How much will a Windows 7 migration really cost?

By | August 30, 2010, 4:59pm PDT

Last week, the Gartner Group made some headlines (including this one from my ZDNet colleague Mary Jo Foley) with a provocative press release that tried to pin a price tag on the cost of migrating to Windows 7. The press release throws out four separate price tags, ranging from $1,205 to $2,069 per PC, with some confusing percentages to quantify overall IT budget increases. But in their zeal to come up with hard numbers, the press release adds more confusion than clarification to the topic. In some cases, the numbers just don’t add up.

Gartner was kind enough to provide me with a copy of the full report. After reading it over, I’ve come up with a slightly different set of conclusions. The executive summary? If you run a Windows shop and you’ve been paying attention to the Windows landscape for the past two or three years, you’ve got few surprises in store, and Gartner’s alarming numbers don’t apply to you. But if you pinned all your hopes on the “Save XP” movement, you’ve got some serious catching up to do, and your migration bill is likely to be much higher than it would have been otherwise.

Here are the places where I agree and disagree with the Gartner study.

Yes, it’s an important issue.

According to analyst Charles Smulders, Gartner estimates that large and midsize organizations will migrate approximately 250 million PCs from Windows XP to Windows 7 in the next two or three years. That sounds about right to me, and is certainly in line with some of the projections I’ve seen lately. And staying on XP is not an option—at least not for any workstation that is actually connected to the Internet.

Your migration away from XP should be in the final stages by early 2013.

I agree with Gartner completely on this point. Support for Windows XP ends formally in April 2014, but third-party software companies will probably be phasing out their support during 2013. In addition, it is prudent to allow some slack in the schedule for things to go wrong, as they always do. In the timeline that accompanies the Gartner report, 2013 and 2014 are colored bright red and labeled the “XP Danger Zone.”

To hit that 2013 deadline, your migration had better be under way now.

Absolutely right. If your IT operation rolls like a well-oiled machine, you’ve already begun deploying Windows 7 on a three- or four-year cycle that will have XP completely off your network in plenty of time for the April 2014 deadline. Gartner assumes PC hardware replacement cycles of 3.25 years for a notebook and a little less than five years for a desktop. If you’re buying new PCs today expecting them to last four years, they’d better be starting with Windows 7 and not with XP.

What might not have been clear in those Gartner numbers that were so widely reported is that they include the capital costs of new PCs and Windows licenses. According to my calculations, Gartner is pegging the cost of a new PC with a Windows 7 Professional license at somewhere between $723 and $1,199. PCs are depreciable assets, so those costs aren’t optional, although their timing is.

So, what happens if you haven’t already started a migration?

If you’re just beginning to realize that you’re behind in your migration planning, then Gartner’s warnings definitely apply to you. Let’s call it the “XP diehard tax,” which Gartner says you’ll pay in one of two ways:

  • Accelerated PC replacement. Gartner’s calculations assume the average enterprise with 10,000 PCs will need to replace roughly 25% of its machines early. In that case, you’ll be prematurely throwing out perfectly good PCs before their useful life has run out, meaning you’ll be paying a “migration tax” equal to 25% of the average cost of a PC, or about $180-$300 per PC.
  • Upgrades for installed PCs. This one hurts for two reasons. First, you have to pay $150-$200 for a Windows 7 upgrade license, and you have to pay for the parts and labor to upgrade memory, hard disk, and/or video adapters on desktop PCs that you choose not to replace. That’s a terrible ROI.

That sounds about right. If your natural hardware replacement cycle is disrupted, you pay extra. Where Gartner loses me in the discussion is with the numbers in the full report, which simply don’t add up. According to the report, those upgrade costs (including the Windows license) equal more than $1,600 per PC, which is double the cost of a new PC. I suspect it’s a typo, and I’ve sent an e-mail to Gartner asking for clarification. I’ll update this post when I hear back.

Update September 9: It took a while, but Gartner’s Charles Smulders finally got back to me. As I suspected, that number is not accurate. The correct figure they used to calculate the cost of an upgrade is $835, which is only a few hundred dollars less than the cost of a maxed-out new PC with a Windows 7 Professional license.

If you’ve put together a comprehensive migration strategy, Gartner’s numbers don’t apply to you.

A few big qualifications are buried in the fine print of that Gartner report, and a couple aren’t mentioned at all.

  • If you bought smart, you don’t need to upgrade hardware. Specs for Windows 7 are equal to or less than those for Windows Vista. So if you bought a Vista-ready machine in 2007 through 2009, it shouldn’t need any hardware upgrades to handle an OS upgrade. The losers here are IT buyers who bought cheap PCs and now need to crack them open. That was a false economy. If you bought PCs with an eye to the future, you’ve already got the hardware you need.
  • If you have a Software Assurance contract, you’ve already paid for Windows 7 licenses. Gartner notes this detail in passing, but that detail shaves $150-200 off their cost estimates.
  • Investments in deployment technology can have huge payoff. Many of the Gartner numbers seem to be predicated on the idea that an IT worker has to touch each PC and do a manual upgrade. But as the report’s authors note, smart enterprises have already eliminated the need for those manual interventions, and the savings are staggering: “[M]igration costs can be reduced significantly by investment in zero-touch PC deployment processes and tools. Gartner estimates that in the best case, an in-place upgrade can be done for $100 per PC or less…”
  • PCs running Windows Vista don’t need accelerated upgrades. For some reason, Gartner completely ignored enterprises that have already completed app compatibility testing and have begun a migration from XP to Windows Vista. Those PCs don’t face the same 2014 upgrade deadline as their XP counterparts. An IT administrator who has moved 25% or more of the enterprise desktops to Vista can comfortably switch to Windows 7, avoid the XP Danger Zone, and avoid all those early upgrades and replacement.
  • This is a tremendous opportunity for desktop virtualization. Gartner notes the potential for server-based computing and hosted virtual desktops but doesn’t calculate the potential savings. I suspect a lot of organizations will accelerate their plans for replacing PCs with cheaper, more centralized options, especially for task workers.

So, what’s the overall impact on IT budgets?

In her headline, Mary Jo Foley called out the most alarming number from the Gartner report: IT shops moving to Windows 7 need a 20 to 60 percent PC budget increase. But as the report makes clear, the PC budget typically represents only 15% of a typical IT budget, which means that a 20-60% increase in the PC budget actually represents an overall increase of only 3% (best case, according to Gartner) or 9% (worst case). And given the numbers I calculated, companies that began planning for migration three years ago and invested in advanced deployment tools could actually see their PC costs drop, percentage-wise, during the course of this migration. Imagine that.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications.

Disclosure

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is a freelance technical journalist and book author. All work that Ed does is on a contractual basis.

Since 1994, Ed has written more than 25 books about Microsoft Windows and Office. Along with various co-authors, Ed is completely responsible for the content of the books he writes. As a key part of his contractual relationship with publishers, he gives them permission to print and distribute the content he writes and to pay him a royalty based on the actual sales of those books. Ed's books are currently distributed by Que Publishing (a division of Pearson Education) and by Microsoft Press.

On occasion, Ed accepts consulting assignments. In recent years, he has worked as an expert witness in cases where his experience and knowledge of Microsoft and Microsoft Windows have been useful. In each such case, his compensation is on an hourly basis, and he is hired as a witness, not an advocate.

Ed does not own stock or have any other financial interest in Microsoft or any other software company. He owns 500 shares of stock in EMC Corporation, which was purchased before the company's acquisition of VMWare. In addition, he owns 350 shares of stock in Intel Corporation, purchased more than two years ago. All stocks are held in retirement accounts for long-term growth.

Ed does not accept gifts from companies he covers. All hardware products he writes about are purchased with his own funds or are review units covered under formal loan agreements and are returned after the review is complete.

Biography

Ed Bott

Ed Bott is an award-winning technology writer with more than two decades' experience writing for mainstream media outlets and online publications. He's served as editor of the U.S. edition of PC Computing and managing editor of PC World; both publications had monthly paid circulation in excess of 1 million during his tenure. He is the author of more than 25 books on Microsoft Windows and Office, including the recently released Windows 7 Inside Out.

Talkback Most Recent of 145 Talkback(s)

  • RE: How much will a Windows 7 migration really cost?
    I can't see some of the local businesses and my local library near me upgrading very quickly as they're using XP (some even using Win2000) and all their web apps are made for IE6 and since Win 7 won't run IE6 they'll have some headaches doing that.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    explodingwalrus
    30th Aug 2010
  • RE: How much will a Windows 7 migration really cost?
    @explodingwalrus that's what happens when you build to a non-standard standard. There shouldn't BE sites that rely on IE at all, much less ones that still require IE6.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    thatroom
    31st Aug 2010
  • RE: How much will a Windows 7 migration really cost?
    @thatroom Seems that IE6 problem happed centuries ago.
    Termopan
    ZDNet Gravatar
    termopane
    13th Oct
  • RE: How much will a Windows 7 migration really cost?
    @explodingwalrus, well if they don't by the 2014, they'll be in for a influx or new apps at your local library and businesses, alas they'll all be distributed from the new botnets they just joined grin
    ZDNet Gravatar
    Xanderxavier
    31st Aug 2010
  • RE: How much will a Windows 7 migration really cost?
    @Xanderxavier Thanks for sharing. i really appreciate it that you shared with us such a informative post..
    High School Diploma GED Online Online Homeschooling Get Diploma Online High School
    ZDNet Gravatar
    silvermessenger
    23rd Aug
  • ZDNet Gravatar
    lincc263
    1st Sep 2010
  • RE: How much will a Windows 7 migration really cost?
    @explodingwalrus They're not alone. There's one large insurance company that announced that it was starting final testing of it's Move-to-Vista effort two days before Windows 7 hit the streets.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    LeMike
    12th Oct 2010
  • Replacement Cycles
    The whole assumption of this analysis is pretty much invalid for most legitimate IT shops with a decent PC replacement cycle. We'll replace our systems regardless of the OS factor.

    In any case, in my business, I'm already upgrading systems to Windows 7 because of the lowered support costs. In my environment, I've had better performance with Windows 7 and fewer end-user support requests, which easily pays for the slight increase in licensing costs.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    GoodThings2Life
    30th Aug 2010
  • You would think so, wouldn't you
    @GoodThings2Life
    The thing is that much of Corporate America don't really have "legitimate IT shops" as you aptly put it. There are major international corporations who are getting caught on the short sided end right now. Some of those companies have hundreds, or even thousands, of workstations that have to be migrated to Windows 7 at this point. For them the analysis is very relevant.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    macadam
    31st Aug 2010
  • Bring out your dead...
    @GoodThings2Life

    We are upgrading machines to Windows 7 as they fail. So far, I haven't had any problems and the users like the speed and the search on the Windows menu...

    That said, they are being upgraded from 1.2Ghz Athlon machines with 256MB RAM to Core i3 with 4GB, so they really do see a performance improvement over Windows XP :-D

    That said, we still have Windows 95 machines in daily use as well, and when they die, we will have big problems, because the software they use won't run on an NT base!

    A lot of my users also still use Windows 9x at home, very few have gotten around to installing XP, most will probably skip straight to whatever is pre-installed on their next machine, when their current one dies...
    ZDNet Gravatar
    wright_is
    13th Sep 2010
  • RE: How much will a Windows 7 migration really cost?
    @wright_is "we still have Windows 95 machines in daily use as well, and when they die, we will have big problems, because the software they use won't run on an NT base!"

    Your solution is to run Win 95 on a virtual machine on the Windows machine and use that for any programs that are vital, while moving all users to the current version of Windows for all other programs. Once that's done, make the effort to replace the vital programs with current software.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    LeMike
    12th Oct 2010
  • Custom (and not so custom) apps
    My organization (20,000+ desktops) wants to move to Win7 yesterday, but is being held hostage by some of the applications we have to run.

    Third-party vendors are in no hurry to confirm that existing systems will work with Win7. It makes business sense for them to want us to upgrade to their new product rather than take the time to certify that something will keep chugging away under the new OS. They won't say that it *won't* work, but they also won't certify that it *will*. If we're talking a small utility used by a few geeks in networking, no harm giving it a try and upgrading if neccessary. When it's the multi-million dollar ERP, then the calculation is different.

    We're left in limbo, hoping the app vendors will actually produce a certified version of the product in time for us to test and then make a part of the overall upgrade. Some apps won't get certified ever because of customizations that have been made and we'll pay for those updates through the nose.

    That's the holdup for us.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    wafsd
    30th Aug 2010
  • Just curious...
    @wafsd

    ...but have you tried in house testing of those critical apps? We were in the same position, but through our own testing found out that, with a few tweaks, the old apps ran very well under Vista/7. We were told recently by another office that the apps "won't work with 7", yet we had already completed upgrading that department's users in our office to 7 with no issues.

    We have found a few apps that will only work with 32 bit 7, though. A shame, really, to be installing modern PCs with a 32 bit OS.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    itpro_z
    30th Aug 2010
  • RE: How much will a Windows 7 migration really cost?
    @itpro_z
    We had the experience to run an application on Windows Vista and W7 even though the vendor hadn't certified it yet. The problem was asking for support. As soon as they knew we had Vista/W7, they closed the case until we downgraded to Windows XP "on a real PC", because virtualization was not an option. I agree with you in testing in a local environment, but for something as critical as an ERP, support is very important and you have to adapt to the vendor requirements. And it's sad when the software vendor put you upgrade on hold because they don't adapt changes fast enough.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    dvm
    31st Aug 2010
  • Time to find a new vendor?
    @dvm

    I would try to find a new vendor. If they are that lazy not to be upgrading their products, then let them fall by the wayside. Don't let them drag you down with.

    My school is the same way, if it was up to them they would be running XP for another few years yet in the CIS dept., which in my mind is a HUGE dis-service to the students. It is only because of the number of students upgrading off of XP, that they are finally teaching Windows 7 and Office 2010 in an attempt to keep up.
    ZDNet Gravatar
    Cylon Centurion
    31st Aug 2010

Talkback - Tell Us What You Think

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources