Jan Hyde (VB MVP) wrote:
> The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as
> Nina DiBoy' <>'s wild thoughts were released
> on Wed, 02 Jul 2008 11:50:54 -0500 bearing the following
> fruit:
>
>> Jan Hyde (VB MVP) wrote:
>>> The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as
>>> Nina DiBoy' <>'s wild thoughts were released
>>> on Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:26:50 -0500 bearing the following
>>> fruit:
>>>
>>>> Carey Frisch [MVP] wrote:
>>>>> Except that there's nothing new here. The same thing happened in 2002,
>>>>> when Windows XP was shiny and new. What, you don't remember?
>>>>> Why, I read it in the Inquirer, on January 10, 2002:
>>>>>
>>>>> Windows XP might be the "best OS Microsoft ever produced" but it's [sic]
>>>>> long time partner Intel thinks that ain't necessarily so.
>>>>> The corporation, which has around 80,000 employees, is rolling out
>>>>> Windows 2K rather than the latest greatest OS from Microsoft.
>>>>> The decision was taken last year and Intel will spend much of this year
>>>>> standardising on W2K in every site and country in the world.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ref: http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=481
>>>>>
>>>> It sounds like Intel has little to no faith in Microsoft's software
>>>> until it's been out for a long time. That is going to send a huge
>>>> message to the rest of the business world screaming "stay away from any
>>>> MS software that isn't old!!" Since Intel has been sending this message
>>>> out since at least 2002 it's no wonder noone is buying vista.
>>>>
>>>> So the Inquirer is your favorite news site now?
>>> It sounds like they don't want to undergo the
>>> cost/disruption of uppgrading etc just like many, many
>>> companies. They haven't send any message about faith in MS
>>> much as people like to infer.
>>>
>> You can keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better. 
>
> I don't feel better or worse one way or the other. The truth
> is that there are no facts to support your statement. You're
> not the only one trying to draw this conclusion though. The
> article has been posted over and over, almost always with
> the intent of using it to support a Vista bashing theory.
>
Sure there is.
Lots of other companies are not moving to vista yet:
http://news.cnet.com/How-quickly-wil...3-6134635.html
"Microsoft, meanwhile, is predicting a speedy adoption for Vista. Brad
Goldberg, general manager for Windows Client product management,
predicted in September that Vista would be put in use by twice as many
businesses in the first year as Windows XP was in the 12 months
following its October 2001 release..." This hasn't happened.
"They have done all the right things, but adoption is going to be driven
by corporate adoption and deployment cycles--more so than by whether
Microsoft has greased the skids to make the product glide in faster,"
Gillen said in the September interview...."
"Driven by corporate adoption", corporate adoption, much of which is not
happening as evidenced by companies like Intel.
Businesses having second thoughts about Vista
http://www.computerworld.com/action/...=NLT_AM&nlid=1
A Majority of Businesses Will Not Move To Vista
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/31/1454248
http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/04/11...l-must-happen/
Businesses having second thoughts about Vista
http://www.itbusiness.ca/it/client/e...s.asp?id=44530
"In a just-released poll of more than 250 of its clients, PatchLink
noted that only 2 percent said they are already running Vista, while
another 9 percent said they planned to roll out Vista in the next three
months. A landslide majority, 87 percent, said they would stay with
their existing version(s) of Windows..."
--
"Fair use is not merely a nice concept--it is a federal law based on
free speech rights under the First Amendment and is a cornerstone of the
creativity and innovation that is a hallmark of this country. Consumer
rights in the digital age are not frivolous."
- Maura Corbett
DRM and unintended consequences:
http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/se...35&tag=nl.e101