THE OFFICIAL BLOG OF THE SBS "DIVA"

Chris was speaking about Linux.  I have always been one to look ahead at emerging technology in order to be ready for change when it makes sense to change something.  But when it comes to advising my clients, I will never recommend a change that carries undue risk or cost with it.  While I appreciate that Linux represents an alternative to Windows, I cannot yet recommend it to my business clients as something that they should adopt as a foundation for business computing.

At this point of its development, Linux is beginning to distill down to a handful of distributions that are no longer in the infancy stage but they are far from mature.  In some ways I see a parallel to the various versions of DOS that once existed before Microsoft took control of that platform once and for all.  Even as DOS matured, we had various developers creating tools to get better performance from DOS through the use of third-party memory managers.  There are many other examples that I could cite, but the independent development from a multitude of sources that takes place with Linux reminds me of those DOS days.  I don't want to be constantly looking for ways to tweak Linux in order to get it to work better and then have to be responsible for deploying that to my clients.  I don't want to deal with numerous possible versions of an operating system from developers who offer little to no support for their creations.  I don't want to make the operating system the focal point of my efforts with clients when I have a solid solution already in place.  I've lived through that phase of my computing life and I have no desire or need to return to it.

Which brings me to Vista by way of XP.  For many years Microsoft has been the single point of contact and responsibility that has provided operating systems that, for better or worse, have enabled my clients to run their businesses with the knowledge that someone of real substance stood behind the product.  There have been ups and downs but for the most part the progression from DOS through several (but not all) versions of Windows has been good to and for my clients.  

Certainly Vista incorporates some technological advances that offer benefits to its users.  I believe that Vista or its successor will be the operating system that my clients will be using at some point in the future.  Yet at this stage of its development, Vista has not demonstrated a compelling reason to make the switch from what is a very solid, reliable, dependable and profitable computing platform for my clients, namely XP Pro.  It's not about my unwillingness to look at something new with an open mind because I spend a lot of time and energy doing that every day.  Rather, it's a matter of knowing that my clients don't need to switch to Vista in order to keep advancing their businesses.  Much has already been written about the need for different hardware in order to obtain the full Vista experience.  That experience - at this point - simply isn't as valuable as the return available from other initiatives that my clients can invest in.  It's all about return on investment.  

I am not a Vista obstructionist, but I am a trusted adviser and a realist.  In that role, I want my clients to have a stable computing platform that can meet their needs and still have an ability to move them forward.  XP Pro continues to fulfill that requirement.  When something comes along that is so compelling that it makes sense to switch, I will embrace it wholeheartedly.  At the moment, neither Linux nor Vista nor Apple have reached that point but as a supporter of technological advancement I wish these platforms well and I will await the day when one or the other seizes the moment and rock my world.  Until then, there are many other ways I can help my clients become more profitable through the use of technology solutions.  An operating system change simply isn't the focal point at this time.

Bob,

  I'm curious how your going to feel six months from now if/when Microsoft stops selling XP. Then you will have no choice but to sell Vista to your customers. Now I'm not saying I don't agree with everything you said but I think you, along with the rest of us, are going to have to change our tones over night.

Dean,

I have no control over Microsoft or the decisions it makes regrading XP, but it definitely concerns me that they will at some point stop selling XP in favor of XP.  If Microsoft delivers a compelling business reason to make the move to Vista, I will embrace it.  But if they are unable or unwilling to do so, perhaps those of us who represent a rather large client base that uses Microsoft products have an obligation to unite our voices so that Microsoft hears our concerns and addresses them.

I don't want to get into any details here, but I will say that based on my convictions I presented a very sound business case to a very large vendor that one of their policies was neither in their financial interests, nor that of their solution provider partners nor that of their clients.  As a result, that company made a major change in policy and now all three groups are better off as a result.  

Maybe XP will fall into that category and maybe I should start preparing my argument to Microsoft.  And maybe, just maybe, if my peers feel that same way they will join me.  After all, what good is a partnership relationship if we can't discuss our mutual business needs?  You would be surprised how much weight you can move with a simple lever.  Would you like to eat your Wheaties and join me?

"but it definitely concerns me that they will at some point stop selling XP in favor of XP".  

No kidding. Although I think you meant XP in favor of Vista.  I get mad when they stop selling any previous product that works just because they have a new version out. Why can't they just sell both for say 7 years and then get rid of the old product. I'm scared to death of when they stop selling SBS 2003 because it works fine.

"Would you like to eat your Wheaties and join me?"

Well if I can do something sure but I'm an EXTREMELY small fish. I don't even show up on the fish finder.

"After all, what good is a partnership relationship if we can't discuss our mutual business needs? "

No one is ever really a partner with Microsoft.

"I don't want to get into any details here, but I will say that based on my convictions I presented a very sound business case to a very large vendor that one of their policies was neither in their financial interests, nor that of their solution provider partners nor that of their clients"

Do you think you could make the same case to our government ? Someone needs to.

"I cannot in good conscious place a 6+ year old operating system on brand new hardware that I will expect to be in the firm for 4 more years."

That's insane. The 6+ year old operating system is the one that will just be getting to the stage where it's bullit proof. Does IBM replace it's mainframe operating systems just because they are 6 years old ? Of course not. It keeps fixing more bugs and making them better and selling them for years more. Microsoft can't do that because they don't sell the hardware the operating system runs on. They would have to except a LOT less profit which of course they won't. Young programmers don't want to keep working on the same "old code" either which is also a problem because to them 3 years is old.

"If that was true, Windows 98 would be unbreakable and Windows 2000 would be bulletproof.  They are not.

There are additional security resources under the hood that are in the newer platforms that are not in the older ones.

SMBv2 is just one example of a technology that will match up with Win2k8 that is not in 2k3.

It's not insane at all to be looking at the security settings under the hood and realizing that a newer operating system has the ability to take me farther and longer term for my firm"

Your to obsessed with security. If security has become that much of a problem then we all need to throw in the towel. Plus if Microsoft kept working on XP then it would have to eventually be more secure than Vista by default. And Windows 2000 would be bullit proof by now if Microsoft had kept working on it.

Can SMBv2 be added to XP ? Of course ! But Microsoft won't do it.

There is nothing that XP couldn't be made to do if Microsoft wanted it to. It even has a 64 bit version. I mean that version alone could be made to run circles around Vista if Microsoft wanted it to.