Microsoft's Windows 8 enterprise prospects: It's complicated
Summary: Half of enterprises are Windows 7. Do we really expect those companies to move to Windows 8 even if there are benefits? And can slow movers go from XP to Windows 8?
Microsoft's enterprise prospects with Windows 8 are front and center as Gartner has questioned the corporate uptake. In a nutshell, Windows 8 could be a win for consumers and a non-starter for the enterprise.
The reality is likely to be somewhere in the middle. Overall, Windows 8 is a play on consumerization---just as Gartner noted---but the experience won't be so hot for desktop users. As Ed Bott highlighted, Gartner's track record can be spotty---especially with Windows---but the consumerization argument doesn't strike me as a big reach. Windows 8 is about the tablet and then the desktop. Corporations are just getting around to Windows 7.
On Microsoft's latest earnings conference call, CFO Peter Klein said:
Our enterprise products and services remain a top priority for CIOs as they navigate macroeconomic challenges. They are adopting our solutions for increased productivity, manageability, and security, at an overall lower total cost of ownership.
Windows 7 and Office 2010 both reached new milestones, as enterprises benefit from our business desktop offerings. Today over 50% of enterprise desktops worldwide are running Windows 7. And software assurance attach rates are at an all-time high. And even two years after launch, Office 2010 attach continues to grow, as businesses make long term moments to the Office platform.
Another way to read that passage is that half the corporations are still screwing around with Vista or Windows XP. I know of countless companies that are phasing in Windows 7 based on corporate PC upgrade cycles that have been stretched to ridiculous time frames. Simply put, many corporate PCs---at real blue-chip companies---are barely usable because they are so outdated. Is anyone measuring the productivity hit?

Let's get real: Reality would dictate that corporations next upgrade after Windows 7 will be Windows 9, not Windows 8. Why?
There are multiple nuances and user behavior items with Windows 8 to ponder and the enterprise is slow to move. A Windows 7 to Windows 10 scenario six years from now isn't out of the question. We've spoken to a few CIOs in the Windows 8 early adopter program. Generally speaking, these CIOs like Windows 8 and see the connections to tablets, smartphones and PCs. However, there are new ways of working and that may require training. That fact may cause some consternation on the corporate Windows 8 upgrade cycle.
Among the things we're hearing:
- Windows 8 is best with touch. Corporate PCs are mouse based.
- Windows 8's real benefit is its tiles and the ability to push data forward.
- A CIO noted that Windows 8 meant he wanted larger and larger screens. He wanted to monitor incoming items easily.
- These screens should also be touch based in an ideal world.
- Windows shops can use Windows 8 to tie multiple form factors together.
In other words, Windows 8 can work in the enterprise, but are corporations going to spend on multitouch monitors, new PCs and tweak workflows to get the most out of the interfaces. Given that corporations are clinging to outdated PCs that barely work, color me skeptical.
Windows 8 can be a total gem on the desktop, but corporations aren't going to move quickly. They simply have other projects prioritized. Office may be adopted for collaboration and hooks into other services. Windows 8 will take time---so much time that Windows 9 is probably a more realistic corporate story.
Related:
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Enterprise is slow.
there's also the 2.0 effect
The new mantra: wait for the second version for MSFT to get things right.
I agree.
Upgrading to Windows 7 isnt complete at many companies. There are compelling reasons to get moved onto Windows 7, if your on either Vista or XP. Windows 8 is quite a new ball game and it will take some new justifications to move onto Windows 8 particularly if you are only recently onto Windows 7. I think there should be little doubt that Windows 8 will not be likely to have a raging great start, it only seems to make sense that following as close as it has on the heels of Windows 7. Changing cost money, and that goes for the consumer and business. Predicting a fast start I truly think would need some compelling explanation because there are some simple economic realities that immediately would have to be addressed. Look at how many have yet to give up XP! And that’s pure economics at work. For many XP still runs great so it’s a bit of a stretch to try and convince them a new OS is the way to go.
Further Windows 8 is not just any new Windows OS, it’s a very new UI and its going to have a learning curve. For a business, and for most individuals you have got to have some very good explanations as to why they should spend their money, and learn a new OS in the process. For many, the explanations are bound to be relatively un-compelling.
as security issues become greater and greater
Currently installed Win7 units will happily live on for years ... as long as they get IE10 updates.
On desktops, I'd love to see a small touch sensitive display (say 17") acting as a kind of 2nd keyboard (slightly tilted under my giant my display #2) displaying the Win8 start screen and Metro interface. If this occurs at the office ... I expect "corporate desktop power users" would demand Win8 upgrades ... along with a "Metro Display" "dynamic keyboard and drawing device".
I don't see it...
I quite like Windows 8, but I don't see the point of forcing Metro on the desktop, an app designed to fit a 10" tablet looks silly full screen on a dual 27" display PC. For my work, I need multiple windows much more than I need touch.
XP SP1
The previous IT Support company had installed AV software, but never let it run in realtime or do a scan, because the PCs slowed to a crawl! By the time I got there, the network was infested with viruses.
I did manage to upgrade most of the machines to 2GB, but replacing them wasn't a priority, as they still worked. The manufacturing company seemed to see them like plant equipment, something you write down over 10 - 15 years!
Even the replacement machines for dead PCs couldn't be more than a Pentium D chip, no Core processors...
Agreed....
Windows 7 desktop..
Windoze 8 = fail
keep dreaming!
Total fail in your commentary.
"their crappy OS"
Windows is a crappy OS?
FAIL. No sorry, FAIL MISERABLY.
Again some dumb twit who has chosen to ignore reality in favor of his own bias.
If Windows was anything close to a crappy OS, 90% of the world could not have run on it for 2 decades.
Its such an obvious and simple reality its hard to believe it can be ignored and the person who ignores the fact still seems to think they have some credibility.
Get a life goof.
Very well said..
Lock-on to a monopoly
No, that is not quite right.
It's both, actually
More on Cayble's post
Right?
I know you're just a troll, but can't help myself.
I'd love to hear what you're basing your opinion on, and please avoid fallacious arguments such as historic failed products as we all know that the past doesn't dicatate the future. Use something concrete and intelligent to support your position.
Thanks much
Talking to yourself?
It's not over until it's over
Personally I dislike the user interface on a PC and absolutely hate it on the server, but I am still willing to say wait and see what the numbers are. At home I plan on staying with Windows 7 even on newly purchased PC's, if the vendor doesn't office Win7 then I will be purchasing it from someone else.