But I'm highly skeptical of a mass migration to Linux or Mac OS X. Windows XP is a much bigger competitive threat to Vista than any other operating system. For many IT organizations that means staying pat, which explains the high number of businesses with no Vista deployment plans.

I guess many I.T. organizations want to stick with the M$ virus magnet they are familiar with than switch to the M$ virus magnet they don't know. Maybe the chances of getting fired are less that way. That is, unless their bosses consider the loost savings that could have been realized if at least some users switched to Linux.

Sticking with XP still incurs costs, at the very least in terms of time and effort expended in trying to keep that leaky boat secure. In some (not all) situations, it's cheaper to switch. But that's not something Micro$oft wants people to relaize, and so the company resorts to FUD.

Mac and surveys of IT professionals reminds the following the Gallup Polls done in my country about the popularity of certain politicians. Some of them are very popular. Their approval rates are over 90%!!!. Over 90% of the respondents have a positive opinion about them. When it comes to the actual elections though, they get 2% or 3% of the votes. Same story with Macs.

I don't doubt that it isn't cost effective to deploy hundreds of new Vista licences across the board. Why would business want to? Office 2007 runs fine on XP, and as your article points out, the business world runs on Office.

Where we WILL see the big battle is in a few years when business starts to deploy new hardware. Will they go the Vista route, or the Mac route? These days the platform is almost irrelevant: a lot of work is now done online, Office runs on both, the Adobe apps run on both, etc. I would think, though, that unless Apple lower its prices, the Windows route would still be the most cost effective for businesses with a lot of seats to cover, even taking into account the apparent higher-spec hardware that Vista requires.

Speaking of which: I think it's a myth. I'm running Vista on this machine as I type. I have Outlook open, Word open, Dreamweaver, Firefox, virus checkers etc. The machine runs fine. But wait... it isn't the latest dual-core with mega ram. Its a six year old Pentium IV machine. My point being : you could easily deploy Vista now on post 2001 machines, with just minimal upgrades (mostly new gfx cards I would think).

From arsDigita to Red Hat via General Atlantic.

Now, here's an interesting odyssey. I won't burden the reader with dates and reference URLs. It's easy enough for you to dig up that stuff as you like.

arsDigita had a software package that treated content and format very much like the way patent 744 treats content, format and functionality.

General Atlantic funded arsDigita during a time when arsDigita was helping the United Nations build developmentgateway.org.

Here's the kicker. developmentgateway.org not only looks like something VCSY would be able to do with their 744 patent, it actually mimicks what VCSY's business plan was when they introduced home-country gateways in 1999.

Ain't THAT a kick in the head? So General Atlantic and VCSY were running on parallel tracks after the dotbomb. In fact, Richard Wade was lauded by the United Nations around the same time... right about the same time IBM recognized VCSY's XML Enabler Agent and retired IBM's version.

Then arsDigita went bankrupt and the Community System software arsDigita used to build the UN websites was bought by, who else?, Red Hat.

Now, remember, patent 744 is an architectural blueprint and any company can build any version of 744 as they like as long as they can do so legally or prove they had prior art.

If arsDigita had prior art to 744, would we not have heard about it long before now? arsDigita is dead and gone but their 744-like software lives on in the hands of Red Hat thanks to General Atlantic as of February 2002.

Now, isn't that odd? Arglen and Ross Systems moved to take VCSY down by suing VCSY beginning in that period. VCSY won that lawsuit in September 2003.

So General Atlantic and Red Hat know a 744-like software can build traditional websites and portals (just like VCSY announced they would do in 1999/2000) far beyond any web-platform Microsoft can demonstrate (take a look at the structure and reach and extent of developmentgateway.org) but the gateways the United Nations deployed have a critical missing element also claimed by 744... functionality.

In other words, a full 744 implementation could compartmentalized content and format across a massive affiliated framework (look at the list of countries belonging to developmentgateway.org and explain to yourself how tiny underdeveloped countries can do such a thing) AND they could employ functionality in the gateways such that each website would be a web application for interconnecting and interoperating any and all other country gateways with each other in a deterministic transactional sense.

Thus, the entire collection of countries would be affiliated into one enormous interoperable application with extensions to any vertical at any time by casually skilled workers.

NOW are you getting a hint? NOW do you see what Chuck Feeney would like to leave the world? NOW Do you see why First Data and General Atlantic were so tight? NOW do you see why the Oracle of Omaha cleaves so tightly to Bill Gates now?

Ask questions, pilgrim. It's the only way you'll get answers.

more on the discussion:

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_M/threadview?m=tm&bn=12004&tid=1316100&mid=1316100&tof=25&frt=1

I would think a fair chunck of the Mac and Linux flavour-inclined respondents would look at virtualisation in the sense of Citrix or Provision networks. That way MS apps like office are fed out from Citrix and the remaining web apps / java apps / personal user spaces are kept locally on the Linux or Mac platform.

This probably makes Microsoft more money in TS licenses than windows oem licenses in the short term but would hypothetically pave the way to a large non-windows user base which in turn other enterprise apps will target.

I work in a 100% Windows shop, much to my chagrin. I'm a Mac user personally and I was a Linux Admin in a previous job.

I wouldn't stay too comfortable with the dominance of Microsoft Office. I was floored about a week ago when word got out that we were going to start evaluating OpenOffice.org. I'm now on the evaluation team because they found out that I've been using it for years.

And we have no plans to move to Vista yet either.

Joe Says:
"Vista can't seem to get a break."

YOU and Microsoft reported they sold 60 Million copies of Vista, eh? what kind of break do they need?

Like a previous poster said here before:
"The last one here at Microsoft-Watch, please turn off the lights"

n0neXn0ne wrote: "YOU and Microsoft reported they sold 60 Million copies of Vista, eh? what kind of break do they need?"

I wrote that Microsoft shipped 40, then 60 and now 88 million licenses. The number deployed is a fraction of the number shipped.

Joe

For businesses, the release of Vista SP1 will increase adoption, by removing a psychological barrier.

As Microsoft's latest financial results show, Vista is selling like hotcakes. The "gloom and doomers" have already been proven wrong.

Joe Says:
"I wrote that Microsoft shipped 40, then 60 and now 88 million licenses. The number deployed is a fraction of the number shipped."

@Joe:
Those are great numbers by anyone's standards, except YOU and 'Microsoft'.

Let me put what I was saying in perspective.
"Mandriva can't seem to get a break."

We still use MS software because we have to,not because we chose to. In some time, relatively close, when the rival software arrives to the threshold of being "good enough" there will be a massive migration and it will be because we(the clients) will be saying: it was enough Ms!!

Software-licensing costs predicted to fall
http://www.news.com/Software-licensing-costs-predicted-to-fall/2100-1011_3-6219263.html?tag=nefd.top
Synder said buyers need to realize that the pendulum is beginning to swing in their favor, with an increasing number of alternatives in the software market.

"We would advise IT organizations to use BPO (business process outsourcing) and open-source alternatives to improve their negotiating power with software suppliers, as well as employing the emergence of third-party vendors as a means to reduce higher maintenance fees on older versions of software," he said. "(Pricing) out the possibility of using offshore skills to build application functionality as Web services will also help negotiations with vendors."

Quote from Joe Willcox:

"That said, Mac OS X is a much more sensible desktop replacement than Linux because of Microsoft Office."
-----------------------------------------------------
Now Joe, I expect that you mostly use your laptops to write your blogs, read other blogs, and get your email. Other than that maybe to play around with the free Zunes your buddies at M$ send you to "test." But here is a clue, the world does not revolve around M$ Office.

Just because you are held hostage with the lockinware that MS put into office, dosen't mean others should stay with an expensive, bloated, buggie, piece of spyware, such as M$ Office. Why should we pay M$ for a product that has seen little if any real improvement since 1997? About the only real changes in it since that time are the new file formats (lockinware) and the increase in price.

Also, some people have wrote in and told you that its possible to run (at least some versions) of M$ Office in Linux, using Crossover or Wine. Personally, I see no need to ever use M$ Office, as OpenOffice and/or KOffice do more than I ever will need at the free price.

We are not all so rich to pony up $400 to $600 for the latest M$ Office 2007, which the only real improvement---whoops---no improvement, only more lockinware. But then, Joe, you probably get your M$ Office, free for testing it.

I would not expect Mac to become the OS of businesses. Because, Mac needs to do more on the server side, which Linux and Microsoft already have.

I don't get the apparent glee people find with getting on a Microsoft blog to bash Microsoft.

Sure, I don't like their pricing structure either but I don't see people bashing Mercedes Benz, BMW or Jaguar because they charge a whole helluva lot more than other car makers for four wheels and an engine.

Get a life folks, if you don't want to pay for it stop complaining as if they are doing something wrong.

Aaron J. Walker Says:
"...as if they are doing something wrong."

@Aaron J. Walker:
As if you don't know?
Well maybe you need to face real life if you dare.

Interesting that, in spite of your comment that OS X may be a more "sensible" alternative to Dimdows, nevertheless the overwhelming "likely" replacement is Linux, at 70%.

nOneXnOne
See, that's what I mean.

Don't support a company you don't agree with.

But, unless Microsoft is using slave labor, polluting the oceans, operating child prostitution rings, deforesting natural eco systems, bludgeoning baby seals, or any host of other more heinous crimes against nature and humanity and worthy of attention, it really isn't that serious that they charge more for software than you want to spend or you find it too buggy to deal with.

Perspective people.

From the post here on MS Watch titled: Microsoft, Listen to the People

Shareholder Michael Harrington explained:

"Microsoft is complicit in working with the Chinese government, utilizing Microsoft technologies to violate basic human rights. Microsoft and other technology companies are working hand in glove with the terrorist Chinese government to build a golden shield to identify pro-democracy and religious groups that oppose the totalitarian communist state ... Microsoft is not only supporting terrorism, but making short-term profits from it."
----------------------------------------------------
Sure sounds like the evil empire to me. What does it take to convince you?

a link to the King survey;

http://www.computerworlduk.com/management/infrastructure/applications/news/index.cfm?newsid=6258

Quote from the link: "Ninety percent of 961 IT professionals surveyed said they have concerns about migrating to Vista and more than half said they have no plans to deploy Vista.

"The concerns about Vista specified by participants were overwhelmingly related to stability. Stability in general was frequently cited, as well as compatibility with the business software that would need to run on Vista," said Diane Hagglund of King Research, which conducted the survey for systems management vendor Kace. "Cost was also cited as a concern by some respondents."

The survey, echoing one from Forrester last week, shows most IT professionals are worried about Vista and that 44% have considered non-Windows operating systems, such as Linux and Macintosh, to avoid the Microsoft migration.

"Clearly many companies are serious about this alternative, with 9% of those saying they have considered non-Windows operating systems already in the process of switching and a further 25% expecting to switch within the next year," the report "Windows Vista Adoption and Alternatives" reads."
--------------------------------------------------
Well, it dosen't sound good for the train wreck that is Micro$oft Vi$ta, does it? Perhaps, at a time when computer hardware keeps getting cheaper, and there is a lot of FREE open source software on the market, perhaps, M$ Software, is grossly overpriced? A low end new computer with ViSta Ultimate and Office on it cost a whole lot less than the M$ software on it. No wonder businesses want to get rid of the constant M$ upgrade cycles every time a new Windows version comes out. And how far away is the next Windows? Seven?

"Microsoft is complicit in working with the Chinese government, utilizing Microsoft technologies to violate basic human rights....."

Most if not all major corporations in the world do business with China including ultimate anti-MS Google. By your criteria all companies are evil, I would turn off my computer if I were you, go and live in some sort of self sufficient commune so you don't help participate in any of these evil companies plans by spending money on...well pretty much anything.

Joe its nice to see you using the new charts in Office 2007.

"For many IT organizations that means staying pat, which explains the high number of businesses with no Vista deployment plans."

Question for Joe:

Are IT organizations going to stay pat forever, or until Microsoft say its OK to jump, then they ask how high.

spine spine spine, whatever, if it makes Balmer sleep better...

I wrote that Microsoft shipped 40, then 60 and now 88 million licenses. The number deployed is a fraction of the number shipped.

What fraction? Could it be 0.99999? Can you share source? Or are you just f**king paranoid?

Shitty site!

Those who think that they can deploy Mac to replace XP or Vista are not the clever or sharp IT Managers /CIOs and most of them are resided in US.

Think about these issues :

1) Apple monoplised Mac hardware with premium price.

2) Besides Microsoft Office for MAc , what other business softwares to run on MAC ?

3) Enterprise networking with MAC , you must be kidding !

4) Where to we get MAC spare-parts , may be only from Steve Jobs