Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Microsoft IT

Olympic Committee Chooses XP Over Vista 283

Posted by samzenpus from the if-it's-not-as-broken dept.
Vinit writes "The popularity of Windows XP is still making things difficult for Vista. Now Vista has again suffered a major setback, with Lenovo (Olympic 2008' official sponsor) installing XP on it's machines to run the Olympic Games' vital PC-related tasks. Vista will only be used in internet lounges set up for athletes to use during the games."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Olympic Committee Chooses XP Over Vista More

Olympic Committee Chooses XP Over Vista

Comments Filter:

  • Hmm (Score:4, Insightful)

    by okinawa_hdr ( 1062664 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @07:56AM (#20234735) Homepage
    At what point does an OS mature enough that it becomes "enough for general use"? Maybe XP is that mark.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by an.echte.trilingue ( 1063180 )
      I don't see this as a particular setback. It's just a good business decision: stable and tested over flashy and new. If they were going to go with Linux, they would probably choose etch over lenny.

      Don't worry, Vista will supplant XP over time.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by GiMP ( 10923 )

        Linux, they would probably choose etch over lenny.


        Except even Etch isn't that old. Infact, as a "stable release" it is *very new*. I only upgraded a box from Woody (to etch) only... yesterday.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Phisbut ( 761268 )

        I don't see this as a particular setback. It's just a good business decision: stable and tested over flashy and new. If they were going to go with Linux, they would probably choose etch over lenny.

        Don't worry, Vista will supplant XP over time.

        Except using WinXP is more like using Woody (if you consider XP to be a 2001 OS), or at most Sarge (if you consider XP SP2 to be a 2005 OS).

    • Re:Hmm (Score:5, Funny)

      by MrMr ( 219533 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @08:10AM (#20234837)
      When it's ready for the desktop.
    • Either way, MSFT gets paid. They have plenty of time to sort out Vista.

    • Re:Hmm (Score:5, Interesting)

      by mwvdlee ( 775178 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @09:54AM (#20235873) Homepage
      Vista certainly improves on a few things. Most notably (for me), is the way the GUI is handled internally. OTOH, with these nice improvements also comes a lot of other crap that I (and many others) explicitely DON'T want. As it stands, XP can be improved upon (i.e. anything that OSX, Linux, etc. currently does better than XP), but Vista isn't the answer to that. Vista would have a better chance at adoption if Microsoft's marketing department didn't have a say over what goes in technically.

  • It is a natural decision. (Score:4, Informative)

    by rolfc ( 842110 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @07:58AM (#20234755) Homepage
    My employer took the decision to migrate from win2k to XP, and we will roll it out this fall. Vista was proposed but we do not consider it ready for use.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Billosaur ( 927319 ) *

      I just started a new job and they gave me an HP laptop, which, when opened, had a nice shiny Vista logo on it. Horrified, I turned it on, only to see the reassuring opening stating I was running XP Professional. I breathed a very heavy sigh of relief. Vista is not making it into general use because companies have spent years getting all their systems converted to XP and now want to get some mileage out of it before they switch. Besides, no one wants to risk their IT department on it until they've seen what

      • Re:It is a natural decision. (Score:5, Funny)

        by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @09:44AM (#20235761)
        There's a computer store on my way to work with a sign out front that says, "Hate Vista? We have: XP Desktops! XP Laptops! Hurry, supplies limited!" I'm not making this up.
      • "Vista is not making it into general use because companies have spent years getting all their systems converted to XP and now want to get some mileage out of it before they switch."

        I thought that it wasn't making it to general use because it sucks balls, and is a bit of a pointless upgrade. Of course I don't see much difference between 2000 and XP, but at least XP wasn't hyped up quite so much, and it doesn't take 30 minutes to delete a file..

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Seakip18 ( 1106315 )
      Same here. We've been trickling XP's in since SP1b was put out. We're finally taking the plunge this fall by putting XP's out on every desk. I'm not touching Vista till I get the means to support it.

      On the plus side, Yea for script standardization.
    • I think what you meant to say is that you were not ready for its use. You meant to say is that you don't have 2+ gigs of RAM in each PC, and that they are all not fitted with SATA-III drives, and that they have DirectX 10.0 video cards that are to become obsolete with Vista SP1.

      I think that is what you meant.

      I'm sure the software is ready, there just isn't a PC that can handle it. Bloat or features, I don't care; there is no reason this OS shouldn't be able to run smoothly on a computer built for 3D games l

  • It's Probably Just (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JamesRose ( 1062530 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @08:00AM (#20234769)
    THe specialist software that it runs not yet being rewritten for vista- I'm sure it'd work on vista, but in an international event like this you really don't want to get things misbehaving or acting just slightly differently. Of course in 4 years time vista will be standard and they'll be no question of using anything else- or possibly using the next version of Windows.

    • Re:It's Probably Just (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @08:19AM (#20234905)
      But the /. spin is that Vista is horrible and that even the Olympics isn't using it. The logical reasoning of the software they are using just not having a Vista version makes too much d@mn sense and doesn't bash MS.

      And let's put it this way to the person who posted this story, you do realize that the largest sporting committee in the world choses Windows over Linux.

      Doesn't that just make you steam, eh?

      • Re:It's Probably Just (Score:4, Insightful)

        by dattaway ( 3088 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @08:41AM (#20235087) Homepage Journal
        you do realize that the largest sporting committee in the world choses Windows over Linux.

        The Olympics is all about product placement and sponsorship. It is a place where the elite can toot their money horn of supremacy.

        Linux will NEVER be in the Olympics, unless it can pass the physical and drug tests. Even then, I'm sure the sponsors will find a way to disqualify it. Nothing personal, just business.

      • Vista is horrible, but Lenovo's CEO wants the upgrade treadmill to work. Athletes will have to put up with it and the public will be lead to believe Vista is what makes the Olympics work. If it's really going to work, the servers are going to use gnu/linux, BSD or something else that really does the job. I'm surprised that they admitted anything was not M$'s latest and greatest. The 2008 Olympics are going down in history like 1936, a zenith of the fake and evil.

        The strategy is ultimately futile and da

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Afecks ( 899057 )

          I'm surprised that they admitted anything was not M$'s latest and greatest. The 2008 Olympics are going down in history like 1936, a zenith of the fake and evil.
          So in other words, Microsoft = Nazis?
      • The logical reasoning of the software they are using just not having a Vista version makes too much d@mn sense and doesn't bash MS.

        It's quite funny if some are actually intending to "bash" Microsoft by a news item saying Microsoft will sell a lot of Windows XP licenses. :-p Sure, MS would have preferred to sell Vista, but I don't think they're crying over at Redmond.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by porkThreeWays ( 895269 )
      A natural question to ask is "why would I want to use Vista". What advantages does Vista have over XP that would outweigh its pitfalls? For most it's a resounding "nothing". All their software has been field tested on XP. All their hardware has been field tested on XP. People in the real world don't just change for the sake of saying they are running the latest stuff. High school kids may get a boner over Vista's features, but for those of us in the real world Vista just doesn't offer any reason to change r

    • THe specialist software that it runs not yet being rewritten for vista- I'm sure it'd work on vista, but in an international event like this you really don't want to get things misbehaving or acting just slightly differently.

      In other words, they're not sure they could get things working reliably on Vista, even with plenty of time between now and then to test it.

      That cautious approach may be very wise, but it's also very telling. Rejecting an "upgraded" operating system because it doesn't run the software that runs fine on your existing operating system is perfectly legitimate, and is entirely Microsoft's problem.

  • Indeed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jayminer ( 692836 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @08:00AM (#20234771) Homepage
    Smart choice indeed. I for myself would have chosen Windows XP over Vista, because even though my personal choice is Linux, I will not force anyone on using it, whatsoever. My new laptop (issued by the new company I work) comes with Vista, and making my life a hell. I am going to install Linux on it if it won't hurt any company policy, as all I do is to develop Java applicatons and run some office work.

  • Not ready for prime time. (Score:3, Informative)

    by TripMaster Monkey ( 862126 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @08:01AM (#20234783)
    The popularity of Windows XP is still making things difficult for Vista.

    I wouldn't blame the popularity of XP as much as I would blame the god-awfulness of Vista. At our organization, there are so many problems we've identified with Vista on our enterprise that we've declared a moratorium on its rollout...probably until SP1 is released (which, considering how late Vista was to begin with, could take a while).

    In the meantime, I now get to blow Vista off all the new systems we purchase and replace it with XP. As if I didn't have enough work to keep me busy...

    • Re:Not ready for prime time. (Score:4, Funny)

      by east coast ( 590680 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @09:08AM (#20235325)
      As if I didn't have enough work to keep me busy...

      Apparently not. You still have time to sit around and post on Slashdot... Not that I have any room to talk, I'm just saying...

    • I now get to blow Vista off all the new systems we purchase and replace it with XP
      Eh? Couldn't you order with XP installed?

      • Eh? Couldn't you order with XP installed?


        Unfortunately no. While we can still order the Dell desktops we use with XP, that's no longer an option with the Lenovo laptops.

        And no, I can't switch to a different brand of laptop. That decision is made two levels above me.
        • Unfortunately no. While we can still order the Dell desktops we use with XP, that's no longer an option with the Lenovo laptops.

          That's ironic given the subject of this topic. They can do it for their own systems, but not for systems that customers order?

  • It Isn't The Popularity of XP (Score:5, Insightful)

    by NeverVotedBush ( 1041088 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @08:01AM (#20234785)
    That is making things difficult for Vista. Vista is making things difficult for Vista.

    Just about every day there are stories of how it can't do something important, or has some kind of security flaw, or won't work with this or that hardware, or needs even more system resources to even run.

    What is making XP "popular" is that it doesn't have the problems Vista does. It is no advantage to XP. It's that Vista has so many faults. This isn't unlike the Microsoft even versions of DOS that sucked too.
    • It reminds me of the following...
      MS DOS 4.0
      Windows ME
      Windows Vista

      I don't know much about why DOS 4 sucked... But Windows ME was made because it was taking to long for XP To come out so they cross hybrid Windows 2000 with the Windows 98 dosish kernel. Causing huge problems.

      Simularly with Vista They had a far more complex OS designed but feature after feature was cut and delayed for years. It ended up just being a cross hybrid of Windows XP and Windows 2003 with a new User Interface.

      • I don't know much about why DOS 4 sucked

        I remember two reasons. One, it broke DBaseIII+ applications, which were widespread at the time. Two, it took up more of the precious 640KB conventional memory than DOS 3.11 used, so a lot of TSR [wikipedia.org] stuff broke.

        MS didn't have the long history of fucking over its customers then that it does now, so the PHB-types tended to take it out on the techs when their favorite productivity app [wikipedia.org] suddenly stopped working.

        That was the first in the long series of support nightmares

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by jawtheshark ( 198669 ) *

        I don't know much about why DOS 4 sucked...

        I do.... One of the main reasons was that it ate memory for breakfast in a time that memory was expensive and that we lived with the 640KByte barrier. Many programs by then required a good 500KByte to 520KByte free. With MS DOS 4.x that was pretty much impossible, with MS DOS 3.3 and MS DOS 5.0 and later MS DOS 6.22 it was possible.

    • What is making XP "popular" is that it doesn't have the problems Vista does. It is no advantage to XP.

      Depends on how you look at it. Firefox is regarded as having advantages over IE in part because it lacks some of IE's security problems. XP do have real advantages over Vista in my eyes. Less problems is not to be scoffed at and called "lack of problems" -- it is a real advantage when you consider an OS.

  • MS fighting this (Score:2, Insightful)

    by high_rolla ( 1068540 )
    And I wonder how hard MS will be trying to persuade them to reconsider. Wouldn't surprise me if in a few weeks time there is another article about how MS gave them a rather nice deal and they decided to reconsider their OS of choice.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by TheRaven64 ( 641858 )
      Why would MS care? They're using Vista on all of the public-facing machines, so it's not like they don't get the publicity.
    • I doubt they'll care much. They'll sell a lot of XP licenses for the new systems in the event, so there's no big revenue problem. They'll solve the problem with getting people to upgrade later when Vista has matured and XP has expired in their product lifecycle.

  • It's funny (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @08:20AM (#20234907)
    Yes, funny how all those anti-Vista stories on Slashdot now portray Windows XP as a popular OS that's loved by everyone. Before Vista, it was portrayed as pretty much the most hated system on the planet.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Skater ( 41976 )
      No, people hate XP, too. They just hate it less than they hate Vista, and given only those two options, they would rather use XP.

      Shades of gray, not black and white.

      Also, different people posting means different opinions, etc. There are over a million accounts here now.

      • I don't remember the transition from 2000 to XP being this difficult. There were a few bumps, the usual driver follies but nothing like the problems plaguing Vista. I don't remember companies going with 2000 because XP caused so many problems.

        If memory serves the transition from 2K to XP was actually pleasant...at least by comparison.

        Having said that I don't doubt MSFT will get Vista straightened out. My beef with MSFT products is not with the quality (although some of you could argue that quite comp

        • Re:Did XP suck this bad? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Junks Jerzey ( 54586 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @09:28AM (#20235571)
          I don't remember the transition from 2000 to XP being this difficult. There were a few bumps, the usual driver follies but nothing like the problems plaguing Vista. I don't remember companies going with 2000 because XP caused so many problems.

          Most individuals and smaller companies went directly from Windows 98 or ME to Windows XP.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by cnettel ( 836611 )
          Do you remember NT4 to 2000? Vista has a new graphics driver model, so did 2000.
      • People hate Ubuntu too. People hate AmigaOS. People hate FreeBSD. What's your point? People hate a lot, depending on what people you talk of. People love Windows XP too -- look at Neowin for among the most crowded forum communities on the web, and people do love Ubuntu, and some people even love AmigaOS and FreeBSD.
        • I've never known anyone to LOVE Windows XP. They only dislike Mac OS X (or Linux, or whatever else), so they use XP. And even then, they only dislike Mac OS X because they have too much personal background and training invested in the Windows route, or they like to pirate a lot of software, or they play video games, or they are hackers. Tinkerers really dislike Mac OS X, but that doesn't mean they LOVE XP; it just means they can tinker more in XP, which gives them more satisfaction. Even my parents won'

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ubrgeek ( 679399 )
      It's the lesser of all devils.

  • Doesn't make a difference (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mrjb ( 547783 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @08:25AM (#20234943)
    The truth is that in the end it is still a choice between MS and MS.

    The same happens with detergents- that's why Unilever and Proctor&Gamble produce a multitude of detergents. If a sufficiently large group of people have a choice between 3 detergents of the same price & quality, and 2 are Unilever, it is likely that around 2/3 of the sold detergent will be Unilever.

    In this case, anything non-MS was out of the picture, so why would they complain?
    • Maybe I missed something further up but I don't think non-MS supporters are complaining. All the complaining about vista is coming from people who are using Microsoft products.

      Just because people complain don't automatically assume they'd prefer something non-MS, which is supporters of Vista biggest mistake. This "you're either with us or against us" talk is getting old.

  • Is anybody surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by WIAKywbfatw ( 307557 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @08:26AM (#20234951) Journal
    Lenevo is choosing to go with an older, well-established OS that's tried and tested for the "mission critical" stuff rather than a newer, less tested one. So what?

    Is anybody surprised at that? Would you do things differently?

    When you have to look after everything from press accreditation to publishing results, from scheduling to putting up the correct names of competitors, and doing it all in a multitude of languages and to the tightest of schedules, what would Windows Vista bring to the party that Windows XP wouldn't?

    To use a car analogy, Windows XP has been around the block, been put through its paces, had its engine tuned and is humming nicely, whilst Windows Vista has barely had more than its tyres kicked in the dealer's forecourt. If you were taking a 5,000 mile road trip across a continent, which would you go with?

    Why anybody would be surprised at this decision, or even see it as a failing of Windows Vista, is beyond me. If you're going to go with a Microsoft OS, then common sense makes Windows XP the obvious choice.

    • Lenevo is choosing to go with an older, well-established OS that's tried and tested for the "mission critical" stuff rather than a newer, less tested one. So what? Is anybody surprised at that? Would you do things differently?

      Why yes I would. I would start with looking at Linux/Mac OS X/Sun Microsystems and would never consider Microsoft at all for anything mission critical. Internet kiosks would be fine...throw some $300 eMachines in there with XP/Vista, does it really matter? Shit is shit. Then aga

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by nine-times ( 778537 )

      what would Windows Vista bring to the party that Windows XP wouldn't?

      And what does Vista bring to the party, in general, that Windows XP doesn't? Pro-Microsoft people tend to suggest that the benefits of Vista include increased stability, performance, and security-- Many of the "under the hood" changes to Vista were in favor of those aims. Wouldn't the Olympics want those things?

      It seems to me that the problem with Vista, in general, is that it doesn't bring anything new to the party that most people w

  • In somewhat related news... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Idaho ( 12907 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @08:27AM (#20234961)
    The dutch equivalent of "the consumerist" (de consumentenbond) recently started a program where consumers can send in their Vista-related problems, which they are going to urge Microsoft to fix or ask for money back (or perhaps, to give free copies of XP instead). To quote de consumentenbond [www.nu.nl] (article in dutch, relevant part translated here):

    "A power user will be able to solve most of the problems that Vista confronts him with, however the average consumer will run into serious trouble. The [operating] system contains so many mistakes that we want to investigate this in detail."

    Furthermore, the article notes that "The consumentenbond dislikes the fact that new computers are delivered with the Vista operating system by default".

    Yup, Vista seems to be doing great...

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by udippel ( 562132 )
      Hmm. It actually is bad, in my humble opinion. I read the whole article, and was disgusted that these days Microsoft somehow has managed to make it to the image of the Robin Hood for computer users; the fearless party that ropes in and waits for the reports by the users in order to help them solve their problems.
      Neither the article nor De Consumentenbond point out that the mess and waste of time, money and energy on the users side is 100% self-inflicted; and due only to the desire of Redmond to make ever mo
  • While upgrading my Catalyst driver from 7.7 to 7.8 I had my first BSOD (Blue Screen Of Death) on Windows Vista Ultimate Eng OEM (64-bit), so yes i understand their worries.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by bazorg ( 911295 )
      and was your reaction: "Wow!"?
    • well yea if you are gonna run that ATI shit on Vista, its gonna bluescreen :P try nVidia next time ...

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by SEMW ( 967629 )

        well yea if you are gonna run that ATI shit on Vista, its gonna bluescreen :P try nVidia next time ...
        Would that be the same nVidia who's initial Vista drivers for their 8800 series still ride atop the charts (from all accounts) as the leading cause of Vista BSODs?
    • ATI drivers causing BSOD. Color me surprised.....

  • Reality check time for Linux fans. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by 140Mandak262Jamuna ( 970587 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @08:36AM (#20235041) Journal
    If a company with that much cash at hand and a willingness to break rules and fight a no holds barred battle finds it this difficult to dislodge XP from the desktop, Linux fans, we have a much more formidable task ahead. When people are asking, "Will 2009 be the Year of Vista?", it is difficult to take the talk about "the year of Linux Desktop" seriously.

    I don't know what would be a reasonable expectation for Linux market share at consumer level in the year 2010. 3%? 6%? 12%?

  • vista can still get into the olympics... (Score:3, Funny)

    by ArcadeX ( 866171 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @08:46AM (#20235145)
    the special olympics...

  • Major setback (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Reckless Visionary ( 323969 ) * on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @08:50AM (#20235185)
    "a major setback"

    Come on, really? Complete sensationalist bullshit. Why don't we keep it up and refer to these meaningless events as "the final nail in the coffin" or ones that "spell doom" or "darken the horizon" for Vista. In case you hadn't noticed, the money's all going to the same place.
    • I was just checking whether someone had already made this point. Microsoft isn't losing if the alternative to Microsoft's operating system is another Microsoft operating system.

  • kinda lame (Score:2, Interesting)

    by wwmedia ( 950346 )
    kinda lame this makes fronpage news when more pressing issues in china like pollution during olympic games, human rights abuse and censorship by chineese takes back seat

  • link is to a parasitic blog instead of the source (Score:5, Informative)

    by 1u3hr ( 530656 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @08:55AM (#20235229)
    TFSummary links to TFA:
    http://www.pclaunches.com/software/olympic_committ ee_chooses_xp_over_vista.php [pclaunches.com]

    which just regurgitates the story from
    http://www.networkworld.com/news/2007/080807-vista -wireless-kept-off-core.html [networkworld.com]

    Why not link directly to the source instead of some blogger collecting Adsense? Network World has got advertising too, of course, but at least they earned it by doing the work and researching a story instead of just plagiarising it like a Picquepaille.

    And for fuck's sake "installing XP on it's machine".
    "It's" == "It is". Possessive is "Its".

  • setback? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Snarkhunter ( 1056150 )
    I fail to see how this is a setback for Microsoft. They still get their license fees from XP (though this is China, you never know). More importantly, any time you see an athlete using a computer, or anyone using a private terminal, won't they be using Vista? I betcha any sponsorship the games get from Microsoft will be branded "sponsored by Microsoft Vista," not "sponsored by Microsoft Vista (but jokes on you guys we're really using XP for our back end stuff here at the games)"
  • Vista could be awesome, and any serious organization would still not have picked it, so this doesn't say much. It's simply too new and unproven. Now that it has performance issues (where some seem scheduled for improvement in SP1), that doesn't exactly paint a brighter picture either. So this is a bit of a non-news item to me, mostly aimed for narcissistic open source users perhaps? ;-)

  • Fool me once... (Score:4, Informative)

    by realinvalidname ( 529939 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @01:09PM (#20238539) Homepage

    The IOC was rather famously burned by widely-reported technological problems with IBM systems at the Atlanta games in 2006, with bugs that reported some athletes as being 7 or 8 meters tall. Near the end of the games, I recall there was a proclamation that the IOC would no longer adopt any technology that hadn't been in production for at least n years. This may simply be a case of Vista, being not even a year out of beta, not qualifying for consideration under this very conservative restraint.

  • Here's the thing - (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mergy ( 42601 ) on Wednesday August 15, 2007 @02:14PM (#20239363) Homepage
    MS tweaks their adoption numbers because it is not possible to buy XP licenses anymore. Instead, you buy Vista licenses and can use XP. So, I am sure for the MS marketing department and for their reporting it might look like Vista is doing great. They did this for XP to 2000 as well but not as aggressively as they did this time around.

    Vista is not something we need at the business-level.

Slashdot Top Deals

Two can Live as Cheaply as One for Half as Long. -- Howard Kandel

Close