Microsoft has sold its Software Assurance (SA) program largely based on a “Trust Me” platform. The company doesn't guarantee that a new version of a product will be delivered during the term of the customer’s SA contract. Although Microsoft has tried to add value to SA since it was first announced in 2001 (when the only benefits were new product versions and spread payments), for most organizations, unless they get new software releases, a three-year SA agreement does not make financial sense. They have had to trust that Microsoft would ship a new release during their contracts or would add sufficient value to make it not matter. For many customers that renewed Office SA in September, October, and probably November 2003, Microsoft has done neither. These customers got Office 2003 as part of their prior SA and will not get Office 2007 unless they renew. Most Windows client SA holders have not gotten a new release during their last renewal, either, due to Windows Vista’s delays, but it’s the Office 2007 slip that’s bringing this issue to a head.

I spoke with a client in this predicament recently. This client has tens of thousands of users and paid Microsoft millions of dollars for Office SA during the past three years. Understandably, this client is not happy. Thus far, Microsoft is stonewalling the customer's request to "make good" before discussing renewal. Press reports on 8 August indicated that Microsoft was finally relenting, but Microsoft insists that this is not the case. As previously, company says it is discussing the situation on a one-to-one basis, but thus far, our reports indicate that Microsoft will not discuss the issue unless it is in the context of a new renewal. Understandably, companies want satisfaction before they even think about renewing. Does this fall into the realm of "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me"?

To be fair, Microsoft specifically does not promise a new version of a product during the term of SA. However, Microsoft has never before gone more than three years (the term of a standard SA) between delivering new versions of Office. Most customers made very clear to their sales people that there was no financial benefit for them to sign the agreement unless they were going to get a new version of Office. Companies feel strong-armed into signing SA because Microsoft has indicated that it will continue to provide value, and the cost of rebuying Office without SA is very high. From a budget and expense point of view, getting a budget of $2 million per year may be much easier than giving up that budget and trying to get a $5 million budget once every three years, so based on internal politics, SA can be an easier sell than a sporadic lump sum payment. We think that Microsoft will increase the pressure to buy SA in the future (see "Microsoft Software Assurance: When Will It Not Be a Choice Anymore?")

Microsoft needs to fix SA so new versions are not needed to attain ROI. Or the company needs to fix product development so new versions are provided on a regular and predictable basis. Or companies need to learn how to say “no” to SA unless they’re sure they will see ROI (see "Determining the Value of MS SA" and "Exclusives Provide Pressure for Windows Client SA").

Submit a Comment | Permalink

I get asked a lot, given the substantial progress that Microsoft is making with its beta testing of Vista, whether I am still confident with Gartner's assertions that Vista will slip beyond the end of this year and launch in 2Q07. The folks at Microsoft are working very hard to prove us wrong, and I give them full credit for the significant improvements we are seeing with each new interim build. However, as with most things, the devil is in the details, and at the moment, based on my continued testing and day-to-day use of Vista, the details are still pretty rough.

Overall, the latest build, 5472, is a pretty solid platform, and one that can be used for day-to-day activities, with little fear of serious disruption. Compared with the original Beta 2, it performs better, is much more stable and exhibits better compatibility with a broader range of applications. Indexing and search functions and interoperability with Office 2007 Beta 2 are functioning properly. Even some of the rough edges on things such as the Network Center and UAC have been smoothed out.

However, there are still a lot of holes under the surface. In particular, graphic drivers and general screen painting continue to lack the polish needed before Vista can move to a release candidate. I've begun noticing a large number of small glitches and failures which can't be reproduced, and while performance is much better, it is also unpredictable. It's not unusual to find my system suddenly lock up for minute or longer. The good news is that many of the issues seem to be related more to "consumer" features (such as media player and Media Center), not the "corporate" items valued by our customers. However, Vista is one product, and both sides will have to be solid before its release to manufacturing.

Based on more than 15 years of experience with Microsoft beta programs, I'd say they are getting close, but they are into the hardest part of the testing: finding the corner cases and quirky bugs — a phase that can take from three to six months. So, while Microsoft is certainly making progress, I don’t expect to see a finished product in November.

2 Comments | Submit a Comment | Permalink

With Microsoft's "Twelve Tenets to Promote Competition" around Windows, the company is sending a message. Sure, Microsoft wants to avoid anti-trust suits in the future, and following these best practices will help it do that, but this is also a message:

1) To the EU: It intends to play fair.
2) To the U.S. Department of Justice: It can police itself, even without a consent decree.
3) To the public: It will create products that work with other products and not stop vendors from building and configuring products they believe customers want.
4) To competitors: It can be trusted to interoperate.

Microsoft is already bound by court decree to comply with much of what's here. The 1994 and 2001 consent decrees, as well as the 2005 ruling by the EU, force Microsoft to have transparent pricing to original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), not retaliate against OEMs, allow OEMs to make decisions over configuration, provide application programming interfaces (APIs) to competitors and so forth. There have already been deals where OEMs will set other products as defaults (such as the Dell-Google deal), and Microsoft's "green light" really was not necessary for these deals to happen.
Microsoft will never be open enough for some users, who point to other vendors that offer their code to open-source projects. However, any time Microsoft puts out a list like this, it is a good thing. Governments, the industry, OEMs and developers will be able to point to these principles as a checklist as new technologies emerge; thus ensuring that Microsoft keeps its word. Microsoft continues to realize (as it did with its ODF translator announcement, recently) that it needs to be open and compete on the strength of its products, not on restrictions or limitations.

But these tenets are specifically Windows principles and may not apply to other products. Microsoft will not be providing the necessary code to run Windows applications on Linux or Mac OS. Microsoft will continue to try to make Windows the best platform and keep organizations developing Windows applications, which will continue to make Windows an indispensable infrastructure.

The industry will require proof by action to be convinced that Microsoft will follow its tenets, and it is unclear whether the company is promising not to "embrace and extend" technologies for its own benefit. It could still comply if it embraces and extends standards, as long as it opens its extensions to others. There’s one thing Microsoft should embrace and extend - these principles - to the Office business.

Submit a Comment | Permalink

Microsoft finally shipped its long-awaited Windows for Legacy PCs this week. Formerly known as "Eiger," WinFLP is a slimmed-down version of Windows that Microsoft would like to see organizations used on older PCs that currently run old, unsupported operating systems such as NTW4 and, now, Windows 98. Media and IE are run locally, along with a few other application types. Other applications, including Office, are designed to be run from a terminal server. They can't run locally because parts of Windows have been removed to enable it to run on a smaller footprint.

You only get WinFLP if you have SA on Windows Client. If you have Windows Client SA on a six-year-old PC running Windows 98, you've spent a lot of money and not gotten a whole lot for it. If you don't have SA on it, you would need to buy a Windows Professional Upgrade and SA on top. If you need to run applications from a terminal server, you'd need a TS CAL and the servers. All that could represent more than half the cost of a new PC. Furthermore, the licensing of WinFLP is pretty strict. Check out "Exclusives Provide Pressure for Windows Client SA" for more detail on licensing limitations and to help you decide whether you can cost-justify SA on Windows Client.

Consider what you need to do to secure PCs running old operating systems, but also consider other thin-client alternatives.

Submit a Comment | Permalink

After extending support for Windows 98, Windows 98, Second Edition and Windows ME twice, support is finally set to expire on 11 July 2006. Most enterprises do not have PCs running these operating systems, but those that do must ensure that their perimeters are secure. This end of support will affect schools, which may still have large numbers of this operating system in use, and consumers more than large enterprises.

Microsoft's support policy delivers security fixes for commercial products for 10 years and consumer products for five years, but these products shipped before the policy was in place and were not grandfathered. Windows ME was a consumer release and Microsoft has supported it for more than years anyway. Although Microsoft tried to position Windows 98 (and SE) as a consumer release, and Windows NTW4 as the commercial release, NTW4 was poor on notebooks and a lot of companies used Windows 98 on a large portion of (if not their whole) PC fleet, so the end of support is coming before the 10-year period on more-recent products.

Few new applications support Win9x at this point, but Microsoft's end of support signals the end of Win9x. Ensure that your AV, firewalls and other security measures are up to date, especially for PCs that are frequently connected to the Internet. Evaluate the risks associated with using Win9x and time migration to newer technologies, accordingly.

Submit a Comment | Permalink

On 27 June 2006, Microsoft announced that the pilot phase of Windows Genuine Advantage (WGA) program was complete and the initiative would be rolled out worldwide. Microsoft is releasing an updated WGA notification package, which will be offered to all English, Spanish, Brazilian, Portuguese, French, German, Italian and Dutch users running Windows XP. The notification package will be available via automatic updates and includes three changes compare with the pilot version:

* The daily checks will be replaced with several checks per year (depending on the license type) to determine if a version of Windows is genuine.

* A clearer end-user license agreement is included, which explains the purpose of the software and details about the program.

* There will be an option to uninstall the pilot version of the software if users do not want to install the updated package. (The uninstall instructions are available as KB article #921914 on www.microsoft.com.)

The changes are not surprising, because the pilot daily bubble message and unclear installation process have created some unhappiness and dissatisfaction among users, particularly consumers. With the WGA program, Microsoft is taking a more proactive approach in helping to reduce piracy and the counterfeiting of client operating system (OS) software, in addition to other education, industry initiatives and legal activities.

During the WGA validation process, users are asked to validate Windows based on the Windows Product Key (WPK) when they download something from the Windows Download Center or Windows Update. If the customer fails the validation, then Microsoft advises the user to contact the reseller or buy a legal copy online. Users of Windows copies that fail the WGA validation check can't download items from Microsoft's Download Center or Windows Update, but they will continue receiving security fixes if they have Automatic Update (AU) turned on. The WGA program is only validates users with Windows XP; all previous OSs are excluded from this program.

The WGA program is targeted at consumers, but it could affect business users as well. To ensure that companies avoid having user problems linked to WGA, IT organizations must ensure that they use a proper Volume Licensing Key (VLK). Companies should not turn AU on until they are certain that they don't have VLK issues, but if security problems outweigh potential license validation issues, then turn AU on.

Submit a Comment | Permalink

This week, Microsoft released a hosted version of Office 2007 for customers to test. It enables users to try out and test the upcoming Office 2007 without downloading and installing it. The hosted version enables users to access all Office 2007 applications and offers some product-specific tutorials. At the moment, the test site is available only in English, but French, German, Japanese and Spanish versions should be available shortly.

The site enables users to try out Office 2007 by using a hosted version running on a Citrix server farm, remotely presenting the user interface (UI) via a browser plug in.

The goal with Office 2007 is for users to be able to create better-looking documents faster, and Microsoft claims the new UI will help users with that. The company is trying to find different ways to enable users to see and try the new UI as a way to speed up the adoption of the new Office product. Offering a live test via Terminal Services and Citrix is a good way for Microsoft to spur trial, but users should be aware that performance is slow and remote presentation is insufficient to put the best face on the new UI with the video limitations. Hosted Office 2007 is a good way to "get your feet wet," and a good way for Microsoft to get people to try the new software without them having to download or install a lot of fat client code. But for people who are serious about deploying the new release, it will not replace installing the beta and testing it locally.

Submit a Comment | Permalink

Since Bill Gates announced that he will be stepping down as Microsoft's chief software architect, lots of people have been inventorying Microsoft's history and listing its biggest "flops." I’m sure everyone has their favorite recollection of a product Microsoft released that missed the mark. You can do that with any vendor.

But let's look at this from the other direction -- what’s wrong with "flops"? Microsoft is a successful and rich company trying to find new avenues for growth. Failure to flop means failure to take risks – and Microsoft can certainly afford to take risks now. I say "flop on." In fact, I'd ding the company for not flopping enough. The companies that fail are the companies that find their one trick and ride it high – and then into the ground. Companies that succeed experiment and try to change their business not when they are failing, but when they are peaking.

Of course, you want a few of these experiments to be successful, and Microsoft has not yet found the heir apparent to its traditional Office and Windows businesses…

So flop faster!

2 Comments | Submit a Comment | Permalink

Office 2007 Beta 2 was released on 22 May. The installation instructions included an interesting caveat:

"There are known risks with installing this or any Beta software on your primary or only machine. Protect your data by backing it up before installation. [NOTE: There are changes in the file formats in Office 2007 between Beta 1 and Beta 2. Any important documents should be saved in legacy (doc, xls, and ppt) formats.]"

Microsoft changed the file format between Beta 1 and Beta 2. This is due to the ongoing standardization effort being performed by Ecma (see "Office Software Battle Moves to Open Source Theater"). The revised formats conform to the Ecma 1.3 draft release comments recently published.

What does this mean for the final release of Office 2007 (due in October 2006)? Will the formats change again?

Because these formats are still under Ecma Technical Committee review, companies cannot really start to seriously examine them. Beta testing should not cover these yet, and anyone using the beta versions should continue to use the binary formats for documents they create. Further testing will be needed when the final version of Office 2007 ships. Normally, this would be a significant problem for Office adoption, but we think most companies won't start mainstream deployments of Office 2007 until they (the companies) deploy Windows Vista (which will ship after Office 2007 and mainstream deployments will likely start in 2008), if not later, anyway.

But the standardization project being done by Ecma and ISO could result in more changes to the formats (although the probability declines over time). The standardization process will likely not be concluded before Office 2007 ships, so it's possible that the format specification will continue to change even after the product is released (although Microsoft says that future revisions will provide backward compatibility). So save your format testing for last. If you're not in a rush to adopt Office 2007, do some testing of the formats and converters, but save the bulk of your testing until as late as possible, preferably after the standardization process is done (which may mean the format is accepted or rejected). Until the formats are finalized, they are subject to change.

Submit a Comment | Permalink

During the Microsoft WinHEC (Hardware Engineering Conference), the company announced the release of a new tool - Standard User Analyzer - for software developers to ensure that their programs will work for standard users.

The company created different user rights in previous versions of Windows, but many organizations were not successful in removing administrator privileges from their users. Aside from cultural and political issues (see "Consider User Profiles in Implementing Desktop Lockdowns"), they encountered technical problems. Standard user rights are very limited; they are not allowed to change even most simple things, such as time zones, and many applications do not run properly. As a result, many users running Windows XP have administrator privilege rights.

Microsoft is focusing on improving the security and manageability of Windows Vista, and reducing user privileges is part of that initiative. Standard users in Windows Vista will be able to change more personal features compared to Windows XP, but it will enable IT organizations to regain better control over their client PCs and improve security.

To identify old applications that require administrator privileges, organizations can use Microsoft's User Account Control agent, which is part of Application Compatibility Toolkit v5 for Vista.

Microsoft introduced the new 'Standard User Analyzer' tool for developers. Developers should evaluate it to help resolve problems with applications that have an administrator access as a dependency. The tool could be helpful for companies with in-house-developed applications and could reduce the time that organizations spend to identify problematic applications. However, the tool will not help developers understand the magnitude of the change required. Going forward, developers should understand the do's and don'ts for writing applications that don't require administrator access to run, and they should investigate other tools that will assist them in writing applications that do not require administrator access for users.

Submit a Comment | Permalink

Part 2

Once you've got a plan of what you want to do, and have settled on a system on which to install Beta 2, you can move on to the actual installation

4. Getting it installed
Getting the OS installed can be an interesting challenge. Beta 2 offers an upgrade option for the first time. DO NOT USE THIS OPTION. In my testing I've found the upgrade process to be slow and glitchy, and the resulting machine does not perform as well as a freshly installed machine. In fact it took much, much longer than performing a complete wipe and reload installation and then manually reinstalling all of the applications and settings. There is still some work to be done here.
Furthermore, one of the key areas you need to test is the compatibility of application installation processes. Running an upgrade bypasses this important compatibility option. You should assemble a tool kit to help you rapidly reinstall your system. This should include a checklist of the common applications and utilities you need on the machine and installation packages for those tools (along with important hints such as product keys, and any special settings or tricks to get installed).

5. Application compatibility
If there is an application that you really care about and need to have working, then expect that it will not work and ensure you have a workaround. Although application compatibility is actually reasonably good, this is just prudent planning.
The biggest issues I've encountered so far have been installation programs that do not want to work under Vista. In many cases, Vista will automatically ferret out the issue and retry the installation with compatibility settings. I've found that once installed, most applications will run relatively well. However expect minor issues with screen repainting, and the occasional application crash, particularly if your system is tight on system resources.

6. Communication issues
Issues abound with virtual private networks (VPNs) or other specialized communications drivers. If you absolutely have to connect to a corporate intranet to work, you may not be able to get this to work from outside the firewall. Talk to your firewall provider to get insight into any updated test version it may have available for testing.

7. Long term
Remember, you should not expect to ever "upgrade" your Beta 2 machine to any future version of Vista. When RC1 or the final code ships, you will need to perform a wipe-and-reload installation. The upgrade process is specifically designed to upgrade from a production version of an OS (i.e. Windows XP or earlier), not a test version. Additionally, an upgrade may leave defective pieces of the OS behind, which can come back and bite you later on.

If all this sounds like too much effort, then turn back now!!! Beta testing is not for you.

I've painted a pretty bleak picture of beta testing, but let me balance it by saying that Vista is a pretty cool place to work. There are some nice features, and the user interface is pretty slick. Beta testing is also an important step for gaining expertise with a new product and jumpstarting more formal testing processes that will come later. Be patient and have some fun. And if you have some interesting war stories about your Beta 2 experiences, we would love to hear from you.

Submit a Comment | Permalink

Will Antitrust Concerns Stifle Innovation and Usability? Will Adobe Sue Microsoft Over PDF Support in Office 2007?

The Wall Street Journal (2 June 2006) reports that Brad Smith, Microsoft's general counsel, said in an interview that Microsoft expects Adobe to follow through with a threat to file an antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft in Europe. Apparently, Adobe feels that by offering (at no extra charge) a “save as PDF” feature in Office 2007, Microsoft would be unfairly exploiting its market position and unfairly injuring Adobe and other competitors.

“Save as PDF” is a step toward greater openness (of benefit to users and the broader industry), improved ease of use for end users and faster innovation (as more players jump into a more open environment).

It would be a tragedy if, in the name of antitrust issues, any governmental or quasi-governmental entity were to stifle that progress. Let’s hope that the parties can come to agreement in a way that maximizes innovation while not rewarding inappropriate behavior. That’s a tough order. But forcing Microsoft to drop PDF save features in the name of reducing its monopolistic practices doesn’t feel like the right thing to do.

I’m not, of course, privy to the negotiations between the players. But it strikes me that an ongoing royalty stream from Microsoft to Adobe for these features might have been the most expeditious way to handle this. Then again, it isn’t my money to give away.

What do you think?

5 Comments | Submit a Comment | Permalink

An important milestone in the development of any new Microsoft operating system is the release of Beta 2. Typically, this is the first test release that enables users to begin some real world testing and Vista Beta 2, which shipped the week of May 23, has been anxiously awaited by many.

Compared with previous OS test cycles, Microsoft has made a large number of interim test builds available through various programs. Most notably, its institution of the Community Technology Preview (CTP) has meant that there have been three official interim releases between Beta 1 and Beta 2, as well as several Interim Developer Builds (IDW) builds. I've had the opportunity to load many of these releases up on several systems, including my day-to-day business desktop, during the past year, and I have a pretty good feel for the kind of progress Microsoft has been making with each iteration. , Beta 2 will be many customers' first real exposure to Vista, and they are wondering what to expect.

1. "That's why they call it a beta"
This isn't a finished product but rather, a work in progress. If it was bug-free or truly complete, Microsoft would be releasing it to manufacturing and not to the beta program. There are still bugs … lots and lots of bugs. Most of the really bad problems have been wiped out, but you will still see issues with fit and finish, quirky drivers and the odd application failure.
As such don't expect it to work or perform as well as a well-honed Windows XP desktop. You will need a reasonably high tolerance for glitches and realistic expectations if you choose to use Vista for daily activities. You would be well advised to keep an XP machine close at hand for times when you really need to get work done.

2. Get prepared
There are two ways to approach a beta test. One is to just slap the OS onto your system and hope for the best. Although this can be fun, it generally doesn't accomplish much. A better approach is to think about specific goals for your testing. Sit down and think about your common tasks or use models. Make a list of key applications you care about and think about how you would "prove" that they are working. Read through our published research on Vista and decide which features you would like to investigate more. Think back to problems you experienced during the past few years and ensure that the issue doesn't recur in Vista, or that an outstanding XP problem has been resolved. Entering into the beta test with a specific plan helps you to make better use of your time.

3. Picking the right machine
It's important to select the right machine for the beta testing to get a reasonable experience with a minimum of hassle. Be aware that the selection of drivers still has holes and that to get acceptable performance with the current package, you will want to overconfigure the system.
Pay particular attention to device driver compatibility. Although Vista will support many XP device drivers, certain classes of devices (including graphics cards, sound cards and network interfaces) will not perform properly or may fail outright if you do not have new Vista device drivers. As such, simple systems with common components are more likely to work. The Vista compatibility tool can provide asome guidance as to what will or won't work on your target system. In my testing, I've had trouble with a scanner, a Web cam, keyboards and some specialized pointing devices.

Notebooks tend to have more model-specific drivers and applications. As such, there is a much higher possibility that a notebook will have serious functional impairments running Beta 2 when compared with XP. Manufacturer-specific drivers and tools include:
• Power management
• Wireless and communication drivers
• Docking/expansion stations
• Security extensions (TPMs, fingerprint readers)
I would also recommend that Beta 2 machines be configured with higher-end processors and extra memory (2GB). Once RC1 becomes available, I expect that these specs can be pared down to more-typical system configurations as debug code is removed and performance is tuned. You can review our research on Vista hardware requirements.

In the second part tomorrow I'll look at the installation process and some of the specific issues you might run across as you test.

Submit a Comment | Permalink

On 22 May, Microsoft announced its intention to acquire Softricity . Softricity markets a product called SoftGrid, which enables applications to run in an isolated environment. The applications are not completely installed in Windows and conflicts are minimized between various applications, helping to eliminate the problem known commonly as DLL hell. Competitors in the application virtualization market include Altiris with its SVS product, and eventually Citrix with its project Tarpon, but Citrix is not yet shipping a product. Some products also support application streaming, but that is not the focus of this posting.

In its acquisition press release, Microsoft made the claim that Softgrid "reduces the complexity of operating system migrations, including Vista, since software can now easily be moved from one OS to another without the need for installation or compatibility testing between applications."

Products like Softricity and SVS can help, but in the proper context. The initial issues companies will face in migrating to Windows Vista will be compatibility testing between the application and the operating system and issues of vendor support of their applications of Windows Vista. We think a good deal of the 18 months before companies begin mainstream deployment of Windows Vista will be spent waiting for vendors to fix compatibility issues between their applications and Windows Vista and develop official support policies. We do not see application virtualization technologies reducing this time.

Once an organization has Vista-compatible versions of all its applications, application virtualization can make the rest of the testing process go faster because it reduces the need to test different combinations of applications together and can reduce packaging costs.

Submit a Comment | Permalink

In July 2000, Microsoft told customers that if they didn't buy upgrade protection on Windows client, then they could not use imaging products such as Ghost to re-image (clone) PCs. By September of that year, they had relented, based on negative feedback from customers and publicity generated by some of Gartner's research.

Well, they're back. No, Microsoft has not changed its re-imaging rules. It's still legal as long as you use volume license media to create your images, and as long as you use the same version. (You can find the specifics here. Re-imaging Rights is the fifth one down. In fact, according to the date, it was last updated on 1 October 2005, just a few months ago).

We have received numerous reports that in an attempt to sell more enterprise agreements that include Windows client (and perhaps to sell more enterprise agreements in general), Microsoft's sales representatives have been telling customers that they have been illegally re-imaging PCs, because they don't have Software Assurance on Windows client.

Don't fall for this. Make sure that you're following the rules, and then write us. We want to hear from you if your account representative told you this. E-mail us at webblogs@gartner.com – include “Vista Blog” in the subject line (organization names will be held confidential). If they gave you anything in writing, send us that as well. Check out our licensing research and set up an inquiry with a licensing specialist when it comes time to negotiate.

Submit a Comment | Permalink

According to news reports on 24 May in Tokyo, Steve Ballmer said that although Microsoft is still on track to meet its target dates to ship Windows Vista (late in 2006 for volume-licensed customers and January for broad availability), there is a possibility of the launch being pushed back "a few weeks" once it has a chance to assess beta 2 feedback.

Microsoft has always said that shipment of Windows Vista ship will depend on quality. But Ballmer's statement shows just how tight its schedule is. We are predicting that Windows Vista will ship nine to 12 months after a stable, feature-complete beta 2. Beta 2 was made available to MSDN and TechNet customers as of May 23, but broad availability is still a few weeks off, until Microsoft releases its customer preview program (most feedback from consumers won't start until then). That would mean around 2Q07 (assuming beta 2 indeed turns out to be stable and feature-complete) for broad availability. Ballmer also said that Microsoft would work with hardware OEMs to understand when they want the product to be released. This validates what we said about the marketing challenges of shipping the product right after the holidays.

Submit a Comment | Permalink

Microsoft has talked a lot about how Windows Vista will scale to different experiences based on your hardware. It used to talk about a good/better/best experience, but it was difficult to understand the difference between the "better" and "best" experiences. Our clients were looking for direction, so in March, we published our understanding and advice in "Is Your PC Hardware 'Ready for Windows Vista'?"

Microsoft decided that it needed to provide an easier way to let buyers know that the PC they buy today will be able to run Windows Vista tomorrow. To that end, Microsoft devised a "Designed for Windows XP/Windows Vista-Capable" logo for PCs. To get the logo, a PC needs "a modern CPU, 512MB of RAM or more, and a DirectX 9-capable graphics processor." Many PCs being produced qualify for this logo, but it provides no guidance about the level of experience — good, better or best — that the PC will provide. It is too simplistic.

Microsoft added an extra specification known as Windows Vista Premium Ready mspx to provide more detail. Good/better/best has been replaced by "capable" and "premium." This specification is more helpful and is a good balance.

However, Microsoft does not want to launch another logo, so the only logo you will see on new PCs and original equipment manufacturer (OEM) hardware Web sites is the Vista-capable logo. Identifying PCs that meet the Windows Vista Premium Ready specifications will depend on how clear OEM Web sites are. Remember, when you see this logo, it is not particularly helpful.

You need to dig deeper. Home PC users are especially at risk. For most enterprises, the "capable" experience will be fine, and many PCs bought in the past year will meet its requirements with minor upgrades.

More-advanced users, and users that need high-end graphics to do their jobs, will want the "premium" experience, with full Windows Aero support — not necessarily for the "eye candy," but for better stability and screen re-draw. If you're planning on upgrading PCs you buy today to Windows Vista in the future, work with your hardware vendor to ensure that you're buying hardware that supports the level of experience your users need. Ask your hardware vendor for a guarantee in writing. Expect that users with a "capable" experience may have "PC envy" when they see their colleagues' "premium" experience. If you're like other larger companies, you won't start deploying Windows Vista until 2008, so PCs you buy today will be two years old before you start the deployment, and you may not end up upgrading them at all.

Call our hardware and purchasing analysts to ensure that you're getting the best deal.

Submit a Comment | Permalink

Welcome to the Windows Vista blog! Check back weekly to see our latest impressions of Windows Vista and our thoughts on how and when (or whether) you should take advantage of it. We'll include some content on Office 2007, because many of our clients look at Windows and Office together as basic desktop infrastructure. We'll cover topics ranging from features, to adoption, to licensing. If there's something you'd like us to cover, we'd like to hear from you. Send your questions and comments to weblogs@gartner.com (please include "Vista Blog" in your subject line). We won't be able to respond to every e-mail, but we'll post and respond to ones of general interest.

It was announced at WinHec that Windows Vista and Office 2007 beta 2 are ready to go. These are always milestone releases for new products. Stable, compatible and successful beta 2 releases are integral to Microsoft's ability to hit its target dates and ship Windows and Office on time.

For many, beta 2 means the start of some real testing. How much testing you do should depend on how fast you intend to adopt Windows Vista (and Office 2007).

Windows 2000 users need to move relatively quickly. Although Microsoft will support Windows 2000 (according to its extended support policy) until mid-2010, we've already heard that new versions of some of Microsoft's applications do not support Windows 2000. This situation will get worse with time, so don't wait until the last minute to start your migration.

Windows XP users have a little more time, but if you're aggressive about moving to Windows Vista, you'll be looking at beta 2 a lot.

Remember that application compatibility is not assured at beta 2, or even at the release candidates that will follow. Applications that work right today may not work when the products are finally released. Hopefully, applications that don't work in beta 2 will work in the final release. Knowing which applications don't work in beta 2 enables you to speak with your internal developers, independent software vendors and Microsoft to ensure that these problems are ironed out in the final release. This is important if you need to get a fast start once the product is delivered. And don't forget, even if an application works, if your vendor refuses to support it on Windows Vista, you may decide that there is too much risk to proceed until they do. Talk to the vendors of your critical applications to understand their timeline for Windows Vista support.

A couple of weeks ago we published a Research Note predicting that Windows Vista was likely to ship later than Microsoft planned. We expected broad availability nine to 12 months after beta 2 shipped (which would be about 2Q07). We stand by that position, but since beta 2 has now shipped, nine months would be before 2Q07. Our official predication is based on the time after beta 2 ships.

For most of our clients, it doesn't matter that much if Windows Vista ships in November of this year or April of next, because it will take 12 to 18 months to get compatible applications and do their testing, preparation and piloting. For companies that do not plan on renewing Windows client SA when it expires during those months, there's more at stake, and for Windows 2000 organizations, there's more urgency to have final code. But for the majority, the issue is when they plan to do the prep work.

1 Comment | Submit a Comment | Permalink