PC Replacement Cycle

[echrada]

How long can enterprises milk their existing PCs without having to upgrade? The answer for now is: Quite awhile, perhaps forever. But technology chieftains are betting (praying?) that there’s a big PC upgrade cycle looming and the Windows 7 Oct. 22 launch will be the catalyst.

The consensus view is that companies will have to upgrade their PCs at some point. Many of them have stretched the desktop replacement cycle perhaps as much as a year beyond the usual 3 to 3.5 year refresh rate.

The PC replacement cycle: Will Windows 7 light the fuse? | Between the Lines | ZDNet.com

 

[Lordbob75]

How long can enterprises milk their existing PCs without having to upgrade? The answer for now is: Quite awhile, perhaps forever. But technology chieftains are betting (praying?) that there’s a big PC upgrade cycle looming and the Windows 7 Oct. 22 launch will be the catalyst.

The consensus view is that companies will have to upgrade their PCs at some point. Many of them have stretched the desktop replacement cycle perhaps as much as a year beyond the usual 3 to 3.5 year refresh rate.

The PC replacement cycle: Will Windows 7 light the fuse? | Between the Lines | ZDNet.com

My school computers suck.... maybe they will upgrade them....?

~Lordbob

 

[DABoogadie]

I see a world wide refit by 2015. jmo

 

[ccatlett1984]

I can tell you from the organization that I work for, we have ~1000 pc's that need to be upgraded. They are all <P4 2.8ghz. Over the last year with the whole economy thing, we had to cut the budget and the first thing to go was the funds for upgrading pc's.

 

[PhreePhly]

I can tell you from the organization that I work for, we have ~1000 pc's that need to be upgraded. They are all <P4 2.8ghz. Over the last year with the whole economy thing, we had to cut the budget and the first thing to go was the funds for upgrading pc's.

My organization still has P3's in the inventory. We just completed upgrading RAM from 128 to 512 MB on about 800 systems. Our inventory ranges from P3-800 mHz 512 MB systems to 2.4 gHz CD2, 4GB RAM. We have about 3500 PC's currently and 80% are 3 years old or older.

Like your organization, new PC's are only purchased for replacement of non-repairable systems. We just completed a whole company move to XP last June. We still had approximately 400 Win98 systems operating. It's actually quite embarassing.

The only reason I run Win 7 on this laptop is that I have convinced my local IT guy, that I can fix any problems. I also am on the hook for fixing systems locally, so he doesn't have to make the 50 mile drive out here. I'm calling it a long term beta test. A Vista or Win 7 migration isn't even in the plans for the next 3 years. I think they are going to be in for a shock as the newer systems start arriving without XP drivers. That will either force their hand, or they will hold on to old hardware even longer.

PhreePhly

 

[ccatlett1984]

Our IT Leadership is recognizing that issue, they are looking into moving to windows 7 (we still have ~800 w2k sp4 boxes). About half of our pc's are core2duo's so they will not have any issues with windows 7 (or xp mode). The largest hurdle is making sure all of the custom (off the wall) apps work with the new OS.

 

[mdodge]

As an IT consultant for many clients, I've been feverishly testing apps, hardware and special enviroments with Windows 7 in the hopes to upgrade them next year. Even though the release is this year I like to give it either 1 year or 1 service pack before roll out. That being said, I want to get clients on 7 as soon as possible along with Server 2008 R2. Lets not forget how much more secure 7 is than XP, which is one huge reason, along manageability (no more damn defrag scripts). But even still, for larger corporations with over 2500 pc's, it has to be done in small waves over time. One of the schools our company does work for has over 2,000 students and is the worst for little wannabe hackers...damn kids.

 

[weh]

A major law firm for whom I used to work still has more than 300 P2-based computers in general use.

 

[Lee]

This demonstrates as to why Vista was such a failure (beside other problems). You cannot blame large companies for not wanting to update there OS when the systems they are using are more that five years old. With the recession; this can only continue being a problem. Even with prices at the level they are now it is still an expensive venture, and one that is hard to sale to the bean counters. On the lighter side may be we can get the President to use some bale out money to help fix this problem.

 

[KrossX]

Windows 98 is still useful for "Office" usage.

There's no need at all for Windows7 fancy things if the user will only make simple documents in word. =_=

Which means, that ancient computer is more than enough and has no "need" to be replaced.

 

[PhreePhly]

Windows 98 is still useful for "Office" usage.

There's no need at all for Windows7 fancy things if the user will only make simple documents in word. =_=

Which means, that ancient computer is more than enough and has no "need" to be replaced.

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

 

[jimbo45]

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 W7 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 W7 -- 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

 

[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).

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

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.

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]

 

[nate42nd]

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

 

[Lordbob75]

Windows 98 is still useful for "Office" usage.

There's no need at all for Windows7 fancy things if the user will only make simple documents in word. =_=

Which means, that ancient computer is more than enough and has no "need" to be replaced.

Sounds like my dad.

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

~Lordbob

 

[jimbo45]

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

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

 

[PhreePhly]

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.

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.

- 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.

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.

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) .

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

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.

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.

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

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

PhreePhly