Microsoft to Stop Selling XP June 30, Should we use Vista?

[bloomlight]

Microsoft announced that June 30 is the cut-off date for selling Windows XP. Currently, all of our PCs are running Win XP pro over a LAN. If need to buy new PCs after June 30, Vista will be the only choice. How does Vista work with business network?

Also, we have a small group of users using remote access from their home computers. They may be forced to get Vista when buying new PCs. With majority of PCs running XP and some PCs using Vista on the same network, will this be a problem?

Thanks in advance.

 

[acewarlock]

I know a company that still run's it's entire company finaince Dept on DOS because there software was written in DOS and it works for them, so why change?




This is a Signature and not part of the answer, it appears on every reply.

This is an Analogy so don't take it personally as some have.

Why change the engine if all you need is to change the spark plugs.

 

[cdogg]

C'mon, really? Not one Windows or Mac computer in the whole department?

I'd find that hard to believe...

We all understand the benefits of getting the most out of each purchase, but to never upgrade? It would have to be a small environment and internal application that doesn't depend at all on outside influences (i.e. fast-changing marketplace, customer interface, security, etc.)


~cdogg
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Einstein
[tab][navy]For posting policies, click [/navy]here.

 

[1gbram]

Personly i think XP's a very accessabe OS and I will keep it for a long as i can (possibly till after Vista). Many people say people who hate vista are just scared,and many we were at first, but the truth is that it's slow, clumbersome, very un -accsesable and a pain in the bum if you need to do anything admin. It's very demanding on he hardware ( vista alone needs 2 Gb of ram, i use1 Gb for XP and its very fast) and you have to have the patiance of a snail to use it effectivly. I'v also noticed that XP is extremly 'indrusuctable', many times it has completely gone, nd within 30 mins of good thinking it's back up and runing with all files ect. restored.

 

[acewarlock]

The DOS PC's are completly insolated from there other PC's that do run Win98 and some WinXP. Accounting is just numbers and doesn't change and has nothing to do with other Departments.




This is a Signature and not part of the answer, it appears on every reply.

This is an Analogy so don't take it personally as some have.

Why change the engine if all you need is to change the spark plugs.

 

[sggaunt]

I waited until Win98 was stable before I switched from DOS

Sorry. I live in the UK.

What I meant was that W98 never got to be stable (In my opinion)
i.e you must be still using DOS.

Many accounts packages hung onto DOS for a long time because of a mistrust of Windows stability, but I believe this is changing now.
The one we use migrated to Windows about 5 years ago.




Steve: N.M.N.F.
If something is popular, it must be wrong: Mark Twain

 

[wahnula]

Another Personal Update

Win XP migration has been going splendidly, bought the XP SP1 version (cheaper) and plugged in SP3 via flash drive...smooth and quick! So far my one-man (me!) IT department has upgraded (3) PCs from Win2K and working on the fourth.

Tony

Users helping Users...

 

[harebrain]

The DOS PC's are completly insolated from there other PC's that do run Win98 and some WinXP. Accounting is just numbers and doesn't change and has nothing to do with other Departments.

And just what do they do about the date? IIRC, DOS suffered the Y2K meltdown. That killed a lot of software where I worked.

 

[danomac]

I don't know about MS-DOS, but DR-DOS was Y2K compliant. It would even correct a BIOS that had issues.

 

[eyec]

why do Vista when W7 will be here in 2010?

http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/06/24/2358210&from=rss

 

[eyec]

with all of the movement going on within MS, i think Vista is going to be the new age Windows ME!

http://www.engadget.com/2008/06/24/microsoft-promises-to-support-windows-xp-until-2014/

 

[MasterRacker]

The media consensus, at least, does seem to be saying the MS is trying to fast track Windows 7 enough that many of us could skip Vista.

It'll be interesting to watch this one play out. ME was never meant for the business world so the impact is different. UAC in Vista is creating havoc with older commercial apps where upgrading may not even be an option due to the vendor/developer being out of business. And that's just one corporate headache.

_____
Jeff
[small][purple]It's never too early to begin preparing for [/purple]International Talk Like a Pirate Day
"The software I buy sucks, The software I write sucks. It's time to give up and have a beer..." - Me[/small]

 

[eyec]

did'nt mean to imply the ME was for business, just that it stunk

 

[EdwardMartinIII]

Man, I sure do miss WinCE.

And what a perfect name.

Edward

"Cut a hole in the door. Hang a flap. Criminy, why didn't I think of this earlier?!" -- inventor of the cat door

 

[MasterRacker]

eyec - I didn't think you did mean that. I was referring to how a lot of the media is now trying paint Vista as the next ME and they're really two different beasts with different issues.

_____
Jeff
[small][purple]It's never too early to begin preparing for [/purple]International Talk Like a Pirate Day
"The software I buy sucks, The software I write sucks. It's time to give up and have a beer..." - Me[/small]

 

[eyec]

MasterRacker - just as ME was an ill-fated release, so was/is Vista. however, ME brought us XP and hopefully Vista will bring us a better W7.

 

[danomac]

...and hopefully it won't take six years this time.

 

[Circle9]

I would DEFINATELY not use Windows Vista. I have used it and had nothing but problems.

 

[cdogg]

For what it's worth, Windows ME ran fine on new systems sold at the time. All the horror stories we have implanted in our heads are from "home" users buying it at the store and attempting to upgrade on their own, often putting it on a weak system. I remember those days!
[LOL]

Also remember that Windows ME was the first to remove "real-mode" access to MS-DOS. Yep, no more DOS games from within Windows, damn! It ended up being the scapegoat of "failure" but in the long run did us all a favor as we transitioned to Windows 2000 and XP. Also, people often forget that it had better USB support and a more reliable TCP/IP stack (same one Win2K had) than Win95/98.

~cdogg
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Einstein
[tab][navy]For posting policies, click [/navy]here.

 

[sggaunt]

Disagree, WinME was W98 dressed up to look like NT/2000 its purpose was to get people used to the changes (in the interface) that would be introduced with XP.

It was still W98 underneath and just as unstable, which is not what you would expect from a 'new' operating system.





Steve: N.M.N.F.
If something is popular, it must be wrong: Mark Twain

 

[wahnula]

This has turned into quite an interesting discussion.

I also ran ME on a brand-new laptop and marveled at how fast it booted, and the pre-XP features like System Restore. I had no issues with it whatsoever, and one of the things I missed the most in transitioning to Win2K was the lack of System Restore...what a godsend that app is!

All-in-all, I did not see "the horror, the horror" that was ME, but it's a good parallel w/ Vista. Just as with Vista some folks like it and use it with no problems, others (myself included) cannot use it and plan to hang on to Old Faithful XP a little while longer.


Tony

Users helping Users...