Posted on 06/15/2005 6:15:31 AM PDT by N3WBI3
Use of Microsoft Windows XP has grown inside corporations, but a new study shows that nearly half of business PCS are still running the older Windows 2000.
The study, released Tuesday by AssetMetrix, underscores a recurring problem for Microsoft: While the company spends billions of dollars developing new versions of Windows and its Office desktop software, many customers are slow to give up older versions of software that's paid for and works just fine.
The AssetMetrix study shows that many companies have moved off of other versions of Windows, including Windows NT 4, Windows 95 and Windows 98.
Windows XP use surged to 38 percent by the first quarter of this year, up from 6.6 percent in the third quarter of 2003. However, the popularity of Windows 2000 has remained high, with the venerable operating system still in use in 48 percent of business PCs during the first quarter of 2005, down just four percentage points from the third quarter of 2003.
"The findings of this study suggest that Windows 2000 still plays an important part in many IT environments," Steve O'Halloran, managing director of Ottawa-based AssetMetrix's research division, said in a report.
And, if anything, analysts say that customer reticence in upgrading has increased in recent years.
"It seems to be taking longer each time" for customers to upgrade, said Michael Cherry, an analyst at Directions on Microsoft.
The sustained use of Windows 2000 is particularly significant as Microsoft prepares to end mainstream support for it at the end of this month. The company will still patch any important security flaws, but most other updating of the OS will cease. Support calls on nonsecurity matters will also be handled only on a paid basis.
Microsoft is preparing one final update to Windows 2000. The software maker opted last year to forgo a full service pack and is instead releasing what it dubs an Update Rollup, a lesser collection of security patches and updates issued since the release of Service Pack 4 in June 2003.
The company has said to expect the Update Rollup by midyear but has not said what features will be included beyond already released patches and updates. By not releasing a more full-featured service pack, Microsoft may be trying to send a signal that customers need to upgrade to get new features.
"I think Microsoft would obviously prefer they were running Windows XP, in part because Microsoft has invested so much to improve the security of XP with Service Pack 2," Cherry said.
For Microsoft, the fact that customers hang on to older versions of its software has become a chronic bugaboo. To some degree, the sluggish upgrade pace affects the company's revenue. In many cases, however, customers have already paid for a license to newer versions.
More significantly, Microsoft believes that when customers stick with older software, their satisfaction level is lower than it might otherwise be--a situation that could ultimately lead to lost sales.
In addition, the situation threatens to undermine the vast sums that Microsoft is spending to increase security in its most recent versions of Windows: Windows XP and Windows Server 2003.
There are several reasons for customers' foot-dragging. Many companies aren't getting rid of their older PCs running Windows 2000. Instead, when new XP-based machines are purchased, businesses are passing on the Windows 2000 machines to workers lower in the pecking order, O'Halloran said.
Windows 2000 is, in some ways, also a victim of its own success.
"When Windows 2000 came out, it was fantastic blend of security and user interface," O'Halloran said. As a result, companies planned their whole infrastructure around it. Many of its management tools have continued to be updated, leaving companies relatively satisfied.
"I think it worked too well," he said.
O'Halloran does expect that the percentage of Windows 2000 machines will drop further now that companies have largely gotten rid of all their Windows 95, Windows 98 and Windows NT 4 machines. Still, O'Halloran predicts that the decline will be a gradual one rather than a large exodus spurred by the June 30 change in support status.
"I don't see anyone having a knee-jerk reaction," he said.
In some cases, Cherry said businesses may decide they want to wait for Longhorn, the new version of Windows due out in the second half of next year. But that transition--if and when companies decide to make the move--could be a far more dramatic one than the move from Windows 2000 to XP. O'Halloran said that most companies won't see a big shift if they move to XP. Windows XP is really just a bulked-up version of Windows 2000.
"It's an SUV versus a minivan," he said. "They both can get you there. It's the same type of vehicle. You still understand how to drive it."
With onyl XP to replace it, Im not too happy that soon we may have to migrate off of our 2K desktops. Especially as XP is going EOL at the end of next year! So companies will enither need to run a mixed environment (2k/XP) until Longhorn is released, or do two desktop migrations in two years... ugg
Oh well at least they let IT folks use what ever they want, they cant take my Linux box away frmo me ;)
Windows 2000 & Office 2000 here. Zero reasons to upgrade either for me.
The name of the game in software is to get you to upgrade. it's the only way to keep money coming in. It's not just Microsoft.
MsOffice is a crappy Office Suite...jump to Corel for real power or to Open Office.
http://www.openoffice.org/product/
Im sorry I like OO, and run neo-office on my Mac but calc is not substitute for Excel...
Windows 2000 Pro is probably Microsoft's best OS to date.
At one point I upgraded to .Net, went back to Win 2000
When Win 2003 came out, I tried that ... went back to Win 2000.
I am wondering why I would even need to upgrade to this 'Longhorn' when it comes out.
Win2K is the best Windows ever. Tons of hospitals and medical practices use it because of the better security, and have no wish to go to anything else. A friend of mine is a SysAdmin for a large medical practice and he says that there is no way MS can end support for it, no matter what they say. He said they expected to run 2000 for the next 5 years, and skip XP entirely.
Heck jump to a desktop Linux and reduce your M$ pain! No one really needs M$ software for anything.
Use Groupwise for e-mail and internal mail.
My office here runs utterly pointless XP. The only things we use are Office apps and Adobe apps. 2K would be a much better choice, INHO, but the IT dept (in another state) runs scared of anything but MS and their latest offering.
Tried Corel and it's okay, but MS Office is better.
Of course they do. They have absolute control over your use of XP. They don't have that kind of control on any of the earlier versions. If they could shut down all previous versions they would do it in a minute. As it is they are trying every minute.
What does this statement mean?
With the 'dependancy' issues inherit in Linux, the average user will find it too frustrating to 'convert'.
Why do people act like you can just plug in Linux and everything works perfectly, when we all know that this is simply not the case?
It means I HATED Windows .Net and went back to Win 2000.
What makes you say that? I know there are differences, but I haven't encountered any serious problems with oocalc in a long time.
I haven't ever really used Excel much, but I do exchange spreadsheets with Excel users.
.Net is a development framework while 2000 is an OS. Do you mean XP?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.