Keith Curtis had a pretty good gig at Microsoft Research, an organization I have incredible respect for. In fact, few know just how much this group does to tackle the world's biggest problems.
Now Curtis is a software advocate, much like the folks at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. In his case, Curtis is pushing Linux on the desktop. In fact, he thinks Microsoft should dump Windows clients and do its own version of Linux.
Here's my view: I like competition and choice. Windows, the Mac and Linux are all in the desktop game. Why give up one of these choices? And as much as Linux stands out on servers, it's going nowhere fast on the desktop. My advice to the Linux camp? Get serious about the desktop and come up with one solid, easy-to-use version. Microsoft should stick with Windows.
Who's right, Curtis or Barney? Vote at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/11/2009 at 1:17 PM6 comments
I'm shocked at how so many people come up with so many dopey theories, while many other dopes believe them and spread them around. Keith Curtis' idea that Microsoft should can Windows and move to Linux registers a solid 9 on the dope scale.
What registers as a 10? The theory espoused by dimwit Jay R. Galbraith (not sure if he's related to the actually brilliant late John Kenneth Galbraith) from CNNmoney.com that Windows 7's success will kill Microsoft.
According to this over-educated dunderhead, having a popular fat client will keep Microsoft from putting all of its attention on smartphones and other lightweight devices and clients. This is the same nonsense spewed by Gartner recently -- that Microsoft is too slow and stupid to move to the Web, thin clients and mobile devices.
I'm not sure how Microsoft is stupid for having a fat client, while Apple with the Mac is God's gift to technology.
Meanwhile, Windows 7 is going great guns, so I guess Microsoft really is in trouble.
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/11/2009 at 1:17 PM7 comments
More readers share their upgrade stories, from those that went flawlessly to those that, well, didn't:
Did a Windows 7 x64 upgrade from Vista x64 with no problems. I ran the Upgrade Advisor Report first and dealt with the several items listed that might cause a problem along with uninstalling and re-installing software as recommended. All third-party vendors with the exception of Symantec's Backup Exec provided drivers, agents, etc. compatible with Windows 7. Was impressed with how seamless and easy the upgrade was and quickly moved on to taking a look at the new features. After a couple weeks of use, no problems at all!
-Beth
A good friend of mine had his upgrade crap out. He got some sort of .EXE-based upgrade from DreamSpark (I think). Whatever it is, it doesn't even make it through the unpacking process. Their resolution is to wait for the media to be mailed. Why they didn't do an ISO-based distro escapes me.
-Eric
I purchased the upgrade version from MS and applied it when it arrived. I didn't uninstall anything my HP IQ506 had installed on it, just selected upgrade and let it rip. It ran for over three hours but did complete with no hitches. The only issue I have noticed is that the NVIDIA GeForce 9300M GS driver didn't install correctly and I don't have all the features of Aero yet. I'm still working on that one.
But here's an odd one: An application I had developed in VS C# would never run as a scheduled task under Vista. But guess what? It's running now and I didn't make any changes to get it to do so.
-Charles
Much to my dismay, it has taken me nearly two days to get Windows 7 64-bit on my PC. I ran the upgrade advisor and was told go forth and 64. I called the MS online store, told them I had a pseudo-legal version of Windows 7 Pro 32-bit and wanted to upgrade to 64. They said no problem. I paid $199 for the upgrade only to discover after going through the process that I had just reinstalled the 32-bit. Called the MS tech dept and they sent me to customer service, who said to download the 64-bit again and re-install. I did, only to find out that after what seemed like an hours-long download, the files wouldn't unpack. After 87 minutes with a great tech guy in India, I was told that it is impossible to upgrade from 32-bit to 64-bit. I called the MS store and was told I had created my own problem. And that I needed to buy a clean install disk for $299!
So here I sit, $500 and over 28 hours later, and Windows 7 64-bit is almost installed. I am getting a refund for my $199 spent on the upgrade, but still can't activate because after three attempts, MS still can't get me a product key that works. This has been quite an ordeal! I don't think MS is clear enough about what is needed to migrate to 64-bit. They use confusing terms such as custom install and clean install which almost was my undoing!
-Anonymous
This weekend I successfully upgraded my HP DV9820 notebook from Vista 32-bit to Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. I had zero problems, except for a couple of driver issues. (Surprisingly, my 18-month old notebook from HP has a couple of drivers missing. HP seems to take pride on their driver webpage that they will not be bothered to produce drivers for older equipment. I did not think 2-year-old notebooks are ancient. Very disappointed about that.)
I ran Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit RC for a few months, then in October upgraded this to Windows 7 Ultimate when the software became available. The only issue I had with this upgrade is that I wiped my hard drive before reading that you had to have a previous install on the hard drive. It took me several days to find my old XP licensed CD/DVD. I of course loaded that then everything went well.
-Ken
Maybe I'll just go to Snow Leopard. And it's only $30.
-Vicke
Everyone likes to talk "upgrades" but the bottom line is that any time one attempts to do an in-place upgrade of a system, they are asking for trouble. The BEST solution is always to upgrade to the new OS with a clean install. This means that the user must re-install all their applications as well, but it makes things almost entirely trouble free. Believe me, it takes a lot more work to track down a subtle bug left over from that 4-year-old software than it takes to re-install all of your applications. Plus, Windows 7 makes this completely pain-free by putting all of your personal files in a folder called Windows.old so restoring your personal data is very easy.
-Marc
And finally, Fred counters reader Chris' claim that clean installs avoid "inheriting any cruft, problems, registry bloat and other unexplained idiosyncrasies of the previous OS":
Yeah, such cruft and idiosyncracies as all the peripherals, programs and utilities you've come to rely on over the years...that won't run in Windows 7.
-Fred
Check in on Friday for more letters! Meanwhile, comment below or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/11/2009 at 1:17 PM2 comments
Microsoft has Citrix as a huge virtualization partner, and now VMware has Cisco and parent company EMC to fight back.
The three have formed an alliance to sell blocks of virtual capacity to IT. Cisco can not only handle the networking, but has a new server line built for virtualization and unified communication. EMC has services and plenty of storage to go around. And VMware has the core virtualization and cloud software.
In fact, the three talk less about virtualization and more about clouds. I'm not clear on whether this is focused on external clouds (where they just sell capacity) or internal clouds (where IT can build its own utility-style computing infrastructure). Do either of these approaches wet your whistle? Who's your favorite virtualization vendor? Fire off answers to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/11/2009 at 1:17 PM0 comments
Doug asked readers what they thought about the recent round of layoffs at Microsoft:
Tawdry.
-Anonymous
Sure, it's the "American Way," but it's a sleazy way, too.
-Ken
As a victim of a layoff earlier this year I may be more than a little jaundiced in my view of the subject. In my opinion, staff reductions are typically a knee-jerk reaction by semi-competent management who didn't foresee the situation requiring the immediate attempt at cost savings. It makes some economic sense because payroll is usually the largest line-item business cost, but management rarely counts the actual cost to the company (how much is it going to cost to replace that lost knowledge?). Staff reductions seldom seem to be opportunities to get rid of dead weight but merely numeric adjustments. Senior staff tend to make more money so the immediate savings are greater. It's often an excuse for some political payback, too.
I think it's generally a lousy way to treat people especially when one considers the fact that the people who made the decisions that put the company in jeopardy in the first place seldom get the axe. It's normally the worker bees. American management, as a group, are pretty clueless, which is why the Chinese are going to eat our lunch for the next century or so.
-J.C.
Layoffs to keep profits up are not right. Here in Philadelphia (the home of Comcast) we are seeing the same thing. You have a company whose profits are up 22 percent and they are laying off -- while RAISING our cable rates. How long is this going to go on before things change?
-Anonymous
Mike Domingo, covering for Doug, last week wondered if he was too trusting of Microsoft Security Essentials. Here are some of your thoughts:
I absolutely love MSE and am moving some of my customers to a UTM device on the edge for e-mail and firewall, but MSE on the desktop in case they bring something in. Personally, MSE has saved my bacon on Facebook a couple of times. I've also used it to clean up a couple of consumer machines. It's not obtrusive, not a big load. I hope it remains free.
-Cris
I've been using MSE since the beta, and I'm also testing the paid, business-oriented version, Forefront Client Security. They seem very similar in features and functionality, and I have had no problems with either one. I like the negligible impact on system performance, and there are no upgrade prompts, nagware, etc. I'm comfortable with the protection provided, and I don't have to worry about losing it due to a forgotten renewal date. If Microsoft changes their stated position that MSE will remain free, I'll be happy to pay for it due to its simplicity and low system impact. My only complaint is that it doesn't wake the computer from sleep to run a scheduled scan.
Microsoft seems to take most of the heat for malware, including vulnerabilities in other software brands or from social engineering. They have a vested interest in providing a reliable AV product with wide acceptance, so I believe that they will continue to maintain the quality of MSE, and to offer it at no cost.
-Dave
More letters coming on Wednesday, including even more Windows 7 migration thoughts. Meanwhile, send in your own comments to Doug at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/09/2009 at 1:17 PM0 comments
The push is on for Windows 7, and while your enterprise can resist for a while, it will get harder and harder to hang on to XP as the years go on.
There are lots of ways Microsoft moves enterprises to its newest wares. It eventually ends support (though for popular products the company is either kind enough or smart enough to extend it), and in the case of operating systems, it no longer lets OEMs pre-install.
If Microsoft were pushing enterprises from XP to Vista, I'd be pretty worked up. But we're talking about moving from XP or Vista to Windows 7. In either case, it's a vast improvement.
I know XP has its fanboys, but I only like it when it's freshly installed. After a year or so, it gets all kinds of flaky and is slower than Kevin Federline thought process. But hey, that's just my opinion. You're the expert. Should Microsoft push users of XP onto Windows 7? And what am I doing wrong with XP that it starts to peter out after a year? Answers and advice equally welcome at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/09/2009 at 1:17 PM17 comments
Last month was a fat Patch Tuesday, with a record number of fixes keeping IT grunts busy. This month is far less onerous with only six tweaks on the way, most aimed at remote code execution exploits with a scoop of denial-of-service on top.
One critical fix is aimed at all versions of Windows with the sole exception of Windows 7. (Is this some kind of marketing ploy?)
While this month is not nearly as serious as the last, with any patch, it pays to be careful out there.
Posted on 11/09/2009 at 1:17 PM0 comments
Who says Microsoft doesn't listen to customers? Because it clearly paid attention to those of you who want to move to Windows Server 2008 R2, but don't want to throw out a perfectly good Exchange 2007 installation in the process.
Microsoft originally had its messaging code monkeys making sure that Exchange 2010 was a perfect fit for Windows 2008 R2. After more than a few howls, it changed course, re-assigned a bunch of programmers, and voila! Exchange 2007 works.
Actually, the two don't work together quite yet -- and Microsoft isn't saying exactly when the compatibility update will arrive.
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/09/2009 at 1:17 PM0 comments
Redmond Report is the perfect test as to what's hot and what's decidedly not. I've asked a few times about green computing, and let me tell you, it's crickets out there.
Do you all truly not care about green computing? Has your shop made any moves to achieve greater efficiency and save on power? If not, what would it take for you to be convinced? Write me at [email protected] and give me a lesson in green.
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/09/2009 at 1:17 PM9 comments
Microsoft shrunk a tad on Wednesday when 800 pink slips were issued. Lest you think Microsoft is in real trouble, these layoffs are part of the 5,000 jobs the company announced earlier this year would be disappearing. However, it seems that this is, in a way, an additional layoff, and that with these cuts some 5,400 jobs are lost.
I have mixed feelings about all this. The layoffs are not to stem losses, but to protect profits. Microsoft still makes gobs of money. Then again, we live in a capitalist society and Microsoft is a public company beholden to shareholders.
What's your take? Are layoffs in pursuit of profits just part of the American way, or a tawdry way to treat people you thought were smart enough to hire? Answers welcome at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/06/2009 at 1:17 PM17 comments
When I first read of glitches with Windows 7 upgrades, I downplayed it, thinking a tiny majority were making a big deal out of their problems while most everyone else did just fine.
You, the loyal Redmond Report reader, set me straight. My mailbag is full of both success and horror stories. If you haven't upgraded yet or want to compare your experience to those of your peers, check out the letters here and here.
The good news is that at least one of these problems has been fixed. With a new "Fix It," Windows 7 should no longer hang during the upgrade (a problem that apparently only occurs when moving from Vista).
We have a ton of letters about Windows 7 upgrades, but could always use more. Feel free to weigh in at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/06/2009 at 1:17 PM3 comments
This post has been brought to you by Michael Domingo, executive editor of new media. Michael's filling in for Doug, who'll be back for Friday's edition.
An interesting feature in SQL Server 2008 R2 (being previewed at the PASS Summit this week) is the PowerPivot. It's kind of like Business Intelligence 2.0 in that it takes all that important data you collect from SQL Server and packages it up for sharing onto SharePoint Server. End users can then slice and dice the data further without leaving the comforting grid patterns of Excel.
Posted by Michael Domingo on 11/04/2009 at 1:17 PM1 comments