Well MS kept back 64 bit XP until Intel fixed their CPUs so that AMD
wouldn't have a big jump on Intel in that department - I'd think MS
would be expecting some love in return.
T
At 07:06 PM 26/06/2008, DHSinclair wrote:
Winterlight,
I does appear that "business" just does not support Vista. (yet).
I can not say I blame them (based on the vitriol I have read on this list.)
Even so. Why do you expect Intel and/or AMD to march in lock-step with
whatever S. Balmer dictates?
Intel/AMD does hardware. MS does software. We all know that there is
plenty of SW that works fine on the current/future hardware............?
Is this divided loyalty?
Is this about a bit of "fan-boy?"
I just do not understand your vent.
Best,
Duncan
At 08:55 06/26/2008 -0700, you wrote:
Reports: Intel to skip Vista upgrade
For any given release of Windows, there are companies that choose
to skip it. But when the company is Intel, it's a big deal.
Following a report Monday on the Inquirer, the New York Times
reported Wednesday that Intel's IT department "found no compelling
case" for upgrading. Ouch.
And that's despite the fact that it's been nearly seven years since
XP debuted. It's not a good thing, if your customers are electing
to stick with 7-year-old technology. (In fairness, XP did get a
fairly big update with Windows XP Service Pack 2, but even that is
four years old at this point.)
Microsoft, which once predicted businesses would adopt Vista at
twice the rate they moved to XP, has scaled back its ambitions and
these days talks a lot about how long the adoption curve is for
businesses when it comes to new operating systems.
