DFS wrote:
Roy Schestowitz wrote:
Ninety percent of 961 IT professionals surveyed said they
have concerns about migrating to Vista and more than half
said they have no plans to deploy Vista.
Your thread title says they rejected Vista, but the article
says they have concerns about it.
This is the umpteenth example that proves what kind of liar
you are.
When you start doing similar deceptive things in the real
world you'll soon be fired. If you go into medical research,
it's no stretch at all to imagine you falsifying data - in
fact I'd bet on it.
http://www.computerworlduk.com/management/infrastructure/applications/news/index.cfm?newsid=6258
[quote]
Ninety percent of 961 IT professionals surveyed said they have
concerns about migrating to Vista and more than half said they
have no plans to deploy Vista.
"The concerns about Vista specified by participants were
overwhelmingly related to stability. Stability in general was
frequently cited, as well as compatibility with the business
software that would need to run on Vista," said Diane Hagglund of
King Research, which conducted the survey for systems management
vendor Kace. "Cost was also cited as a concern by some respondents."
[/quote]
Deceptive? It seems Roy's statement is on target. What is the
difference between "reject" and "have no plans"?
Oh, I get it. Because a statement was made against the convicted
monopoly now makes one a liar.
However, the industry rants against Vista continue:
http://www.computerworlduk.com/technology/operating-systems/windows/news/index.cfm?newsid=6277
or http://tinyurl.com/2ye6kq
November 20, 2007
Microsoft's Service Pack fails to supercharge Vista
Stick to XP for a speedy operating system...
By Gregg Keizer, Computerworld
[quotes]
Windows Vista Service Pack 1 (SP1) is no faster than the launch
version of the operating system, according to a performance
testing software vendor.
"One gigabyte, 2GB [of memory], it didn't make a difference,"
said Barth. "SP1 was never more than 1% or 2% faster."
The difference between Vista RTM and SP1 on Devil Mountain's
Microsoft Office-based test script was "statistically
insignificant," Barth said, while a multitasking test panel
produced results for SP1 less than 1% faster than RTM.
"Our goal wasn't to bash Vista," said Barth. "We've been doing
this for a while, we know how to do it, and we tried to be as
clinical as possible. But SP1 is not going to be a panacea for
any performance problems users have with Vista. If you've been
disappointed with the performance of Windows Vista, you're not
going to be any happier with SP1."
[/quotes]
http://www.computerworlduk.com/management/infrastructure/applications/news/index.cfm?newsid=6234
or http://tinyurl.com/2gdrbx
November 15, 2007
Businesses continue to avoid Vista
Loyality to XP is the problem, apparently.
By Gregg Keizer, Computerworld
[quotes]
Businesses are continuing to avoid Vista, the latest research
from Forrester Research reveals.
Gray also echoed other analysts who last week said Vista plans
had been significantly scaled back by most companies. "That's
absolutely the case. In May 2006, 40 percent of the companies we
surveyed said they planned on deploying Vista within the first
year of its public life," Gray said. "Forty percent were planning
on deploying, but by the end of 2007, only 7 percent will have
started. Enterprises are absolutely pulling back from their very,
very aggressive deployment plans."
He attributed the lowered expectations to a lack of detailed
information about Vista in 2006; too-high prices for PCs with 2GB
of memory, which is essentially the minimum needed for Vista,
according to company managers; and a larger-than-expected number
of incompatible applications.
[/quotes]
--
HPT
|
|
