New study highlights cost savings afforded by deploying Windows Vista

re: New study highlights cost savings afforded by deploying Windows Vista

Colon Cleanse — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 10:25:38 GMT

Talking about your best users, how did you determine this? is it by their dexterity with computers, or with Windows? In our deployments, I have found the converse to be true: the UI is the one thing that users, especially power users seem to love.

re: New study highlights cost savings afforded by deploying Windows Vista

kampfgranate — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 16:31:32 GMT

Thanks dexteur, you've really said what I was thinking.

I am deeply sorry for every minute that Vista has wasted and is continuing to waste for me.

Look at your own blog, Mr. White: It seems as though the only product that Vista can be compared to is XP -and that's supposed to sound like an advertisement?

It's a monopoly is what it is.

re: New study highlights cost savings afforded by deploying Windows Vista

dexteur — Sun, 23 Sep 2007 05:03:40 GMT

This is a problem with Microsoft: they make biased and illegitimate claims about their Operating systems. Just to present myself not as someone who has absolutely no experience with computers, but I do have experience managing a computer repair shop. In this post I want to tell you some of the problems I have had with windows Vista, simply because Microsoft does not provide adequate user support.

1. Windows Vista is unstable.

No doubt windows vista has made its way to becoming one of the most unstable operating systems to deploy in a large-scale business environment. The way Windows handles its process and services is still unacceptable. After all the research and effort into Vista, crashed processes still crash the entire system. Explorer.exe crashes more than often, not to mention that on my SECOND day of using Vista...I received a blue screen. New to windows Vista is the increased CPU usage and inefficient resources to tasks that "get your work done."

2. Windows Vista is slow. As already seen someone else complained about this problem. Copying a 196 MB MP3 file from your hard disk to an MP3 player using USB 2.0 took me 2 minutes on windows XP, it took me 5 minutes to copy the same file on Windows Vista. Explorer has crashed 2 times trying to "calculate time remaining". All my co-workers have been advising me that the Windows file copy algorithm is illogical in the way that it handles large files.

3. Windows Vista is hard to use. I do not know the reason for having the misleading "Network and sharing Center"...actually I find it annoying and useless for two reasons: first, the name is misleading, it assumes users know where to find the network adapter configuration. This wasted 10 minutes of my time trying to find where the network connections adapter settings are....this is talking from the viewpoint of a computer technician. Simply said, it takes 2 steps in Windows XP to get to the network adapter properties page. It takes 4 steps in Windows vista.

4. Windows Vista still has the same security loopholes. I must admit that you guys have come a long way in terms of security. However, you still run most Windows services under the "SYSTEM" user (aka the most powerful user on the computer with unlimited rights)....secondly, you pre-install internet explorer, hence forcing users of windows vista to initially use internet explorer until they can gain access to a much more decent alternate browser such as Mozilla Firefox. Seriously guys, give up on Internet explorer, it is built upon a very weak foundation and there is no point trying to "renovate a house built on a weak foundation" so to speak. Again, including and forcing users to use internet explorer is against fair-competition laws and there have been numerous lawsuits concerning this matter.

5. Microsoft "forces" you to use vista. This actually, again, is a violation on "fair-competition" and "consumer-rights" laws set by the United States and many other countries. Typically said, computer manufacturers only say they "recommend Microsoft windows vista" because Micrsoft dominates the software market, hence manufacturers are able to get mass numbers of legitimate licenses for windows Vista at a significantly lower cost. This is fine, except there is one problem, new conmputers prevents users from downgrading to windows XP. If you want to use windows XP, you must use a third-party partition manager to wipe your hard disk clean, and install XP from "scratch".

6. Master the essentials before adding on the unnecessary. Aero interface = useless, network and sharing center = useless, all the entertainment add-ons like sidebar = useless. I want to quote another computer technician: "if you want to see your CPU usage skyrocket on your vista box, use aero." I personally think that you should master the fundamentals of operating systems before "having fun". Compare the number of exploits on Windows platforms, Linux platforms, and Macintosh platforms.....you get the idea. Yes, linux user-interface is hard to use, but with the linux box that I am using and as I look at the system uptime = 12 days 03 hours 43 minutes......without crashing. Every since purchasing my new computer with vista pre-installed, the longest system uptime without crashes is 4 days. You compare the stability.

7. Microsoft doesn't listen. I had the opportunity to participate in a Microsoft "show-and-tell" event that took place last winter at the university of Calgary. These are the first words that the microsoft representative said to us in the seminar:

"you said you want it clean and simple, you said you want it easy to use, you said you want it secure........now we're saying......we heard you."

Web of lies. The fact that Windows vista is simply harder to use than windows XP is out there, the fact that it is more unstable is out there, the fact that it is slower is out there, and finally, the fact that you literally force the market to migrate to windows vista, is also out there.

decide for yourselves.

re: New study highlights cost savings afforded by deploying Windows Vista

Nick White — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 06:25:19 GMT

Hey bezee: I wanted to get back to you with info on how the costs are calculated in this study. The metrics in this study compare "run state" costs for both Windows XP and Windows Vista; deployment costs for both operating systems are not included its scope.

We know that new users will spend time learning and adapting to Windows Vista, and such costs should be included in every business case. But, note that those costs will be quickly offset by new productivity benefits, realized in Windows Vista in ways like reduced PC self-support time and due to new features like Meeting Place, which improves collaboration. User productivity benefits were not included in the Mobility paper (as we explicitly focused on "run state" TCO), but can be easily calculated using a formula found in Appendix A of the study.

re: New study highlights cost savings afforded by deploying Windows Vista

bezee — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 19:58:33 GMT

Bezee here again,

Just a quick follow up after a reread.

The accountant that we upgraded to Vista is a power user and an early adopter. He likes Vista with some minor complaints and wanted it to work, but Peachtree and another app were givng up trouble, that was eventually worked out, now the kicker is this user is on XP and Office 2003 because we also installed Office 2007 on his machine. The problems with Office 2007 have soured him soo much he says we are not going to Vista/Office07 for a long time, and when we go to Office 2007 he says he will not do it. He HATES the ribbon, calendar won't print right, graphics don't print as nicely.

Business users a complely different animal to home,hobby,gamer,college,users. Microsoft can not rebuild Rome so to speak every few years and expect nothing but applause. Yes, my mom would do better with Vista and Office 2007 as a new user, but experienced users are very hindered by the alltogether overwhelming amount of change in migrating to Vista and running Office 2007. For me getting to often used control panels in Vista much more clumsy. For a new user who likes all the obstructive hand holding Vista does, they will like it.

Vist is a home user, new user, gamer, change for the sake of change OS. Throw in Office 2007 too.

re: New study highlights cost savings afforded by deploying Windows Vista

bezee — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 19:26:32 GMT

Beezee here,

UI gripes:

Start Menu; Icon at top changes, no visual/icon que, have to read list to find 'computer', etc.

Where is the UP folder button?!

Where is the back button (in a dialog windows)..."oh up there...?"

First problem with Vista: Copying files takes forever! Deleting files takes forever! Uninstalling applications takes forever! No it isn't a hardware problem. Solution to follow.

Second problem with Vista:

Hard drive running ALL the time (not under XP). Turned off Indexing...still running ALL the time. Finally found a good blogger who pointed out that Off line files is the culprit, turned off Off-Line files and seems normal FINALLY. Vista was giong after all our network drives...fine for home users, not good for businesses.

Third problem:

The bosses label printer doesn't work. No drivers. Very big problem, since he owns the company I work for. He requested we buy a copy of XP to install over his new computer's OEM Vista copy. Back to XP for him.

Fourth problem:

Peachtree accounting. They swear it works with vista. We load it, it doesn't work, no patch (at that time) we reload XP because we need to keep the accountants that write the paychecks very happy. Peachtree finally has a version with a patch that works...but we had to spend money on an upgrade just to retry a Vista deploy. More time installing Vista, installing new Peachtree...again.

The typical business user does not want change. Businesses need features that improve efficiency and if they don't, nobody wants them. None of my users save maybe one, wants a new OS. They just want their computer to work reliably and in a consistent way. The home users and gamers want the new bells and wistles.

Vista does not make good business sense for us...maybe someday.

re: New study highlights cost savings afforded by deploying Windows Vista

john — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 18:11:05 GMT

Hello Bezee,

What problems have you encountered as far as attempting to test or deploy Windows Vista? I would like to know what tools, hardware and software, you employed in your expensive effort. If you have a plan that didn't work out, if not confidential, please pass it on as well.

With adequate training, which 'should' be an integral part of any test regime, even the most computer-illiterate user would find Windows Vista to be a breeze.

I believe the calculation methodology was included in the paper.

Finally, I would really be interested in trying to replicate your issues. If you click on my name link above, it would take you to my blog where you can email me using the convention: firstname dot lastname at absolutevista dot com.

re: New study highlights cost savings afforded by deploying Windows Vista

Brytown — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 05:07:55 GMT

good_bytes i couldnt agree more i find my self doing less maintenance and worrying with smoother runniung machine indexing protection beter help beter over all experince ect. All i really have to do is just have to remember to check for updates. oh wait it does that too. Sure it needs work but theyve done more for this OS in the first X months than XP in 2 years. I think that says something. I think most peoples "problems" from what ive fixed on other machines running vista was vendor related. There are still some getting their stuff together and thats understandable, but ive been able to reserch or fix most problems. Its always an endevour buying on launch day but it hasnt been as bad for me os alot of people claim.

re: New study highlights cost savings afforded by deploying Windows Vista

Good_Bytes — Fri, 07 Sep 2007 04:19:39 GMT

People want change... yet they don't want any. Interesting...

I'm no expert but you can put Windows Classic skin. The only new thing they will see is the blue back button on windows and search bar oh and new start menu. In fact with this UI setting, I don't think you'll have to upgrade the computers with a better video card. So you should save money. Moreover, installing the OS will not require IT's to bring a pack a CD's to install those drivers for all those devices. Install>Update, create the account and poof your set, image it and install it on all computers, and if you have 2-3 computers that are different, you can repeat the task without doing an image, as you'll install it directly on it, and you'll be done in no time, specially with the ultra fast install.

My personal experience with Vista was only good. Under XP I always feel I needed a bigger screen or dual screen, but those transparent boarders helps A LOT to a point I'm fine with my 17inch 1280x1024 display. Which is great because I have a high-end CRT monitor and I can't find any other monitor that is at least near equivalent to the high detailed, better and more colors, and at 85Hz refresh rate and perfectly flat double glass it feels like an LCD.

AN other personal experience is with my mother. She know NOTHING about computers. In previous version of Windows she got lost when she minimized a window, she used to panic and go "where did it go", and it was impossible for her to use MS word or similar programs.

With Vista, I see her browsing directories and running application herself, heck even change the background! I think it's because of the perfectly balanced animation (animated windows but not to a point of watching a movie playing like some OS's) so the user knows what is happening. And the descriptions on each options really helps. Moreover, the new more graphical and easier to understand (bravo Microsoft for it) Help document.

As with MS Office 2007 new interface, she manages very well. As she always goes "ok I'm inserting a table, so I click on "Insert">"Table". That simple."

So far, I have more freedom in doing my own work, and I know Vista is taking care of it self with auto-defrag, anti-spyware, etc...

So know I can be more to help for real problems (if any).

Sure Vista has not the best utilities in the world, and frankly I think I should get better and more then what I paid for and for the long wait, but that's fine. At least it's not horrible, and give a descent level of overall (expect anti-virus) protection.

re: New study highlights cost savings afforded by deploying Windows Vista

bezee — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 20:52:47 GMT

I am very confused about these TCO studies. Our attempts to test and deploy Vista have only cost us money and time. We as a company (a Microsoft Partner), are very concerned about what do about Vista. Our best users don't like it at all (lots of UI gripes), and we know our less computer literate users are going to be completely overwhelmed to the point of rioting if we ever take away XP. How do you measure that cost...?

re: New study highlights cost savings afforded by deploying Windows Vista

Nick White — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:41:18 GMT

Hey Good_Bytes: Windows Vista is loosely based on the NT kernel, so while I'd not refer to it as NT version 6, you could call it Windows version 6.

re: New study highlights cost savings afforded by deploying Windows Vista

Nick White — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:39:40 GMT

Hey ekwoodard: you're better off posting technical help questions in our public newsgroups: http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/communities/newsgroups/en-us/default.mspx.

re: New study highlights cost savings afforded by deploying Windows Vista

Good_Bytes — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 07:03:45 GMT

Operate? or startup time?

From my understanding (please correct if I'm wrong), Windows Vista SP1 that will be released soon (Q1 of 08) will have significant improvements on laptops. Also it could be drivers issues. If companies moved more (or actually moved), Windows Vista would actually be interestingly good. Microsoft should work on that next time. Just a quick question, is Vista NT6.0? Or Vista is simply Vista with a new NEW core.

re: New study highlights cost savings afforded by deploying Windows Vista

ekwoodard — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 03:29:46 GMT

i doubt i am in the right place... but i am looking for help in finding why my vista home premium computer w/2 turion tl 52 processors and 512mb hypermemory and 2gb ddr2 operates slower than my old pc which had a p3 processor. if you can give me directions in finding a resoulution to this problem please respond to me by email ekwoodard@mail.boisestate.edu

thank you

re: New study highlights cost savings afforded by deploying Windows Vista

newscientist2000 — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 01:03:37 GMT

Interesting, Sarbanes Oxley (SOX) compliance is a real pain to deal with, nice to see that Bitlocker can lower the risk somewhat, and thus lower the overall cost of compliance.

My company had to remove all the screensavers on communal machines at work so that we could be sure confidential info wasn't accidentally displayed on a screensaver to someone who shouldnt have access, kinda overkill, but hey thats the world we live in!