Report: Intel says no to Vista

Intel’s decided to stick with Windows XP, skipping Vista until the next edition of Windows comes steaming out of Ballmer’s pores. The Inquirer’s Charlie Demerjian sums up the issue:

“When a company as tech savvy as Intel, with full source code access and having written several large chunks of the OS, says get stuffed, you know you have a problem. Well, everyone knows MS has a problem, but it is nice to see it codified in such a black and white way though. Reassuring, like a warm cup of tea, or a public kick to the corporate crown jewels.

His conclusion: “Intel is not going to use Vista on its corporate machines… ever.”

Intel won’t touch Vista [Inquirer]

About Rob Beschizza

Rob Beschizza is the Managing Editor of Boing Boing. He's @beschizza on Twitter and can be found on Facebook too. Try your luck at besc...@gmail.com

 

This entry was posted in visted. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Report: Intel says no to Vista

  1. Enochrewt says:

    Ok, we get it, Vista is kinda bleh. But seriously, The Enquirer? I’ve seen some video game rumors in on their site that turned out to be true, but how far can you trust them with business/tech news?

    I feel vindicated though, two of my friends made fun of me for not getting Vista when it came out.I told them I’d wait for SP1. They asked me what that was.

  2. Josh Bancroft says:

    It’s true. If you don’t like the Inquirer as a source, check out the article in a little publication called the New York Times:

    http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/25/et-tu-intel/

    I work there, and I can confirm it’s true.

    Of course this doesn’t mean that “no copy of Vista will ever run inside Intel’s walls”. That’s just silly. What it means is that IT is not going to be deploying it, as an upgrade or on new machines, to regular IT supported users.

    Developers and people who are writing stuff for Vista, or otherwise need it? Of course they have it. People like me who are willing to support themselves, and who don’t need official IT support? I ran it for a couple of months when it first came out. But I switched to a Mac as my main/only machine about the same time, so…

    In my little part of Intel, speaking anecdotally, I know more people who have Macs than people who run Vista. Come to think of it, I know more people who run some flavor of Linux on their laptops, too, but then, I’m surrounded by software developers and geeks, so my perceptions are biased.

  3. dderidex says:

    Ehhhh…ok. Going to be a little tricky to develop a DX10 graphics card, if you never ‘use Vista on [your] corporate machines…ever’.

    I mean, the ray-tracing on Larrabee is nice and all, but we KNOW it has to have DX10 support, or it’s stillborn.

    Call me ‘skeptical’…

  4. TheFirstMan says:

    Yeah, I’m extremely skeptical as well. I don’t think that Intel would be this short-sighted. It’s got to be important to have Vista on *some* of their machines, right?

    Besides, Vista ain’t really that different from XP, and I don’t really see why it’s seen as any worse than its predecessor. It’s got a few too many bells and (drm) whistles which are carefully avoided, but aside from the random freeze of Sid Meyer’s Railroads!, I really don’t have any complaints.

  5. TheFirstMan says:

    Well, if what’s implied is that I’m apologizing for MS, then that’s not true. I’m just stating that paying for one MS OS is as good as paying for another. It’s all the same bull. And I didn’t pay for Vista, anyway.

    As for donating cycles to the RIAA and the MPAA, I have all my music encoded in OGG and don’t support any DRM-based systems. All services that aren’t necessary are stopped. I carefully monitor my connections with PeerGuardian. If anything, I’m working against the monopolistic bastards. I’m donating cycles to folding@home, but that’s about it.

    I have to run Vista (or XP) to run Photoshop and InDesign. The Gimp doesn’t cut it when you’re preparing things for print, and running PS or ID in Wine is slow and flaky.

  6. Nile says:

    I work for investment banks and we’re not rolling ot Vista, either. It’s not just a let-it-settle-down thing, or even waiting for Service Pack 2 to come out – the standard advice with any major software product.

    No, it started with the bad press (or more precisely, some heavyweight technical articles from authors we respect) about system instability introduced by the driver model – an inbuilt flaw arising from the way the system has been built around DRM.

    We’d have tolerated this if it was all about security – believe me, security *sells* in this industry – but it’s about securing media rights and much of it seems to work against securing our systems and our confidential data. We’re paying for the product, but it seems like it wasn’t written for *us*.

    Well, a year or more after the release, Vista’s settled down as much as it’s ever going to. And it seems to be a lot of work – still lots of patches to keep up with, a lot more sysadmin intervention for the licensing and media warnings, and all the associated driver updates.

    We’re not home users who might rely on automated updates and trust Microsoft to do it all for them: we have to test it, we have to know that this is going to run before we risk losing the core functions of the bank.

    Worse, every release of Windows seems to be an exercise in proving Ballmer’s Law: that’s the one which says that just as fast as hardware’s getting faster, operating systems and applications are getting slower. We’d need a company-wide programme of hardware upgrades to roll out Vista.

    So what’s the gain? Cost-benefit analysis supported the move to XP, but there’s no case for Vista. And the risk analysis is very negative indeed.

    So… Intel. There’s a tiny core of technical users who will need to put Vista on their Test and Development boxes. The rest of their business isn’t so very different to anyone else’s; their insider knowledge of the technology gives them no special priveleges or miraculous and, at a guess, their per-user IT budget is probably far lower than ours. Which leaves them making the same decision as every other company with an effective IT decision-making process.

  7. shutz says:

    I think what is meant here is that they won’t be upgrading the majority of their “office” machines to Vista (there isn’t any point in it, anyway…)

    Obviously, they will need to have some machines with Vista in order to develop drivers for their hardware, testing, etc.

    In any case, doesn’t Intel have a non-negligible part of its workforce using GNU/Linux instead of Windows for their main office systems?

  8. Man On Pink Corner says:

    99.99% of computers at Intel are not used for R&D, but for the same thing they’re used for at every other company. The 0.005% of employees who need Vista will, I’m sure, be able to get it.

  9. eustace says:

    Vista is a perfectly acceptable OS, as long as you don’t mind donating clock cycles to MS in order to make record companies/movie studios happy. Think of your machine, your depreciating investment, costing extra so that the more powerful CPU and extra memory will make it less sluggish (compared to your old XP machine)as it simultaneously runs your software and carefully checks your media for legitimacy. Gee, who WOULDN’T want Vista!?! We all need to do our part for the RIAA/MPAA.

  10. Rick says:

    The funny thing about MS apologists is that they willingly pay for MS products.

    “Oh, Vista isn’t so bad, except for blah blah and yadda yadda. Other than that it’s as good as XP.”

    This from people who paid a good US$100 for Vista in their computer’s retail price, to say nothing of the brash souls who paid as much as US$300 for a boxed version. There’s an old Mexican saying:

    El que por su gusto es buey, hasta la coyunda lame

    Rough translation: He who is as stupid as an ox will even lick the yoke.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

More BB

Boing Boing Video

Flickr Pool

Digg

Wikipedia

Advertise

Displays ads via FM Tech

RSS and Email

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution. Boing Boing is a trademark of Happy Mutants LLC in the United States and other countries.

FM Tech