Vista: One Year Later
|
One year ago today, Microsoft released Windows Vista to manufacturing. In the obligatory anniversary post we ask: Was it ready? Will it ever be ready? |
The answer to the first question is an emphatic "no." Vista wasn't ready. Hardware manufacturers and software developers weren't ready for it. The channel and enterprises weren't ready, and consumers couldn't get it because Vista missed holiday 2006.
Microsoft promised WOW, but the reaction was, "What?" What is different from Windows XP? What is wrong with the hardware requirements? What is the difference between "Capable" and "Ready?" What is this Software Assurance requirement for Vista Enterprise? What happened to the familiarity of Windows XP? What is wrong with my Vista applications and hardware?
More recently the "W" question is "When?"--as in when will Microsoft release Vista Service Pack 1?
Ready or Not
Something about Windows Vista's two launches—on Nov. 30 and Jan. 30—felt wrong, like Microsoft was out of step somehow with the marketplace. Who launches a business operating system during the holidays when no IT organization could possibly want to begin compatibility testing or new deployments? What consumer would want to buy new Windows PCs more than a month after Christmas and days before the Super Bowl? But that's what Microsoft asked of its customers.
Early reviews complained about nagging security popups and missing drivers—for new hardware—and broken applications. Early enthusiasm waned as more businesses tested Vista and some early adopters returned to Windows XP.
Yesterday, Michael Silver, vice president of Gartner client computing, gave me the dim view of Microsoft's flagship operating system. "Vista adoption in the enterprise has been really poor," he said. "Enterprises are about a year behind where they told us they'd be a year ago."
A year ago, Gartner forecast that early Vista deployments would begin in earnest by the fourth quarter of 2007 and reach threshold by the second quarter of 2008. Now, mainstream enterprise adoption is tracking for early 2009, about the time Microsoft is supposed to be wrapping up Vista successor Windows 7.
"App support is really the biggest issue people have had, with the lack of a compelling reason to migrate following close behind," Silver said.
"With our customers the largest barrier to Vista adoption is compatibility with existing software," said Mytech Partners solution provider Lyf Wildenber. "Most software vendors are Vista ready. However, many times our customers are not at a version level that can run a Vista OS. Bringing one Vista machine onto the network can mean the organization needs to make bigger decisions regarding their line of business applications."
Resellers are moving what customers want, and there remains strong demand for Windows XP. In the United States, "25 percent of all PCs sold in the month of September had Vista installed in the VAR channel," said Chris Swenson, NPD's director of Software Industry Analysis.
The Waiting Game
So far, the two most compelling reasons to upgrade have little to do with Vista: Market shift to portables from desktops and normal hardware refresh cycles.
Steve Rubin, president of WorkITsafe, said he has seen, slow but steady Vista adoption—at least related to refresh cycles. "Most of our clients upgrade on three-year cycles, and they're coming up on the anniversary now," he said. "If the clients are ready to move forward, they're going to move forward."
The reasons to wait are more, particularly as businesses grapple with in-house application compatibility problems and sit tight for the release of Vista Service Pack 1. The update isn't expected until at least the first quarter of 2008.
No service pack may be more necessary than the first for Windows Vista. Microsoft has downplayed the need to wait for Service Pack 1. But some analysts believe that longstanding IT organization attitudes about waiting for the first service pack, not applicable to Windows 2000 or XP, apply to Vista.
"This time it's really the one you want to wait for," said Michael Cherry, Directions on Microsoft's lead analyst for desktop and mobile. He made this declaration based on the list of changes Microsoft plans for Service Pack 1.
"SP1 really does look like its fixing things that slipped through the release," he emphasized. "A lot of people had a feeling it was a date-driven release." The fixes, such as basic file copy, are surprising. "I'm just stunned they weren't caught during beta testing," Cherry exclaimed. "The beta testing for this thing was huge."
Cherry said that one of his Vista computers has two hard drives attached to a single controller. Copying 70GB of data from one drive to another takes about 24 hours.
"In many ways, Service Pack 1 is going to address a lot of peoples' concerns and be the release they wanted last year—it will lower resistance to the product.
Silver agreed about the update's importance. "SP1 will help, but time passing helps, too, as more ISVs support their apps on Vista," he said.
"We'll almost look back to SP1 as the launch date," Cherry asserted. "It will steadily grow from here on out."
[Editor's Note: This is the first of two posts looking at Vista adoption. The second, coming later today, will explain why Vista is poised to finally take off and identify a surprising lever pushing enterprise sales.]
Related Posts:
- Vista: None for All?, Microsoft Watch, Oct. 4, 2007
- Windows Vista Ultimate: Plus or Minus, Microsoft Watch, Sept. 26, 2007
- What Windows Vista Does for Me, Microsoft Watch, Sept. 14, 2007
- Yes, Virginia, There is a Vista SP1, Microsoft Watch, Aug. 29, 2007
- Don't Have a WOW, Man, Microsoft Watch, Aug. 28, 2007
- Broken Windows, Microsoft Watch, Aug. 9, 2007
- Were Vista Capable Stickers Incapable?, Microsoft Watch, Aug. 8, 2007
- Vista Pushes Volume Licensing, Microsoft Watch, July 26, 2007
- Microsoft: No Rush to Vista SP1, Microsoft Watch, July 19, 2007
- The Vista Contradiction, Microsoft Watch, June 4, 2007
- How Does Windows Vista Rate?, Microsoft Watch, May 20, 2007
- Is Vista One Step Ahead?, Microsoft Watch, May 16, 2007
- I Shacked Up With Windows Vista, Microsoft Watch, May 10, 2007
- Uh-Oh, Vista! PC Sales Are Normal, Microsoft Watch, April 11, 2007
- Stacking Vista Licenses Too High, Microsoft Watch, March 26, 2007
- Vista Launch Sales Falter at Retail, Microsoft Watch, Feb. 15, 2007
- Vista Security: A Petulant Child?, Microsoft Watch, Jan. 16, 2007
- The Wow Is When?, Microsoft Watch, Jan. 7, 2007
Comments (9)
Ok girls and boys, why couldn't Microsoft deliver the 'WOW' factor in Vista? Instead the reaction they got was 'oww'. Do you think maybe without the use of VCSY's patents in Vista, the steak lost it's sizzle?
So why is Microsoft able to keep such a big chunk of market share with such lame products and delays out the ying-yang on everything else.
After settling with Eolas they were finally able to deliver Silverlight, but "who" will they have to settle with to keep Titan, Viridian and Silverlight 1.1 from losing the "WOW" factor in those products? Or will they just resort to releasing crap, because the biggest software company in the world can't make a kick-ass product without infringing on VCSY further?
VCSY is still just under two cents per share.
Sorry Joe, your readers here aren't very sharp if they haven't heard me by "Now".
For those of you who are here because you are investors looking to make money, i'll say it slower.
VCSY-IS-STILL-UNDER-TWO-CENTS-PER-SHARE.
------------------------------------------------
FRIDAY, APRIL 20, 2007
Vertical Computer Systems, Inc. Files Patent Infringement Lawsuit Against Microsoft Corporation
Fort Worth, TX, April 20, 2007 (PRIME NEWSWIRE)? Vertical Computer Systems, Inc. (OTCBB: VCSY)(www.vcsy.com) announced today that on April 18, 2007, Vertical Computer Systems, Inc. filed suit for patent infringement against Microsoft Corp. in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. VCSY claims that the Microsoft .Net System infringes U.S. Patent No. 6,826,744.
--------------------------------------------
(I personally believe that VCSY took something much more valuable than money from this lawsuit victory-INFORMATION)
MONDAY, OCTOBER 29, 2007
NOW Solutions Awarded Judgment for $3.1 Million Against Ross Systems, Inc.
Fort Worth, TX, October 29, 2007 (PRNewswire)? NOW Solutions, Inc. (Now Solutions), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Vertical Computer Systems, Inc. (OTCBB: VCSY)(www.vcsy.com), announced today that it has been awarded a judgment in the New York Supreme Court in the action of Ross Systems, Inc. (Ross) vs. Now Solutions in the amount of $3,151,215.52, which includes interest and attorney fees.
Posted by I-Man | November 8, 2007 5:08 AM
SP1 is nothing more than the rollup of hotfixes that are mostly available from the MS download site today. There's no magic that would suddenly make Vista w/ SP1 any more palatable than a patched up Vista system today.
Running SP1 beta doesn't show any performance, reliability, or feature improvements over a non-SP1 machine that has been patched with the hotfixes. It's still the new Windows ME.
Posted by Devnull | November 8, 2007 7:34 AM
To paraphrase an old '70s standard, A walk through the ocean of Vista's soul will barely get your ankles wet. There is no "there" there. Vista was pulled from the flames of Gates' failed Moon Project/Longhorn. A desperate Steve Ballmer had them sift the ashes into a box, slap on a pretty label (Aero), and ship the $#@! thing.
It has no past and it has no future. It's just a bundle of code scraps that will go nowhere without a constant push by MSFT.
Posted by Allan | November 8, 2007 10:14 AM
I see a lot of frustration with customers who have Vista computers. MS will proabably be forced to release the next version of Windows (Seven perhaps) sooner in order to keep users. Not everyone hates Vi$ta, just most (all) of the power users that comes in. They all want to go back to XP, buy a Mac, or try Linux (the best option).
Vista is such a DRM/WGA dungpile, I doubt that M$ can ever really fix it.
Posted by chips | November 8, 2007 8:59 PM
The objective behind Vista was to add major new functionality on top of the existing Dimdows XP base, while still maintaining backward compatibility.
In trying to do this, it failed. Much of the major new functionality was sacrificed to avoid final release being delayed even more than it already was. And yet they still didn't manage to maintain a satisfactory level of backward compatibility. So it didn't achieve either part of the objective.
What will be different about the next version of Dimdows? Hard to see, really. It will still be trying to achieve the same objective, which Vista has already shown is not possible. So where is Microsoft to go from here?
Posted by Lawrence D'Oliveiro | November 9, 2007 12:49 AM
Yes, I entirely agree that Vista was not ready. Absolutely not ready. In fact, XP turns out to be much better even now. I suppose this software will get into shape aome day and we'll be able to enjoy its perfect features.
Posted by Patricia | November 9, 2007 6:08 AM
I have currently installed linux ultimate over vista. linux works better, of course i need wine to run most programs. but its free. i am also looking into a mac, i was once anti-mac. vista has turned me. not only to mention computer builders are puting code into new computers that will not allow xp to be istalled onto new computers
Posted by john | November 9, 2007 4:03 PM
"I'm just stunned they weren't caught during beta testing," Cherry exclaimed.
I'm part of the beta testers. This is voluntary work (not paid) that we do for Microsoft - without any promises for compensation. Microsoft usually gives a free copy of its OS to the beta tester who reported at least 1 bug.
This said, a LOT of the bugs that we submit are discarded without comment from the Microsoft developers. Sometimes they leave a comment such as "Not reproducible" or "Won't fix". Most of the time they actually fix the bugs.
I've tested most versions of Windows since Windows 98. Microsoft have always waited until the OS was rock solid before releasing to manufacturer. They would survey us and ask "Do you think it's ready?".
No such thing happened with Vista. Pre-Release Candidates were simply just too buggy to even test seriously. Release Candidates were slightly better, except they feel like stuck in a bog of molasses. And then - POOF - Windows Vista is RTM. No survey. No preview to the beta testers. Although we did get the free copy - which I still don't use, by the way.
SP1 looks good. Most issues have been addressed. Windows Server 2008, which shares the same codebase, except for the sluggish AERO theme, is awesome, and will be a great replacement for Windows Server 2003.
My take on this? Microsoft HAD to push out the product because they had deadlines to meet. Period. They figured that the issues were not serious enough to prevent sales and OS adoption - which clearly was wrong. I bet SP1 is going to be rock solid. Only time will tell if it's too late.
This is only my opinion, of course. I don't work for Microsoft, so I may be wrong. Don't make this an OS war. I use both Windows (XP) and Linux (Fedora). My comment is simply intended to shed some light on the reason behind Vista's problems which most of IT folks will recognize: Bad project management.
Posted by Anonymous | November 9, 2007 4:41 PM
I think sum talk bad about Vista is because it took microsoft 6 years to make.. if i recall Vista was being worked on a few months before XP came out and Vista was in alpha stage at that time..
so 6+ years and all they could come up with is what you see in Vista.. what a shame.. and they still could not add the stuff that they wanted to add. that even more of a shame.. what was Microsoft doing for 6 years+ years??
Posted by dddd | November 10, 2007 1:55 AM