Scripps Employees Called 'Hackers' For Exposing Massive Security Flaw
Suspected PayPal Hackers Seek Deal To Stay Out Of Prison
Half of all companies will continue to use Windows XP after it retires in 2014
According to a shocking report, 48% of IT administrators intend to continue running Windows XP after Microsoft officially retires it in 2014. The "IT [sector] just really, really likes the XP operating system," says Diane Hagglund, a senior analyst at Dimensional Research, reporting on the findings of a survey of 950 IT professionals. "They say it's just that good, and don't want to mess with it."Windows XP might be really good, but its retirement in April 2014 means that it will no longer be supported by Microsoft -- there will be no more security fixes. That almost half of the IT sector intends to keep Windows XP installed -- it will be 13 years old in 2014! -- can only be indicative of two things: either Windows XP really is is that good, or IT professionals are lazy.
In other news, 6% of companies have now rolled out Windows 7, as opposed to only 1% back in January. "What's really interesting here is that if you look at the numbers, they've almost exactly adopted according to plan," said Hagglund. "That's a real indicator that Windows 7 migration is going well." With almost a quarter billion copies sold in the first 12 months, and the biggest market segment -- the workplace -- about to roll over, 2011 is looking good for Microsoft.
Comments
22
Subscribe to commentsjarrodnbNov 1st 2010 2:07PM
they are that lazy
JordanNov 1st 2010 2:14PM
Now that's just silly. No one used 3.1 for that long, even though it was still superior to 95 and 98, it wasn't until W2K that a version bested it for security and stability.
Windows 7 is LEAPS and BOUNDS ahead of XP in terms of networking and enterprise features, and it just seems a shame to let Vista tarnish the ability of the business world to maintain a modern infrastructure.
And as to the thousands of businesses that have IE6-only programs, those should have been upgraded years ago. And now with modern browsers and stable cross-browser support of standards and HTML5 features, this is probably the best time to upgrade such a program, to take advantage of the new features and to allow cross-browser support and increase productivity (like how productive are you going to be on a slide-rule versus a calculator?).
CarneyNov 1st 2010 2:44PM
The over caution and stubborn resistance to superior new technologies on the part of workplace IT, as well as its lazy, follow-the-leader mindlessness, is a huge bane on modern life.
http://www.slate.com/id/2226279/
r3loadedNov 1st 2010 2:45PM
That's so lazy, that they don't deserve the honourable title of "Sysadmin".
It's the equivalent of a business back in 2008 using Windows 95.
JohnMWhiteNov 1st 2010 2:51PM
I actually saw a business using Win95 quite recently. Pretty much everywhere I go I see XP, though, and if I still see it in 2014 in a fair few places, it would not really bother me. There are alternatives to the false dichotomy of XP being near perfect or Sys Admins being lazy. For example, some companies may have limited resources and just not be able to upgrade, even in 2014. Some companies may have no impetus to upgrade if XP is still doing exactly the job they require. Not every workplace needs to be on the cutting edge.
48%, though? That seems a lot more than just local libraries and mom and pop stores, and it's a bit odd to think that many companies would not want to keep their systems up to date.
Sebastian AnthonyNov 1st 2010 4:44PM
Yeah, the same analyst says that that 48% is representative of a big swathe of business types -- small, medium and large.
I guess it's not just down to resources. XP may just be that good... :)
jeremiah89Nov 1st 2010 9:47PM
It won't be "that good' when Microsoft is no longer providing security updates.
famehNov 2nd 2010 4:51AM
"It won't be "that good' when Microsoft is no longer providing security updates "
Don't you think M$ is an enterprise which goal is to make profit? or is their goal to give you just the superb OS? Do you think they will no longer sell other OS if some day they find the 'awesome f*cking good OS' ?
Being good, bad, or superb, M$ is NOT interested in people continuing using their OS during 10-11 years, that's not good for sales. So, probably, the most efective way to "unlazy", to "awake" or "to sell new OS" is just to stop giving service to the old OS.
C'mon, I could imagine myself also trying this if I were a directive of M$...
ElranzerNov 1st 2010 3:05PM
I'll bet the IT sys admins that want to keep running on XP in 2014 are the same type that still cling to the MCSE as if it were still relevant.
Danny BoyNov 1st 2010 8:06PM
I've seen Win98 still being used in some banks, where they still use some kind of DOS-based banking programs.
KevinNov 2nd 2010 7:16AM
The geniusi where I work still have us running Windows 2000.
Praveen PremchandranNov 2nd 2010 2:21AM
Maybe also because 48% of the companies run on PCs with less than 512 MB RAM modules in them, making it inefficient to run Windows 7? Am not suggesting that Windows 7 is bloated.. But it makes sense running it on more "modern" hardware (read: 1Gig of RAM)...
I remember trying to install Win 7 on a colleague's PC, but it wouldn't install since the BIOS didn't support the OS!
Maybe M$ should just keep quiet?
famehNov 2nd 2010 5:11AM
To migrate a few PCs in a small enterprise not focused on IT development, or also, in whatever sector medium-big enterprises, translates into a significative cost.
For a very big part of the enterprises (I would say much more than the other 52%) there are no significative advantages for day-to-day usage of W7 over XP. In fact there are big disadvantages, as users are not used to it, and would generate more cases (so IT administrators must first install the new OS and later explain/resolve the new problems). I work in a medium-sized enterprise, dedicated to IT, and believe me, not everyone reads DS. There will be always people disturbing IT admins about quite-trivial things, and if you change them the OS, much much more ("I used this program that now i can't install"..."my outlook"...blablabla...unending).
So also, apart from old PCs, as the previous comment #11 says, for enterprises loss/gains is the most important, and if they have to buy new copies of the OS, also invest a big money in the migration and support...they must see very big advantages to assume that cost, which I think personally they don't see, and prefer the most-secure and cheaper option of just "mantain what is working".
anonymousNov 2nd 2010 11:22AM
It’s because Windows 7 and Vista are the same products, slightly different. Vicious circle of adding features, taking away existing ones. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_features_removed_in_Windows_7 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_features_removed_in_Windows_Vista
JayNov 2nd 2010 11:49AM
If based on my company it's because the IT people are lazy and/or paranoid of learning something new.
JayFiveAliveNov 2nd 2010 2:01PM
Happy to say I've been moving my company to Windows 7 as we order new machines ;). I'd upgrade everyone, but the cost is a bit high -- we can wait for new machines.
By the end of 2011, we will be fully on Win 7! Out of 110 PC users, we have about 30 on Win 7 now, soon to be 50.
FatmanNov 3rd 2010 6:32AM
I keep sneaking Windows 7 installs onto some of our workstations, but every time something prevents me from saying "yep, this is ready to roll out now". Issues have included networking issues, bug-ridden third-party software and five-year-old hardware.
Interestingly, neither Windows XP nor Ubuntu Linux have comparable problems. (I would be equally happy to roll out Ubuntu, but that's a harder sell to the boss.)
cortesNov 3rd 2010 7:51AM
Companies are not in business to install operating systems on their computers. They are in business to make money doing what they're good at doing, be it real estate, restaurant supplies, banking, chemicals, or any of thousands of other things.
For these companies, their computers are a simple tool, like their telephones. The PBX business may have changed by leaps and bounds, but most companies don't need their phone system to do anything fancy.
Likewise, they don't need their computers to do anything extraordinary. XP finally gave them reliable computing. And they can get their real work done now without much hassle.
So they won't change just for the sake of change. Nor should they.
Their sysadmins are there to keep the XP computers running and the XP computer users happy, nothing more, nothing less. They're not lazy, just task-focused.
Brett MillerNov 6th 2010 10:03PM
It van be difficult to make intelligent business decisions in the current moment. When you starting asking what are you going to do in 4 years, the value of the answers becomes questionable.
No matter how solid XP was, support for hardware, browser, and applications will be ending. Sure companies can save money by not upgrading, but it will be too costly to deal with all the problems.
It's almost like saying companies shouldn't have computers so they can save money.
Brett Miller
Http://www.customsoftwarebypreston.com
William FankbonerNov 7th 2010 11:26AM
You advocates of the immediate adoption of Windows 7 are ignoring a host of issues, foremost of which is the huge investment in application software required by an OS upgrade. Other considerations include reorienting large corporate staffs to the new OS. Use the loaf.