Windows 7: PC Replacement Cycle

Only if that PC will never touch the internet. The bigger problem is the security of the OS, and I can tell you that Win 98 is not very secure by today's standards.

So long as the office has a decent enterprise, with admins that know what their doing, keeping XP, or even Win2K, is possible, but getting harder and harder. One thing people overlook is that Vista is by far more secure than XP, even after SP2 and SP3.

PhreePhly

Hi there

Shell Oil company in Europe was very recently still using windows 2000 on a lot of its company desk and laptops --the laptops were fine but they have their own common Desktop image which is deployed on company laptops -- how they got the SATA drivers to work on the newer laptops I haven't a clue (unless they were operating with the Bios set to IDE mode).

External consultants with their own laptops could logon again via a VPN and get the "Company Desktop" image whatever OS they had installed on their own equipment.

Actually whilst this might seem backward an advantage is that you can go to any Shell site or even anywhere on the Internet and can logon to the VPN and get a Common desktop whatever the gear you are using.

Making this work for Windows 7 won't be a trivial task -- they skipped (IMO) very wisely a company wide VISTA upgrade - but some of the old desktop gear has really passed its sell by date so I suppose they will go to Windows 7 -- I wouldn't like to work on that upgrade project however.

In fact it's almost like a "Private Cloud Computing" system.

They are phasing out ALL desktops which is again a good idea - considering the amount of travelling these guys usually do and saving a HUGE amount of money by insisting that any external staff have their own laptops -- actually in my experience most consultants like using their own gear anyway so one up to SHELL --

Security also isn't a horrendous problem as most of the Oil business is so technical stolen data is of very little commercial use to people outside the industry - and things like Oil Reserve details and on going contract negociations aren't normally held on the typical "generally acessible" servers anyway.

Cheers
jimbo

I do consulting work for Exxonmobil, and they are still using NT 4.0 and Office 97.


I work for an environmental consultant and deal with the environmental liability side of ExxonMobil, and I can tell you that security is critical. As the consultant, we have limited access to their network, their people have no rights to perform installs on their laptops, and any software we produce that may need to be installed on their laptops must go through their IT security process. We must submit the source code and full documentation.

PhreePhly

Cheers
jimbo[/QUOTE]

I work at a worldwide corporation. The philosophy is "when it breaks replace it" it's incremental replacement. I work every day with office 2003 and XP and it sucks. BAD

Sounds like my dad.

Not that its bad, but sometimes an upgrade just makes everything better.

~Lordbob

Hi there
This is probably because you've still got rather Old fashioned management who haven't understood what the market actually wants or needs still using a 1990's business model that isn't appropriate to 2009 / 2010.

- most professional consultants just want to get their work done -- a lot of security is based on "old fashioned" models -- Of course any deliverables must pass QC checks and be appropriate for the business model in question - but most leaks (I agree not the best word for an Oil company) don't come from flaws in the IT infrastructure but often by word of mouth or Engineering drawings done in a Pub or elsewhere.

Same with a lot of useless Airline security -- you can't take a pair of scissors into an aircraft cabin but if you've any sort of decent Military training you can do a surprising amount of damage with a Piece of Paper - including causing severe Neck injuries etc. (Actually I'm not that horrible BTW but not to be messed with) .

Fortunately SHELL seem to operate in a much less "Strait Jacketed mode" - probably because they are mainly Dutch with a substantial UK element -- Europe has always been a bit more laid back over this type of stuff - and usually without any worse negative consequencies than their US conterparts - and a lot easier to work for.

However to get back to the thread -- we've both proved the point that Corporations upgrade OS systems and hardware at "Glacial Speed".

Cheers
jimbo

That's part of it. I think that the old addage "If it ain't broke, don't touch it" is also huge in the decision.

Actually, from the environmental liability side, the bigger issue is proper procedures to protect discoverability. I am involved with approximately 190 open environmental cases, of which there are easily 40 or so lawsuits in progress. Having a tight control on documentation and data is important.

Absolutely agree, and I believe Americans are prone to over-react.

Well I'm half Dutch and spent much of my childhood in the Netherlands. After university, I worked for an American company in the Netherlands for about 3 years, and I would say that as a whole, they are far less likely to over-react. Europe doesn't have to deal with the threat of lawsuits near as much as we do here. It changes how work get done and decisions are made.

Sometimes glacial seems fast, I think tectonic plate movement would even be welcome.

PhreePhly