Vista: Look Before You Leap
But the more I think about Vista, the more mixed my feelings have become. Now I'm at a point where I'm not so sure that Vista is the way for businesses to go -- at least for now.
I have played with Vista quite a bit over the last few months and have both RTM code and Release Candidate 2 installed on several test systems. As a matter of fact, my primary notebook PC, a Lenovo T60, runs Vista Ultimate Edition (RTM code), so I am no stranger to the operating system.
However, my comfort level with Vista has plummeted, mostly because I'd like to test the product under different scenarios but Microsoft has been slow to release the tools to make that happen. Perhaps that's due to overwhelming demand or just someone dropping the ball on Microsoft's part. Anyway you slice it, Microsoft's less-than-prompt support added another layer of muck to the Vista puzzle for me.
While that situation hinders my ability to do more testing of Vista in an enterprise environment, I have to wonder if Microsoft's piracy fears, its new licensing model, Vista's activation methods and its deployment changes will create fear, uncertainty and doubt for enterprises considering a Vista upgrade path.
Another area that adds to the murkiness is the number of Vista versions. Does the market really need five versions of an OS? Vista should be trimmed to two versions: a business version and a personal-use version. Microsoft could include everything in the business version and let those users choose which features to deploy, and the company could reduce the feature set for the personal version, such as by removing some networking features, tablet functions or customization options.
I, for one, am trying to figure out why someone would need Vista. What is the compelling reason to upgrade? Some may say it's security. But to me, most of the security enhancements are stem from end-user interaction via User Access Control (UAC) -- in other words, ask the user if it's OK to do something. That's not a security improvement; it's just a way to shift the blame from poor code execution to the end user. After all, most end users will probably click "OK" without even reading the warning text.
Others say a key upgrade point is the new interface, Aero. Yet that strikes me as style over substance. Sure, it looks nice, but does it enhance my experience or my ability to be productive? It seems to push the PC more toward being a toy than a tool.
Some feel the enhanced performance and integration are what makes Vista a must-have. But the simple fact is that any performance gains come from throwing more hardware at the OS. The enhancements, such as integrated search, were already available for Windows XP via third-party tools, so that holds little water as a must-have capability. Certainly, Vista does a lot of cool things, but at the end of the day, do those cool things make my job any easier?
I think Microsoft may have made a mistake with Vista, and I think those pushing to upgrade desktop OSes across the enterprise also would be making a mistake if they jump on the Vista bandwagon immediately.
After thinking about all of the pros and cons and the five years of development behind Vista, I conclude that Microsoft's next-generation OS should have been written from scratch, and concerns about compatibility should have been secondary. Vista isn't a new way of doing things. It's shaping up to be little more than "Service Pack 3 Plus" for XP.
Perhaps, Microsoft should have started with a blank sheet of paper and developed a secure desktop OS that focused on stability and usability and then relegated compatibility to a virtual PC session running a slimmed down version of XP as part of the new OS.
In the meantime, users wishing to deploy Vista should just buy new systems with the platform pre-installed -- and that goes for enterprises as well. That way, enterprise users can avoid most of the licensing hassles, not worry about upgrading current hardware and phase in Vista over time.
For myself, of course I'll use Vista. It's basically a must for me. I need to know it, and I need to experience the latest applications. And with the right hardware, it's definitely better than XP.
FRANK OHLHORST is director of CRN Labs.