|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, December 30 2012 @ 09:47 AM EST |
Hey, it's only company money! The company will get it back
many times over by staying with M$ products. Not a troll, but
just stating what I have observed in the past.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, December 30 2012 @ 10:03 AM EST |
Or companies could just keep using Windows XP/7 and not spend any additional
money. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: albert on Sunday, December 30 2012 @ 12:03 PM EST |
watch as Win8 dies a slow death, and M$ abandons the few companies that were
stupid enough to switch. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, December 30 2012 @ 12:27 PM EST |
There is so much time in labor invested into even data that
sits in
MS Access databases, and time trained on those
tools, to move to something
else... does not cost benefit
out to move away from windows if migration costs
to new apps
don't come back in savings in a SHORT period of
time.
One big problem I've encountered in the past is the orphaned
apps. Someone in the office writes an application in Access without IT's
involvement. They share it with coworkers, then leave the company. It is often
easier to just keep an old machine running the application than to rewrite it to
company standards.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: tknarr on Sunday, December 30 2012 @ 03:12 PM EST |
The thing is, the cost isn't in retraining employees. The real cost is in
software. Not the OS, all the other software that runs on the OS. In any major
corporation, every bit of that software has to be certified by the vendor to run
on Win8, supported on Win8, and then tested and certified by IT as running
correctly on the company's new Win8 systems. Until all that's done, Win8 can't
be deployed. And that's a major cost. It starts with the cost of time for IT and
Legal to check on all the vendor certifications and support, and for IT to
assemble test systems and test all the software to make sure it really runs. The
hardware vendors also have to support Win8 officially. The tools to create and
deploy system images have to support Win8. And then the real costs hit: the
vendors who go "Oh, yes, we support Win8. In the most current version. You
aren't licensed for it, though, so let us hand you off to Sales to buy those
licenses.". And believe me, management doesn't like signing off on cutting 6-
and 7-digit checks to vendors to pay for upgrades to new versions of software
just to support a new OS when the existing versions and OS are working just
fine. Lastly you have software the business is dependent on that isn't being
sold anymore and the company can't get a version supported on Win8 at
all. All that's why Win7 took so long to take hold in the corporate
world.
Plus, Win8's facing a hurdle Win7 didn't: time. Win7 came out long
after Windows XP was adopted. Companies had had time to pay off their investment
in upgrading to XP. But here, Win8's coming in right on the heels of the
majority of upgrades to Win7. The first thing the finance guys ask when faced
with the price tag for upgrades is "Didn't we just finish spending money on
this?". I know where I work we just finished a hardware upgrade cycle to get
desktop systems that could run Win7. We won't be looking at any changes to the
desktop OS for at least 2-3 years yet, when the leases on the current desktop
hardware run out. With the current economy, the only way an early hardware
refresh could be justified is if our hardware vendor offered us free
replacements of all the machines, and I don't see that happening. Without that,
the money simply isn't there. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, December 30 2012 @ 05:03 PM EST |
What company will want to pay employees to learn Win8 over 6
weeks?
She didn't say that it took people 6 weeks of effort to
learn to use Windows 8. She said that after using Windows 8 for six weeks,
people were using the "new way" of doing things more than they were using the
"old way". That's something entirely different.
You don't spend all
day interacting with the Windows UI. You use the Windows UI to launch or select
programs or to find files. You spend most of your actual work time using the
applications, which (so far) not have changed from what people were using on
Windows 7. There is a much bigger change for anyone switching to Mac OS/X, but
it doesn't seem to take those people months to learn the "Apple" way of doing
things.
I've used Windows 8, and while I don't like it, I don't think
it's as bad as what is being written about it in the Internet. I suspect that
Microsoft will come out with a "Windows 9" earlier than they otherwise would
have, and they will have "fixed" a lot of the desktop problems in the UI.
Time for Google to step in with simple solution, but it has
to work with all past Windows software, including Quickbooks ...
etc.
In other words, it's never going to happen. Software
vendors can't reliably make all their software run on multiple versions of
Windows. Any sort of WINE-like solution will never be "simple".
As for
"employee training", I don't know what planet you live on, but on Earth
companies stopped caring about things like that at least 10 years ago. Nowdays,
if you work for a large company and you can't use whatever software they stick
in front of you, they will just fire you and replace you with someone else who
can. If you need training, they will tell you to go get yourself "trained", but
it's your problem and not theirs. I have yet to see a large company in the past
20 years who has cared even the slightest about their employees' opinion of what
software the IT department installed. If companies cared about such things, then
things like SAP wouldn't exist. If it takes you longer to do your job, well then
too bad. Work through lunch. Welcome to the modern globalised market economy.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: myNym on Monday, December 31 2012 @ 06:01 AM EST |
Where I work, the majority of the desktop "office" computers
still are on XP.
Vista was ignored completely.
Newer machines that we get are just now coming out with
Win7.
I'm pretty sure 8 will be a complete non-starter.
The switch to Linux has been explored, it's just a couple of
old-school apps that are not available there. Yet.
Odds are we'll see Linux roll-outs before 8.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
