Server Operating Systems:
At this time, I see little reason to upgrade to Windows 2008. For what most servers do, Windows 2003 does the job just fine, and is still being supported (with hot-fixes, but not Service Packs) by Microsoft. The software you run on it likes 2003 just fine. Before long, new hardware will be built with Windows 2008 in mind, and Windows 2003 drivers for your hardware might get harder to find. However, I recommend moving to virtual servers at that time, and it will then not be necessary to have Windows drivers for your new server. The virtualization layer (hypervisor) will handle that, and the “virtual hardware” assigned to your server will work fine with Windows 2003 for many years to come.
Exchange 2007? Let’s just not talk about that right now. This is an OS discussion, and I will just say that I intend to resist that one as long as possible too, until Microsoft remembers that if we wanted to manage everything with command lines and scripts, we’d be using Linux with Sendmail or some open-source, command-line driven equivalent.
Terminal Servers, however, could benefit from a Windows 2008 upgrade. Terminal Services (now called Remote Desktop Services) functions have been greatly improved in 2008, specifically in the area of publishing applications seamlessly without giving the users access to the entire desktop – and in the area of remote printing. Remote printing has been a major thorn in your side, and Windows 2008 can help you with that. I believe the new Terminal Services is web-accessible, making it very easy to set up new workstations to use it.
Here is another, more detailed discussion of those improvements.
Is it worth the cost to upgrade? Your customer will have to decide.
Workstation Operating Systems:
I am happy to say that most of my customers have managed to skip right over Windows Vista.
I have not had much experience yet with Windows 7, but my limited experience suggests that Microsoft learned a lot from their Vista flop, and worked to smooth out the rough edges that made people despise Vista. My limited experience also suggests that Windows 7 is still too new for widespread adoption, with pitfalls lurking due to software applications and drivers not being fully compatible with Windows 7 yet.
That being said, we are entering a more sophisticated age of malware and viruses, and it may be time to leave behind the less intrusive security measures we have been enjoying with Windows XP, which is now allowing more and more PCs to become infected – just as it happened with Windows 2000. It will be a rocky time, when we try to balance having appropriate access to our own computers against making them wide open to attacks. Some software will work OK when installed with an administrative account and then used by someone else. Some will not. We’ll have to work out which software requires which installation method, and perhaps sometimes temporarily give a user administrative access to their machine to get something installed and configured, then take it away to help protect them. We can do this with Windows XP for now, and then later with Windows 7.
For the time being, I will recommend that my customers continue to purchase workstations that come with Windows 7 licenses, but have a downgrade to XP installed on them. This will continue for as long as possible, until we start seeing the rate of virus infection become too high, or other factors necessitate a change. The age-old cycle of viruses and antivirus software one-upping each other continues, and maybe we’ll see a comeback of the antivirus software.
For now, Dell is offering workstations with Windows 7 licenses, with Windows XP installed – but only in the Business section.
So, am I just being resistant to change? There is some of that, but I do not embrace change for its own sake. there has to be some benefit, other than the many hours of billable work I could get from pushing customers into unfamilair operating systems just because Microsoft wants to keep their money machine rolling. Let me just say that I was determined to be open-minded abot Vista. I gave it a solid try. When asked whether I wanted Vista or XP on my company-supplied laptop, I chose Vista. I suffered it for 6 months, before finally deciding that enough was enough. I had passed the learning curve and the pain continued. I went back to XP. So no, it is not just resistance to change. There are good reasons for me to hold back. They are related to deficiencies of the new OSes, financial reasons, and the general difficulty of being among the first to move to new technology.
Unless there are specific, compelling benefits to be gained in each scenario, then you won’t see me jumping first to new versions of the OS. Not me, not this time.
