Gartner estimated that it will cost US$339 to US$510 per user to
move from Windows Vista to Windows 7, and US$1,035 to US$1,930 per
user to move from Windows XP to Windows 7.
Unless that includes more than just the OS. A site license should cost no
more than $50 per CAL, Depending on what applications are also
updated, I could actually see this being reasonable. But if it is just for the
OS then the cost is out of line.
Five steps before moving to Windows 7
Summary
Gartner says it is "nearly inevitable" that businesses will migrate to Microsoft's upcoming operating system Windows 7 but they must examine some key issues before making the move.
Topics
It is "nearly inevitable" that businesses will migrate to Microsoft's upcoming operating system Windows 7 and they must examine some key issues before making the move, advised Gartner.
In an advisory released Friday, the research firm outlined five key areas companies should evaluate to prepare their migration to the new OS when it is officially launched Oct. 22.
1. Plan to be off Windows XP before end-2012.
Enterprises that had skipped Vista should plan to be leave Win XP by the end of 2012. According to Gartner, while Microsoft will support Win XP with security fixes until April 2014, past experience has shown that independent software vendors (ISVs) will stop testing their apps much earlier. In fact, ISVs will start limiting their support for Win XP after 2011.
"New releases of critical business software will require Windows 7 long before Microsoft support for Win XP ends," Steve Kleynhans, research vice president at Gartner, said in the report. "Organizations that get all of their users off Win XP by the end of 2012 will avoid significant potential problems."
2. Start work on migration plans now.
A typical organization requires 12 to 18 months of waiting, testing and planning before it can start deploying a new client OS, Gartner explained.
Read more on "Five steps before firms make Win 7 move" from ZDNet Asia.
Talkback Most Recent of 22 Talkback(s)
-
Rick_K16th Oct 2009 -
Whole thing is disturbing and premature.
I found the whole article disturbing right down to the opening sentence that..."It is "nearly inevitable" that businesses will migrate to Microsoft's upcoming operating system Windows 7"
Why is it inevitable? We all agree that Vista sucks, but what is Windows 7 really offering that would appeal to businesses over XP Professional? Most still use IE6. Unlike individuals buying Windows for home use that have no choice, businesses will need to buy the ultra premium un-nerfed edition of Windows just to function, it won't come pre-installed and it isn't cheap. In fact, it's a lot of freaking money to spend on an XP M&M (That's XP with a candy shell).
It's so much more expensive that a Mac will cost you the same as a PC if you account for buying a legitimate OS. then you get all their genuine big brother crap making the install complicated. Why not boycott MS and wait until the price goes down or the compatibility gets better. Why the rush to install and all this talk about the inevitability of having to install an OS that hasn't even been released yet and is questionably not stable?
Then there are the wild cards in all this, Linux, ARM, mobile devices, and net-books. These can now be issued to some employees instead giving them dedicated workstations. An option that will appeal to many businesses with tight budgets. Microsoft isn't exactly a leader in the mobile market you know, Activesync was a horrid application even without Win7's bloated and useless security features and overhead mucking it down.
So in a race between the tortoise and the hare, It's bold and short-sited for Gartner to already be handing the trophy to the rabbit. I'm still holding out on the turtle. Because the race hasn't even started and it can only help businesses to wait.
Socratesfoot16th Oct 2009 -
sigh . . .
"but what is Windows 7 really offering that would appeal to businesses over XP Professional?"
Faster, more control, better security. May also vary depending on the needs of the business.
"businesses will need to buy the ultra premium un-nerfed edition of Windows just to function, it won't come pre-installed and it isn't cheap"
a) Depends on the business.
b) Two words: Volume licensing.
c) It's not any more expensive than previous versions of Windows.
"Then there are the wild cards in all this, Linux, ARM, mobile devices, and net-books."
Linux? Maybe if your business is running servers. But if you think it's a wildcard for the desktop OS, you need to pay a bit more attention to recent OS trends.
ARM/mobile devices: You can only get so far with a phone. I wouldn't want to use one for a data entry job, or any other job that involves a lot of typing. It has its place, but it is not a replacement for a larger computer.
Netbooks: Now pretty much all running Windows. Linux tried, but didn't succeed. Turns out people are willing to pay a bit more for a more familiar OS. And again, not exactly the best for a data entry job or any other job with a lot of typing.
"even without Win7's bloated and useless security features and overhead mucking it down."
Umm - Windows 7 is on par with XP for speed. There are reports that it's even faster in most cases. One of the biggest improvements of 7 over Vista is in the area of performance.
And the added security is certainly real. Having read some of the technical docs - it's definitely a lot better. If you think all it is is that UAC prompt - you're sorely mistaken.
CobraA116th Oct 2009 -
Really?
My point is...nothing is inevitable. Plus even if Windows 7 is the greatest thing since XP; why not wait? If nobody buys it, the price will come down. Windows 7 isn't even released yet. the best thing we can do is let it rot on the shelf. I'm not saying that Linux will replace the Windows desktop, but "inevitable". Pretty bold statement for a newly released OS that has barely even hit the market.
We don't NEED Windows 7. You said yourself "Windows 7 is on par with XP for speed." - Faster is questionable applying to specific products and only if you have the resources available. But even if it is faster, there is a reason net books run XP and the fact that they do ensures support for the OS. That means it has to be equally secure and we will not die tomorrow if we keep using it.
If every business uses XP for the next year or two and lets Win 7 rot on the shelf. How inevitable is it then?Socratesfoot16th Oct 2009 -
Business today can't allow themselves to be forced into
excepting W-7 at outrageous conversion cost? Until were out of this recession and by that I mean "banking, housing, auto industry and health care costs go down" companies will make do just fine with what ever they're using now. I don't see any large deployment (30,000+ units) for years to come. You know all that old hardware works just fine with Linux. One thing for sure things are changing right before our eyes .... Did anyone think of how Google's OS could effect things next year.......stay tuned IT industry, things are only starting to heat up............
SoYouSaid16th Oct 2009 -
And everyone but one above missing the point
due to anti-ms colored glasses everyone seems to be wearing these days.
In any case, Businesses will refresh their hardware because A) they skipped Vista or B) couldn't afford it due to downturn. Now that things are starting to pick up again, those that skipped or delayed, for whatever reason, will want a hardware refresh. Not all of them, but a majority anyway. When they do, their new machines are more then likely (to the tune of 85% or so) will run Windows and that will be Windows 7.
And to the poster above, volume licensing is exactly just a part of that quoted cost. We are talking the cumulative costs of migrating from one OS to another, including licensing, testing, IT labor costs, and temporary loss of productivity due to migration.
In fact, that is a VERY small price to pay if it is in fact an accurate figure as Win 7 is by far a better productivity enabler then XP or Vista. Believe me, I cannot WAIT till my company adopts 7, but that won't be until 2011 I'm guessing. However just the simple fact that Win 7 will utilize multiple core CPUs better then XP will already make back the money within a year due to reduction in times sitting and waiting for large dataset queries to run - i know that doesn't apply to ALL companies. That's before we get into security implications and all the other UI improvements that, while saving only 15 seconds here and 30 seconds there, can add up to a substantial amount of labor-hours over an entire year, again, more then off-setting the migration costs.
So in conclusion, that cost of migration, less then 10% of it is from license costs, the rest is non-avoidable labor/overhead expenses. Waiting for 'the price to drop cause noones buying' is a naiive notion. As for compatibility - its already there... not sure where that was pulled from but it wasn't reality.
In other news, Happy Friday!!
"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."
gnesterenko16th Oct 2009 -
My thoughts
"If nobody buys it, the price will come down."
Until, of course, people start buying it.
. . . and don't expect the price to infinitely flexible, either: Microsoft still needs to cover the development costs. Until those costs are covered, the price may remain high.
"But even if it is faster, there is a reason net books run XP"
Yeah, because Windows 7 is barely out of the door, and Vista is a hog. You don't want to put a pre-release OS on a machine intended for the general public.
That being said, it appears some of the faster/bigger netbooks do appear to be coming with Vista - my mother got one. I was rather surprised to see Vista on an Atom machine, and I definitely plan on moving it to 7 ASAP.
I'm pretty sure that Windows 7 will see a pretty fast roll out on new machines. Do keep in mind it got released to manufacturing very recently, and that it's not going to hit store shelves until next Thursday. So no, you shouldn't expect to see it on new computers today.
"If every business uses XP for the next year or two and lets Win 7 rot on the shelf. How inevitable is it then? "
That's a pretty big "if." Very unlikely for it to happen that way. Being that Microsoft actually focused a lot on performance this time around, and didn't make any large changes to drivers, IMHO it's likely that Windows 7 will pick up much faster than Vista. That's my prediction. Of course only time will really tell.
No, it isn't really inevitable, especially with how conservative businesses tend to be. But my personal opinion is that it'll do better than Vista. Things are looking good, and this isn't changing as much as it is improving what already exists.CobraA116th Oct 2009 -
One word: Drivers.
"what is Windows 7 really offering that would appeal to businesses over XP Professional?"
Essentially nothing. The reason the move is inevitable is because hardware manufacturers will stop making drivers for XP (and many already have started doing just that).
There's no reason they can't separate driver support and the core OS, but they won't, because that's exactly what forces many people to upgrade.
Larsix21st Oct 2009 -
seriously?
The cost of the software is minimal compared to the human cost. The uninitiated think you can just unplug one computer and plug in the replacement.
MIGRATION COSTS MONEY. The biggest portion of which is salaries to pay the people to do the move.
If you think the cost of XP to Vista is heavy, you should see the numbers for moving from Windows to Apple or some flavor of Linux.
Anyone that tells you Linux is "free" is probably charging you $200 /hr for their expertise; hardly free.
jasonc_z29th Oct 2009 -
RE: Five steps before moving to Windows 7
"It is 'nearly inevitable' that businesses will migrate to Microsoft's upcoming operating system Windows 7"
Gartner needs to check how many businesses are still running Windows 2000
.
Nothing is really inevitable, especially if a system has been working for years without issues.
Windows 7 is a good step forward, though. A very nice OS. CobraA116th Oct 2009 -
On that we can agree,
I'll agree it is a nice OS. I just think it is expensive and not necessarily worth the price. I do have objections to the way that M$ has chosen to market and license their product. A problem that has lead me personally to use Linux exclusively at home. But at work I use XP and will for several years.Socratesfoot16th Oct 2009 -
Expensive?
I always see reference to the expense of the OS, and other MS products. Sure, pricey for the home, and MS should acknowledge this better than they are doing now, but used in for-profit businesses, the price is fine compared to the gains. On average, 85% of my users generate over 500k in GP per quarter / per user. Some are up to a million. The rest are there to support this effort. Windows and Office, totaling about $500 per user retail pays for itself quickly. Jumping to Windows 7 on newer hardware with better performance only helps things, and better security allows me to reduce my IT support expenses significantly.
It is my opinion that those who complain about price all the time are either too cheap, a home user on a budget or someone who doesn't understand the economics of the organization they work for.
Sure, try to save money wherever you can. Scrutinize your vendors and put them to task for their pricing practices. That is our job too. But do not do this at the expense of productivity, advancement and security.
djmik16th Oct 2009 -
THANK you
In addition, comments like 'not worth the price' are absolutely meaningless unless you've done a comprehensive cost/benefit analysis of migration and in fact, costs came out to be > then projected monetery benefits. Such a statement is highly subjective... at best. "worth it" only has any meaning to the person saying it.
I predict, like this article, that by the end of 2010 the naysayers will be on these boards claiming they know WIn 7 was going to see a mass adoption all along. Happened with 2000. Happened with XP. And now it'll happen again. It continues to surprise me how poor our collective memories are.
"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."gnesterenko16th Oct 2009 -
Well, it's generaly bought with a new computer.
Well, the thing is that Windows is rarely bought directly. Most of the time it's bought with a new PC, or refreshed on a regular basis with a business.
It's generally the power users that really go out and buy it direct from the shelves. Although I do agree, it is admittedly pretty expensive as a shelf-bought item.
There is some hope, though:
Early buyers were able to get some pretty good deals by pre-ordering. The best deals are over by now, though.
Educational discounts are available, and are pretty easy to get if you have any connections to education.
There is a family pack available, although it does appear to be a limited time deal?
Microsoft TechNet subscribers can already get it. Although that subscription is pretty expensive. But as I understand it it offers access to all of their software, even historical stuff.
You can also get some OEM pricing, although that's a pretty grey market.CobraA116th Oct 2009 -
RE: Five steps before moving to Windows 7
If XP is working fine, what's the point?
JeramieH16th Oct 2009
Talkback - Tell Us What You Think
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
Facebook Activity
