of an 8 thread+ system at work... but i think they are on a quad or dual quad already and will rather wait and go for a dual nehalem system and have the full 16thread goodness... and how many people are those? one in 1000? one in 10.000?

[Kingcarcas]

In other news the sky is blue?

[Salavat23]

In other news the sky is blue?

Not at night.:D