What is your IT department doing about

[brons2]

QFT. Totally unfair evaluation.

If all you are doing is running standalone to play games or light home usage, Vista can be made to work. If you use it in an Enterprise environment & ask it to interface with a network and multiple business apps, its many flaws become apparent very quick.

None of my clients have a compelling need to upgrade, so I am recommending staying with XP for the forseeable future.

I run all our line of business apps on Vista. Granted the standard desktop image is XP, but I have Vista on my machine with no problems and I'm lovin it!

 

[-Sean Casey]

We are running Vista on basically every machine that can run is well enough to be worthwhile. Currently planing a migration to Server 2008. Vista has been fairly troublefree and in some cases has eased support compared to XP. I have a couple machines that run XP because the software used is not supported on Vista. Heck I have one DOS machine, one NT4 machine, and one Win2000 machine still in service for similar reasons.

I run a mixed environment of Windows, Mac OS, Solaris, and Linux (Ubuntu). There is no breakdown of Vista when networking in complex environments. If anything it typically works better than XP, especially with SP1.

Unfortunately, one Vista machine was rolled back to XP (against my wishes, but there is a LONG story to that). Outside of that 40% of my Windows environment simply is to old to support and run Vista (heck it barely runs XP well enough to be usable).

Also we are fully running Office 2007 (exceptions: Mac Office 2008 on the Mac's, and Open Office on Linux). Best version of Office yet. The ribbon took a bit to get used to, but in the end I like it much more. I just wish Visio and Publisher would have received the same UI update.

Outside of that we run Exchange 2007, MOSS 2007 (doesn't work well with Safari, but Firefox does ok), and SQL Server 2005.

Any new machine we get comes with Vista. It deploys faster, connects into our infrastructure faster, supports fast user switching in a domain environment, plays well with our mixed environment, handles redirected profiles and offline files wonderfully.

One problem I found with Vista is that if you have a large number of users on the same machine the indexing can get a bit overwhelmed and requires some slight configuration changes, and it does slow down a bit when someone decides to drop 20gb of photos in their desktop which is redirected onto the server and using offline files. But outside of that, no major problems.

 

[Thuleman]

I've only deployed Vista at 1x client of mine...a law firm. Brand new hardware. Even on current hardware, Core 2 Duos, adequate RAM, complaints of slowness.

I am running Vista on old hardware (Opteron 185, 4 GB memory, and I get Vista scores of 4.7 (memory) and all others at 5.9) and Vista is not slow. I am also running it on C2D machines, and it's not slow either. So ..., that really only leaves one conclusion, either there is a problem with peripheral hardware they have, or they are simply lying about their experience.

Yes, end-users lie, there, I said it.

 

[xxEIEIOxx]

I am the IT department, and we are not upgrading any time soon. Somewhat because the users don't want it, and somewhat because I don't want to have to retrain them all. They barely get through the day with XP.

 

[NeoGohan]

I am the IT department, and we are not upgrading any time soon. Somewhat because the users don't want it, and somewhat because I don't want to have to retrain them all. They barely get through the day with XP.

Hahah same here man... we're still using office 2003 because office 2007 makes everyone go crazy and we don't want to deal with it.

 

[Dallows]

I just installed (upgraded) to office 2007, thankfully I use outlook mostly, but still, ugh.

 

[Angelus897]

Server 08 is real nice. I've deployed a few so far. Have a new one for a client that just got ordered today(poweredge 2900 with 08 std 64)

I'm going to be setting up another Server 08 w/ Exchange 07 late this week for a client. First time for Exchange 07.

 

[swatbat]

I'm going to be setting up another Server 08 w/ Exchange 07 late this week for a client. First time for Exchange 07.

Few words of advice. First off go pick up a book on exchange 07. I had picked up mastering exchange 2007 when exchange 07 first came out and used it as refrence. Exchange 07 is a lot different then the old versions.

Second is if you look online you will read about installing it on 08 and you will see a list of powershell commands to load everything needed preinstall. This is the best way to do it.

Thrid is to not disable ip v6. I had already done this on my first 08 box with exchange(back in april when 08 was only out to volume license customers) and couldn't get exchange to install. It needs it at least for the install even if you have no wants to use it in the future.

Have a new dell poweredge 2900 tower sitting next to me right now. I'm letting it run for the next 24 hours or so to make sure it is working ok then it is getting server 08 64 bit. Machine is going to be a single server for a smaller school with 80 students or so(Christain school). They were given the funding for all new machines. Every student desk will have a new optiplex with a 17 inch lcd on it.

Also have a core2 based 3u custom server I threw together with some spare parts that is going to be my companies new ts box. Going to run 08 on it. Old Terminal Server machine is really starting to screw up.

 

[Dillirium]

I am running Vista on old hardware (Opteron 185, 4 GB memory, and I get Vista scores of 4.7 (memory) and all others at 5.9) and Vista is not slow. I am also running it on C2D machines, and it's not slow either. So ..., that really only leaves one conclusion, either there is a problem with peripheral hardware they have, or they are simply lying about their experience.

Yes, end-users lie, there, I said it.

This is false. I had two identical laptops from dell. One came w/ winxp by request and the other w/ vista (someone else ordered and forgot to get xp).. The xp booted much faster than the vista.

Like I mentioned in my other post, once we realized the problems that vista caused with our older programs not being able to be ran on vista.. we quickly put xp on the vista machine.

Currently we only have 1 computer w/ vista and that's the projector pc.. nothing but loading power points from the Microsoft powerpoint viewer

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

I am running Vista on old hardware (Opteron 185, 4 GB memory, and I get Vista scores of 4.7 (memory) and all others at 5.9) and Vista is not slow. I am also running it on C2D machines, and it's not slow either. So ..., that really only leaves one conclusion, either there is a problem with peripheral hardware they have, or they are simply lying about their experience.

Yes, end-users lie, there, I said it.

I see it myself....I run it at my office, and I see it myself every time I go to this law firm client. Browsing and file copying to network shares is clearly slower than the XP/2K machines that got replaced. SP1 was to address some of the file copying issues..it improved it..a bit. But it still is nowhere as fast as prior OSs. Network of 20-ish rigs, all brand new CAT6 cables, HP ProCurve gigabit switch, Dual Xeon Proliant ML with 5 gigs and 15krpm drives running SBS snappy as a champ, lightweight antivirus (NOD32 2.7) properly configured to exclude network shares in AMON.

 

[Valnar]

I am running Vista on old hardware (Opteron 185, 4 GB memory, and I get Vista scores of 4.7 (memory) and all others at 5.9) and Vista is not slow. I am also running it on C2D machines, and it's not slow either. So ..., that really only leaves one conclusion, either there is a problem with peripheral hardware they have, or they are simply lying about their experience.

Yes, end-users lie, there, I said it.

End users lie, but this isn't necessarily one of those times. Microsoft admitted they rebuilt the TCP/IP stack for Vista. It has been proven to be worse than 2000/XP's from a network point of view. Architecturally some things improved, but others did not. Unfortunately, from an end-user perspective, the things Microsoft made worse are more noticeable.