Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

October 4, 2008

MS knows Vista is crap lol

http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=1619

Microsoft is sending some very confusing signals about Windows Vista - the

latest of which it issued via a statement on October 3.

The Register reported on October 2 that Microsoft was going to extend again

the date until which PC makers would be allowed to continue to offer Windows

users "downgrade rights," enabling them to switch from Vista to XP on new

machines. The Reg said Microsoft had moved the downgrade cut-off date from

January 31, 2009 to July 31, 2009.

I asked Microsoft about the Reg's report and got this statement, via a

company spokesperson:

"As more customers make the move to Windows Vista, we want to make sure

that they are making that transition with confidence and that it is as

smooth as possible. Providing downgrade media for a few more months is part

of that commitment, as is the Windows Vista Small Business Assurance program

(available in the U.S. only), which provides 1-on-1, customized support for

our small business customers."

In other words, the Reg's story was correct.

The spokesperson sent further clarification:

"What's changing is Microsoft is giving six more months where it will

provide downgrade media for XP Professional for OEMs and system builders to

provide to their customers who purchase Windows Vista Ultimate and Business

editions - (which the company figures will be) largely going to be small

businesses since that's the audience that would want/use XP Pro. So it's the

same old downgrade right thing that was in the EULA (End User License

Agreement) before; it's just Microsoft is providing the media to partners a

few months more."

"The same caveat with providing the downgrade media as before applies,

which is OEMs and system builders don't have to do so if they don't want -

it's their business decision to make."

Microsoft has extended XP's end-of-life date before. In Apri 2008 l,

Microsoft officials said the company was not going to extend again the date

on which it required OEMs to stop preloading XP on new machines. That date

was June 30, 2008. Microsoft did say that system builders, a k a white box

vendors, would be allowed to continue to preload XP on new systems until

January 31, 2009. OEMs and system builders both were OK'd to continue

preloading XP on new ultra-low-cost systems through 2010, as many of those

systems were and are incapable of running Vista.

Bottom line: Even though Microsoft is maintaining publicly that Vista is

finally ready for prime time, it is allowing PC makers to continue to offer

customers XP. So what's a user to believe? Is Microsoft really standing

behind Vista? And if it's not - but instead is doing what customers really

want (while simply giving lip-service to Vista's readiness - is that still a

positive?

October 4, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

All I can say to this is that MANY of the "leading" OEM laptops sold in the

fall/winter of 2007 do not run Vista well.

1. First problem -- Processor and memory speeds & amount of memory. (Most

laptops use part of System RAM for Video RAM, and it may be a significant

amount.)

2. Video and sound drivers (combined with "dual core" processors ) Quite a

few of the laptops develop "stuttering" that is usually sound, although some

also have the same problem with video. Seems that the affected laptops were

released with 32bit Vista versions, and there was no upgrade path to 64bit,

due to lack of drivers. The Video drivers are just now being updated enough

to permit fair (low option) game play of the newer graphics intensive games.

DX10 is another issue in the same general area. The "Classic" mode seems to

be almost mandatory if reasonable speed is to be maintained.

3. An additional problem is that win XP drivers may not be available for

these laptops.

I believe that XP should have one more "final" release, fully patched &

SP'd, and be available to the public as either a "downgrade", or an

upgrade/refresh for existing systems.

"the granter of sina" <granter@yan.sina> wrote in message

news:48e6d370@newsgate.x-privat.org...

> MS knows Vista is crap lol

>

> http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=1619

>

> Microsoft is sending some very confusing signals about Windows Vista - the

> latest of which it issued via a statement on October 3.

>

> The Register reported on October 2 that Microsoft was going to extend

> again the date until which PC makers would be allowed to continue to offer

> Windows users "downgrade rights," enabling them to switch from Vista to XP

> on new machines. The Reg said Microsoft had moved the downgrade cut-off

> date from January 31, 2009 to July 31, 2009.

>

> I asked Microsoft about the Reg's report and got this statement, via a

> company spokesperson:

>

> "As more customers make the move to Windows Vista, we want to make

> sure that they are making that transition with confidence and that it is

> as smooth as possible. Providing downgrade media for a few more months is

> part of that commitment, as is the Windows Vista Small Business Assurance

> program (available in the U.S. only), which provides 1-on-1, customized

> support for our small business customers."

>

> In other words, the Reg's story was correct.

>

> The spokesperson sent further clarification:

>

> "What's changing is Microsoft is giving six more months where it will

> provide downgrade media for XP Professional for OEMs and system builders

> to provide to their customers who purchase Windows Vista Ultimate and

> Business editions - (which the company figures will be) largely going to

> be small businesses since that's the audience that would want/use XP Pro.

> So it's the same old downgrade right thing that was in the EULA (End User

> License Agreement) before; it's just Microsoft is providing the media to

> partners a few months more."

>

> "The same caveat with providing the downgrade media as before applies,

> which is OEMs and system builders don't have to do so if they don't want -

> it's their business decision to make."

>

> Microsoft has extended XP's end-of-life date before. In Apri 2008 l,

> Microsoft officials said the company was not going to extend again the

> date on which it required OEMs to stop preloading XP on new machines. That

> date was June 30, 2008. Microsoft did say that system builders, a k a

> white box vendors, would be allowed to continue to preload XP on new

> systems until January 31, 2009. OEMs and system builders both were OK'd to

> continue preloading XP on new ultra-low-cost systems through 2010, as many

> of those systems were and are incapable of running Vista.

>

> Bottom line: Even though Microsoft is maintaining publicly that Vista is

> finally ready for prime time, it is allowing PC makers to continue to

> offer customers XP. So what's a user to believe? Is Microsoft really

> standing behind Vista? And if it's not - but instead is doing what

> customers really want (while simply giving lip-service to Vista's

> readiness - is that still a positive?

October 4, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

"the granter of sina" <granter@yan.sina> wrote in message

news:48e6d370@newsgate.x-privat.org...

> MS knows Vista is crap lol

>

> Bottom line:

That's precisely it, it's a business descision, not a crap one.

- Vista Cabal

October 4, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

Vista Cabal wrote:

> "the granter of sina" <granter@yan.sina> wrote in message

> news:48e6d370@newsgate.x-privat.org...

>> MS knows Vista is crap lol

>>

>> Bottom line:

>

> That's precisely it, it's a business descision, not a crap one.

>

> - Vista Cabal

And, next to Windows Me and Microsoft Bob, one of the worst decisions

Microsoft has ever made.

Alias

October 4, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

"Chuck" <cdkuder@msn.com> wrote in message

news:ec9Su1cJJHA.1308@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> All I can say to this is that MANY of the "leading" OEM laptops sold in

> the fall/winter of 2007 do not run Vista well.

> 1. First problem -- Processor and memory speeds & amount of memory. (Most

> laptops use part of System RAM for Video RAM, and it may be a significant

> amount.)

While my system isn't a laptop, it is a Q6600 quad processor and 8GB of RAM

with 2 500GB SATA drives. And it is pig slow at network and disk to disk

copy.

> 2. Video and sound drivers (combined with "dual core" processors ) Quite

> a few of the laptops develop "stuttering" that is usually sound, although

> some also have the same problem with video. Seems that the affected

> laptops were released with 32bit Vista versions, and there was no upgrade

> path to 64bit, due to lack of drivers. The Video drivers are just now

> being updated enough to permit fair (low option) game play of the newer

> graphics intensive games. DX10 is another issue in the same general area.

> The "Classic" mode seems to be almost mandatory if reasonable speed is to

> be maintained.

A flaw in Vista's design. You shouldn't need a super computer to run the

graphics. And they are not without issues either, noisy fans, heat, power,

drivers...

> 3. An additional problem is that win XP drivers may not be available for

> these laptops.

Actually, they usually are. It would be more accurate to state your vendor

does not want to support their use and isn't telling you where to get them.

For example, I go to Intel and slip stream in the XP drivers and back to

much faster XP. But the vendor will not tell you that as a rule. Probably

because of their M$ agreements and predatory pricing.

> I believe that XP should have one more "final" release, fully patched &

> SP'd, and be available to the public as either a "downgrade", or an

> upgrade/refresh for existing systems.

Agreed. But for customers to get what they want a few ego's at M$ need to

be fixed.

> "the granter of sina" <granter@yan.sina> wrote in message

> news:48e6d370@newsgate.x-privat.org...

>> MS knows Vista is crap lol

>>

>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=1619

>>

>> Microsoft is sending some very confusing signals about Windows Vista -

>> the latest of which it issued via a statement on October 3.

>>

>> The Register reported on October 2 that Microsoft was going to extend

>> again the date until which PC makers would be allowed to continue to

>> offer Windows users "downgrade rights," enabling them to switch from

>> Vista to XP on new machines. The Reg said Microsoft had moved the

>> downgrade cut-off date from January 31, 2009 to July 31, 2009.

>>

>> I asked Microsoft about the Reg's report and got this statement, via a

>> company spokesperson:

>>

>> "As more customers make the move to Windows Vista, we want to make

>> sure that they are making that transition with confidence and that it is

>> as smooth as possible. Providing downgrade media for a few more months is

>> part of that commitment, as is the Windows Vista Small Business Assurance

>> program (available in the U.S. only), which provides 1-on-1, customized

>> support for our small business customers."

>>

>> In other words, the Reg's story was correct.

>>

>> The spokesperson sent further clarification:

>>

>> "What's changing is Microsoft is giving six more months where it will

>> provide downgrade media for XP Professional for OEMs and system builders

>> to provide to their customers who purchase Windows Vista Ultimate and

>> Business editions - (which the company figures will be) largely going to

>> be small businesses since that's the audience that would want/use XP Pro.

>> So it's the same old downgrade right thing that was in the EULA (End User

>> License Agreement) before; it's just Microsoft is providing the media to

>> partners a few months more."

>>

>> "The same caveat with providing the downgrade media as before

>> applies, which is OEMs and system builders don't have to do so if they

>> don't want - it's their business decision to make."

>>

>> Microsoft has extended XP's end-of-life date before. In Apri 2008 l,

>> Microsoft officials said the company was not going to extend again the

>> date on which it required OEMs to stop preloading XP on new machines.

>> That date was June 30, 2008. Microsoft did say that system builders, a k

>> a white box vendors, would be allowed to continue to preload XP on new

>> systems until January 31, 2009. OEMs and system builders both were OK'd

>> to continue preloading XP on new ultra-low-cost systems through 2010, as

>> many of those systems were and are incapable of running Vista.

>>

>> Bottom line: Even though Microsoft is maintaining publicly that Vista is

>> finally ready for prime time, it is allowing PC makers to continue to

>> offer customers XP. So what's a user to believe? Is Microsoft really

>> standing behind Vista? And if it's not - but instead is doing what

>> customers really want (while simply giving lip-service to Vista's

>> readiness - is that still a positive?

>

October 5, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

On Sat, 4 Oct 2008 10:29:01 -0600, "Canuck57"

<dave-no_spam@nospam.net> wrote:

>While my system isn't a laptop, it is a Q6600 quad processor and 8GB of RAM

>with 2 500GB SATA drives. And it is pig slow at network and disk to disk

>copy.

I don't do a lot of disk to disk, but Vista _is_ a pig on network

access. Getting to/from shares is pitiful compared to XP. A peek

around the newsgroups or the 'net will demonstrate that Vista's

networking just plain sucks all around, from the time you try to hook

up to the time you disconnect.

October 8, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

the granter of sina wrote:

>

> Microsoft is sending some very confusing signals about Windows Vista - the

> latest of which it issued via a statement on October 3.

>

> The Register reported on October 2 that Microsoft was going to extend again

> the date until which PC makers would be allowed to continue to offer Windows

> users "downgrade rights," enabling them to switch from Vista to XP on new

I'm also a bit confused. The other Sunday I was watching NASCAR with a

neighbor and was considering bringing my laptop over after signing up

with their special service, which required a high end pc/laptop, so I

went to Dell and looked for laptops as it was about time for me to get

in shape, and they all seemed to come with Vista, but for $100 _more_

you could get a _downgrade_ to XP.

Too weird for me. I closed the page.

--

http://www.bootdisk.com/

October 8, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

Chuck wrote:

>

> 1. First problem -- Processor and memory speeds & amount of memory. (Most

> laptops use part of System RAM for Video RAM, and it may be a significant

> amount.)

I believe all, most all, laptops use system ram for video ram, as do

most new desktops.

--

http://www.bootdisk.com/

October 8, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

"Plato" <|@|.|> wrote in message

news:48ec55a2$0$272$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com...

> the granter of sina wrote:

>>

>> Microsoft is sending some very confusing signals about Windows Vista -

>> the

>> latest of which it issued via a statement on October 3.

>>

>> The Register reported on October 2 that Microsoft was going to extend

>> again

>> the date until which PC makers would be allowed to continue to offer

>> Windows

>> users "downgrade rights," enabling them to switch from Vista to XP on

>> new

>

> I'm also a bit confused. The other Sunday I was watching NASCAR with a

> neighbor and was considering bringing my laptop over after signing up

> with their special service, which required a high end pc/laptop, so I

> went to Dell and looked for laptops as it was about time for me to get

> in shape, and they all seemed to come with Vista, but for $100 _more_

> you could get a _downgrade_ to XP.

>

> Too weird for me. I closed the page.

If you had read and understood the offer i.e.

You get two OS - Vista and WinXP CDs.

October 8, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 17:19:35 +1000, "Sunny" <wombathouse@yahoo.com.au>

wrote:

>

>If you had read and understood the offer i.e.

>You get two OS - Vista and WinXP CDs.

The point is that most of us don't want Vista, so we're effectively

paying an extra $100 to get XP. Dell knows that, and is gouging out

$100 if you want XP.

October 8, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

+Bob+ wrote:

> On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 17:19:35 +1000, "Sunny" <wombathouse@yahoo.com.au>

> wrote:

>

>>If you had read and understood the offer i.e.

>>You get two OS - Vista and WinXP CDs.

>

> The point is that most of us don't want Vista, so we're effectively

> paying an extra $100 to get XP. Dell knows that, and is gouging out

> $100 if you want XP.

>

Actually, the point is that you aren't buying XP, only Vista, and if you

insist on having XP installed instead as a special option you will pay

for the adder.

October 8, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

+Bob+ wrote:

> On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 17:19:35 +1000, "Sunny" <wombathouse@yahoo.com.au>

> wrote:

>

>>If you had read and understood the offer i.e.

>>You get two OS - Vista and WinXP CDs.

>

> The point is that most of us don't want Vista, so we're effectively

> paying an extra $100 to get XP.

"...most of us..."?

I've seen less than 10-15 posters in here wanting or threating to go

back to XP.

Hardly qualifies as "most of us".

Dell knows that, and is gouging out

> $100 if you want XP.

So that is MS's fault?

Grow up bob!

October 8, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

Plato wrote:

> the granter of sina wrote:

>

>>Microsoft is sending some very confusing signals about Windows Vista - the

>>latest of which it issued via a statement on October 3.

>>

>>The Register reported on October 2 that Microsoft was going to extend again

>>the date until which PC makers would be allowed to continue to offer Windows

>>users "downgrade rights," enabling them to switch from Vista to XP on new

>

> I'm also a bit confused. The other Sunday I was watching NASCAR with a

> neighbor and was considering bringing my laptop over after signing up

> with their special service, which required a high end pc/laptop, so I

> went to Dell and looked for laptops as it was about time for me to get

> in shape, and they all seemed to come with Vista, but for $100 _more_

> you could get a _downgrade_ to XP.

>

> Too weird for me. I closed the page.

>

"Downgrade" is the operative word.

But why would anyone pay $100 to "downgrade" anything?

Are there that many stupid people out there?

October 8, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

Frank wrote:

> Plato wrote:

>

>> the granter of sina wrote:

>>

>>> Microsoft is sending some very confusing signals about Windows Vista

>>> - the

>>> latest of which it issued via a statement on October 3.

>>>

>>> The Register reported on October 2 that Microsoft was going to extend

>>> again

>>> the date until which PC makers would be allowed to continue to offer

>>> Windows

>>> users "downgrade rights," enabling them to switch from Vista to XP on

>>> new

>>

>> I'm also a bit confused. The other Sunday I was watching NASCAR with a

>> neighbor and was considering bringing my laptop over after signing up

>> with their special service, which required a high end pc/laptop, so I

>> went to Dell and looked for laptops as it was about time for me to get

>> in shape, and they all seemed to come with Vista, but for $100 _more_

>> you could get a _downgrade_ to XP.

>>

>> Too weird for me. I closed the page.

>

> "Downgrade" is the operative word.

> But why would anyone pay $100 to "downgrade" anything?

> Are there that many stupid people out there?

You don't have to pay to downgrade, it's part of the Vista business

license as it was part of the XP Professional license as it was part of

the Windows 2000 Professional license as it is and was part of different

Server versions. No one says you have to pay an OEM to do this for you

but it is up to you to supply the previous version installation media

and to make sure that drivers for the older version are available for

the new hardware, so sometimes paying the OEM may be easier than doing

it yourself or it may give the buyer a reassurance that the hardware

will work with the older operating system and that it will be guaranteed

and supported by the OEM.

Why would business customers want downgrade rights? Perhaps if you were

administering several hundred or several thousand workstations you might

find that it is easier to maintain your machines if they all have the

same operating system. Or maybe you have specialized applications or

custom software that was designed to run on Windows XP but that doesn't

work so well on the newer Windows version, changing the older or custom

applications may not be a feasible option at this particular time so you

might instead exercise your downgrade rights, for business customers

this is not something that is as stupid as some might think. As I said

above, this is nothing new, it's been around for a while and it is aimed

at corporate clients, most people misunderstand the purpose of the

downgrade rights but if they so chose to exercise it it is theirs to

exercise if they buy business versions of the operating system.

John

October 8, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

The date and time was 10/8/2008 7:26 AM, and on a whim, Frank pounded

out on the keyboard:

> +Bob+ wrote:

>

>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 17:19:35 +1000, "Sunny" <wombathouse@yahoo.com.au>

>> wrote:

>>

>>> If you had read and understood the offer i.e.

>>> You get two OS - Vista and WinXP CDs.

>>

>> The point is that most of us don't want Vista, so we're effectively

>> paying an extra $100 to get XP.

>

> "...most of us..."?

>

> I've seen less than 10-15 posters in here wanting or threating to go

> back to XP.

> Hardly qualifies as "most of us".

>

"Most of us" is infinitely beyond the limits of this little newsgroup

server. This newsgroup absolutely doesn't qualify as "most of us"

either. Maybe you should read a few tech articles if you need to be

educated on who isn't moving to Vista.

And you're cross-posting to an XP group, so in here that IS "most of us".

--

Terry R.

***Reply Note***

Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.

Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

October 8, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

Terry R. wrote:

> The date and time was 10/8/2008 7:26 AM, and on a whim, Frank pounded

> out on the keyboard:

>

>> +Bob+ wrote:

>>

>>> On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 17:19:35 +1000, "Sunny" <wombathouse@yahoo.com.au>

>>> wrote:

>>>

>>>> If you had read and understood the offer i.e.

>>>> You get two OS - Vista and WinXP CDs.

>>>

>>> The point is that most of us don't want Vista, so we're effectively

>>> paying an extra $100 to get XP.

>>

>> "...most of us..."?

>>

>> I've seen less than 10-15 posters in here wanting or threating to go

>> back to XP.

>> Hardly qualifies as "most of us".

>>

>

> "Most of us" is infinitely beyond the limits of this little newsgroup

> server. This newsgroup absolutely doesn't qualify as "most of us"

> either. Maybe you should read a few tech articles if you need to be

> educated on who isn't moving to Vista.

"...who isn't moving to Vista"?

Sorry, but that isn't the same as paying $100 to downgrade.

And you're cross-posting to an XP group, so in here that IS "most of us".

I answered a cross-post. I didn't originate it.

October 8, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

John John (MVP) wrote:

> Frank wrote:

>

>> Plato wrote:

>>

>>> the granter of sina wrote:

>>>

>>>> Microsoft is sending some very confusing signals about Windows Vista

>>>> - the

>>>> latest of which it issued via a statement on October 3.

>>>>

>>>> The Register reported on October 2 that Microsoft was going to

>>>> extend again

>>>> the date until which PC makers would be allowed to continue to offer

>>>> Windows

>>>> users "downgrade rights," enabling them to switch from Vista to XP

>>>> on new

>>>

>>> I'm also a bit confused. The other Sunday I was watching NASCAR with a

>>> neighbor and was considering bringing my laptop over after signing up

>>> with their special service, which required a high end pc/laptop, so I

>>> went to Dell and looked for laptops as it was about time for me to get

>>> in shape, and they all seemed to come with Vista, but for $100 _more_

>>> you could get a _downgrade_ to XP.

>>>

>>> Too weird for me. I closed the page.

>>

>> "Downgrade" is the operative word.

>> But why would anyone pay $100 to "downgrade" anything?

>> Are there that many stupid people out there?

>

> You don't have to pay to downgrade, it's part of the Vista business

> license as it was part of the XP Professional license as it was part of

> the Windows 2000 Professional license as it is and was part of different

> Server versions. No one says you have to pay an OEM to do this for you

> but it is up to you to supply the previous version installation media

> and to make sure that drivers for the older version are available for

> the new hardware, so sometimes paying the OEM may be easier than doing

> it yourself or it may give the buyer a reassurance that the hardware

> will work with the older operating system and that it will be guaranteed

> and supported by the OEM.

>

> Why would business customers want downgrade rights? Perhaps if you were

> administering several hundred or several thousand workstations you might

> find that it is easier to maintain your machines if they all have the

> same operating system. Or maybe you have specialized applications or

> custom software that was designed to run on Windows XP but that doesn't

> work so well on the newer Windows version, changing the older or custom

> applications may not be a feasible option at this particular time so you

> might instead exercise your downgrade rights, for business customers

> this is not something that is as stupid as some might think. As I said

> above, this is nothing new, it's been around for a while and it is aimed

> at corporate clients, most people misunderstand the purpose of the

> downgrade rights but if they so chose to exercise it it is theirs to

> exercise if they buy business versions of the operating system.

>

> John

>

Then obviously those saying it will cost $100 to "downgrade" are confused.

October 8, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

Frank wrote:

> John John (MVP) wrote:

>

>> Frank wrote:

>>

>>> Plato wrote:

>>>

>>>> the granter of sina wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> Microsoft is sending some very confusing signals about Windows

>>>>> Vista - the

>>>>> latest of which it issued via a statement on October 3.

>>>>>

>>>>> The Register reported on October 2 that Microsoft was going to

>>>>> extend again

>>>>> the date until which PC makers would be allowed to continue to

>>>>> offer Windows

>>>>> users "downgrade rights," enabling them to switch from Vista to XP

>>>>> on new

>>>>

>>>> I'm also a bit confused. The other Sunday I was watching NASCAR with a

>>>> neighbor and was considering bringing my laptop over after signing up

>>>> with their special service, which required a high end pc/laptop, so I

>>>> went to Dell and looked for laptops as it was about time for me to get

>>>> in shape, and they all seemed to come with Vista, but for $100 _more_

>>>> you could get a _downgrade_ to XP.

>>>>

>>>> Too weird for me. I closed the page.

>>>

>>> "Downgrade" is the operative word.

>>> But why would anyone pay $100 to "downgrade" anything?

>>> Are there that many stupid people out there?

>>

>> You don't have to pay to downgrade, it's part of the Vista business

>> license as it was part of the XP Professional license as it was part

>> of the Windows 2000 Professional license as it is and was part of

>> different Server versions. No one says you have to pay an OEM to do

>> this for you but it is up to you to supply the previous version

>> installation media and to make sure that drivers for the older version

>> are available for the new hardware, so sometimes paying the OEM may be

>> easier than doing it yourself or it may give the buyer a reassurance

>> that the hardware will work with the older operating system and that

>> it will be guaranteed and supported by the OEM.

>>

>> Why would business customers want downgrade rights? Perhaps if you

>> were administering several hundred or several thousand workstations

>> you might find that it is easier to maintain your machines if they all

>> have the same operating system. Or maybe you have specialized

>> applications or custom software that was designed to run on Windows XP

>> but that doesn't work so well on the newer Windows version, changing

>> the older or custom applications may not be a feasible option at this

>> particular time so you might instead exercise your downgrade rights,

>> for business customers this is not something that is as stupid as some

>> might think. As I said above, this is nothing new, it's been around

>> for a while and it is aimed at corporate clients, most people

>> misunderstand the purpose of the downgrade rights but if they so chose

>> to exercise it it is theirs to exercise if they buy business versions

>> of the operating system.

>>

>> John

>>

> Then obviously those saying it will cost $100 to "downgrade" are confused.

It may cost more because you have to buy a business version when maybe a

home version might be all that you need. What the OEMs decide to charge

to do the downgrade is up to them, but not all OEMs charge for this

service. Some OEMs will supply an XP Pro restoration disk free of

charge with their Vista Business machines, if the buyer wants to use XP

he simply has to do a factory restore to the XP version, I know that

Lenovo does this with their ThinkPads. So you're right, it doesn't

necessarily cost $100 to downgrade your machine, people are saying that

because that is what one of the large major OEM charges to do it for

their customers, people can shop elsewhere and see what other OEMs have

to offer.

John

October 8, 2008

Re: Microsoft extends XP downgrade rights date by six months

> Why would business customers want downgrade rights? Perhaps if you were

> administering several hundred or several thousand workstations you might

> find that it is easier to maintain your machines if they all have the same

> operating system. Or maybe you have specialized applications or custom

> software that was designed to run on Windows XP but that doesn't work so

> well on the newer Windows version, changing the older or custom

> applications may not be a feasible option at this particular time so you

> might instead exercise your downgrade rights, for business customers this

> is not something that is as stupid as some might think. As I said above,

> this is nothing new, it's been around for a while and it is aimed at

> corporate clients, most people misunderstand the purpose of the downgrade

> rights but if they so chose to exercise it it is theirs to exercise if

> they buy business versions of the operating system.

I agree with you mostly except the following:

The magnitude has never been this large though it is known that corporate

customers are, rightfully, cautious. However, corporate customers are

normally signed in with volume licenses and if one pays attentions to the

offer from brand name system providers, one will also know that it's not

just corporate customers but also a larger number of SMBs (small and medium

business) are doing so.

Apart from the "standard" costs of migrating to a new operating system,

Vista also requires a large amount of "retraining" cost including

interruption of work and user dissatisfaction, and we are still dealing with

some primitive issues (e.g. file copying, basic networking issues, etc.)

after Windows has been introduced, say, 20+ years?

On one hand, we have increased cost without reducing any of previous

standard migration costs such as some of you already mentioned, and on the

other hand, what are "tangible" benefits (key word: tangible, not

sensational or feeling safer)?

Also with today's global competitive environment, I seriously doubt any

proper trained decision maker will give it a go.

The newer version will have to deliver one critical business element

regardless of its technical hype and that is, If it cannot present

*tangible* benefits, it needs to reduce deployment/migration cost, or it

will face the same if not a worse situation.

"John John (MVP)" <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message

news:gcii7i$gn9$1@aioe.org...

> Frank wrote:

>

>> Plato wrote:

>>

>>> the granter of sina wrote:

>>>

>>>> Microsoft is sending some very confusing signals about Windows Vista -

>>>> the

>>>> latest of which it issued via a statement on October 3.

>>>>

>>>> The Register reported on October 2 that Microsoft was going to extend

>>>> again

>>>> the date until which PC makers would be allowed to continue to offer

>>>> Windows

>>>> users "downgrade rights," enabling them to switch from Vista to XP on

>>>> new

>>>

>>> I'm also a bit confused. The other Sunday I was watching NASCAR with a

>>> neighbor and was considering bringing my laptop over after signing up

>>> with their special service, which required a high end pc/laptop, so I

>>> went to Dell and looked for laptops as it was about time for me to get

>>> in shape, and they all seemed to come with Vista, but for $100 _more_

>>> you could get a _downgrade_ to XP.

>>>

>>> Too weird for me. I closed the page.

>>

>> "Downgrade" is the operative word.

>> But why would anyone pay $100 to "downgrade" anything?

>> Are there that many stupid people out there?

>

> You don't have to pay to downgrade, it's part of the Vista business

> license as it was part of the XP Professional license as it was part of

> the Windows 2000 Professional license as it is and was part of different

> Server versions. No one says you have to pay an OEM to do this for you

> but it is up to you to supply the previous version installation media and

> to make sure that drivers for the older version are available for the new

> hardware, so sometimes paying the OEM may be easier than doing it yourself

> or it may give the buyer a reassurance that the hardware will work with

> the older operating system and that it will be guaranteed and supported by

> the OEM.