Intel won't upgrade to Vista until SP1

Intel won't upgrade to Vista until SP1

Summary: Intel CEO Paul Otellini said the chip giant isn't going to upgrade to Vista until it gets the first service pack from Microsoft. Speaking at the Bank of America Technology conference in San Francisco, Otellini was asked about his take on Vista and whether it could drive demand.

SHARE:
TOPICS: Windows
43

Intel CEO Paul Otellini said the chip giant isn't going to upgrade to Vista until it gets the first service pack from Microsoft.

Speaking at the Bank of America Technology conference in San Francisco, Otellini was asked about his take on Vista and whether it could drive demand.

For corporations, Otellini said Vista upgrades will be slow. "I know of no organization doing an upgrade before SP1," said Otellini. "Intel isn't upgrading either (until SP1)."

Otellini, however, noted corporate uptake won't hurt Microsoft because most enterprises have commercial licenses that are "all you can drink."

On the consumer side, Otellini said "Vista will play out like XP did. There's not a large demand for backward looking upgrades." Over time, demand will pick up because because "consumers will like Vista as they play with it." Otellini added that Vista is "closer to the Mac than we've been on the Windows side for a long time."

On other topics:

Market share: "I've always been a market share guy. Having market share is critical to advance in multiple markets and lower costs," said Otellini. Intel's goal is to stay within its 10 year trend line for market share. In the last 10 year's Intel's lowest market share was 72 percent and its highest was 86 percent. "Staying in that range is modus operandi," said Otellini. AMD issued a sales warning today.

Global capacity: "There's clearly more capacity to build microprocessors in 07 and 08," he said.

Pricing: "Pricing continues to be very competitive," said Otellini. But Intel can "show differentiation through the platform." For instance he noted that "VPro insulates us from commoditization of the desktop."

Linux vs. Windows: "It's still a Windows world out there. Where I see Linux gaining is in ultra mobile devices. The Linux footprint is quite good for power," he said. Otellini added that Intel was nudging Microsoft to optimize its Windows kernel to save power.

Topic: Windows

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

Talkback

43 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Seems to be a common mindset...

    Seems to be a common mindset amongst corporate customers to wait until SP1. Even if it was under development for 5 or 6 years, Vista is still very "beta" in terms of support and performance.
    olePigeon
  • US Government Bans Vista and Office 2007

    http://blogs.business2.com/beta/2007/03/us_government_b.html
    LittleGuy
    • And we all know how 'visionary' the US ...

      Government happens to be!
      M Wagner
      • You mean prudent

        Seriously why should they leave a stable platform to become beta testers?

        Remember XP SP1 && SP1a ?

        There are alot of things that cant be broken until you put it into the hands of everyday users.
        Suicida|
      • Visions of setting the world right

        Whatever direction they tend to run, I generally find myself running the other way - repuli[b]con[/b] and democ[b]rat[/b] alike. Like the vaunted WGA initiative, I wish I could find a large button that reads [b]DELETE HERE [+][/b]
        klumper
      • how visionary

        "And we all know how 'visionary' the US Govt happens to be!"
        <p>
        Let's see,
        <ul>
        <li> funded research into graphical user interfaces because industry didn't want to do it (Project Athena)</li>
        <li> demanded miniature, transistorized computing equipment because industry wanted to keep building vacuum tube computers (Air Force, NASA)</li>
        <li> funded research into globally scalable internetworking because industry didn't want to do it (ARPANET, TCP/IP)</li>
        <li> specified POSIX generic platform to preserve competition because industry didn't want to do it (kept unix alive through the '80s)</li>
        <li> Determined significant risk to national security in dependence on proprietary formats and systems, chose open systems (Reagan's Pentagon, current gov'ts in Latin America)
        <li> specified autonomous, expandable desktop microcomputers because industry wanted to keep selling minis and terminals circa 1978 (Oops, that was state gov'ts, led by DMVs)</li>
        </ul>
        <i>Somebody's</i> got to be visionary when industry doesn't want to be.
        cls8
    • Not exactly...

      The article you provided the link for said it was the Department of Transportation, not the "US Government". And it implied that the reasons for not using Vista and Office 2007 was for reasons of incompatibility of currently installed applications in use by the DoT. That in itself is unsurprising.

      Take your glee elsewhere.
      M.R. Kennedy
  • "closer to the Mac than we've been on the Windows side for a long time."

    "consumers will like Vista as they play with it." Otellini added that Vista is "closer to the Mac than we've been on the Windows side for a long time."

    Well then instead of buying a new PC to upgrade to VISTA I'll just buy a MAC.
    T-Rexx
    • I agree 100%

      Let's see how Vista is closer to OSX than any version of Windows before it:
      1. DRM built into the heart of the OS? Check.
      2. Inability to be virtualized? Semi-check (OSX [b]can't[/b] be virtualized at all, Vista can be virtualized with certain limitations).
      3. Difficulty running Windows applications? Check (although guess which one will improve faster).
      4. Must spend extra money on hardware? Check (although buying a Mac will cost you $1,200, upgrading RAM for Vista costs $70, slight difference).

      Yup, Vista is more like OSX than any other version of Windows!
      NonZealot
      • agree with whom?

        Sounds like you hate both and have only used one...that is the impression you give at least.
        jjarman
      • You forgot the Goo-eee

        Don't forget the GUI. Just like the Macmeisters, you can now fire a bright shiny arrow [er, aero] up your ... pooter.

        Check.
        klumper
  • ditto for my customers

    no vista till sp1 and only if they want to buy it at that point.
    Been_Done_Before
  • What? No Bitty? No Loverock? No Mike Cox??

    Where's the outrage? The government has spoken, IT DOESNT WANT VISTA!!!
    itanalyst
    • Non-Zealot is still here

      No message
      MacGeek2121
    • The Government?!?

      ONE department says, "Oh, I'm sorry, but we have a legacy application that just will not run on Vista"-probably because it was developed by GOVERNMENT employees-and all the ABM'ers come out and say "The ENTIRE government will have nothing to do with Vista and NEVER will-or the states, either, yeah, that's right, or local governments! Yeah, I read that the entire city of Podunk, Maine has declared that Vista is incompatible with their Pentium II's, and they will have nothing to do with it!! Yeah,governments everywhere are declaring against Vista!"
      justanitguy
    • Shut up, fool.

      nt
      Hallowed are the Ori
  • It's foolish for any corporate entity ...

    ... to assume there will be no problems with Vista 'out of the box' (for instance, VPN stability is still a major problem -- expecially with ISPEC). Nevertheless, it is equally short-sighted for ANY enterprise to just blindly refuse to begin testing Vista before SP1 ships. YOu won't know when the time is right unless you start testing NOW. You should wait until your mission-critical applictions are ready -- but once they are ready, it is just plain dumb not to move to Vista -- regardless fo the status of SP1.
    M Wagner
    • A lot of businesses are still running Windows 2000

      I find it strange but I've glanced over at computers in businesses and noticed quite
      often that they are running Windows 2000. How long ago were quite a few
      companies running really old mainframes? Not that long ago! Many companies
      stick with hardware, not just computers but trucks and other equipment for long
      after you would imagine. It's better for taxes to fix something than it is to buy new
      equipment. New equipment is a capital investment and must be depreciated over
      time. Fixing equipment is an expense and tax deductable. An OS upgrade or
      change means that software needs to be upgraded as well. Some specialized
      software will need to be rewritten for a new operating system. Sometimes, people
      have to be trained. Technology oriented companies will upgrade fairly soon, but
      as the article suggests it is not advisable to upgrade until after the first service
      pak comes out. Other companies will use computers until they literally fall apart. It
      just makes better sense for some companies who use the old addage "if it ain't
      broke don't fix it" to not buy every technology advance that comes their way.
      MacGeek2121
      • If it ain't broke......?

        I suspect that too many people do not really believe that line which is more of an excuse than logic. With the new hardware available with greater capability, less power usage, lower cost, and new ways of protection being integrated into the board and processor level to protect against invasion, doesn't if make sense that the OS should also need to be tweaked or changed to maximize the new capabilities?

        If any of you have the cajoles to ask your upper management that just bought a new Lexus or BMW why they did so, I am sure they would respond with more efficiency, safety, and comfort. Not to mention that as the car gets older it requires more maintenance and downtime. This holds true for the equipment that runs the business, and is more important than the new Jaguar.

        Besides, most large corporations do not own the equipment,rather, it is usually on a lease basis which is a total monthly write off. Also, the idea of HaaS, or hardware as a service is a new twist that not only provides equipment but also the maintenance, servicing, and help desk in one. Ooops, that would put some of you guys on the streets, and this isn't personal since so many of you don't do anything anyway with all the new Macs you have been having management buy. They never have problems so perhaps they need to cut down on useless overhead in the support department.

        EOR (end of rant_
        magpie_z
        • Straight from the Microsoft handbook

          For salesmen.

          EOC (end of chuckle)
          Ole Man