Why Corporates are forced to Continue using Windows XP

Windows XP has several flaws. Its 7 years old. Any modern computer would be able to run Windows Vista or Linux anyway. There are cheaper options out there in the market. There are better options too. Its just completely outclassed by today’s standards. Yet its still being used by corporates. And yeah, microsoft recently had to extend its lifetime even more.

The following tries to analyse reasons why corporates still need to use Windows XP while there are several better options available, and it also tries to present reasons why migration and hardware upgrading would be quite difficult.

Its purely the company’s decision to use an operating system. Public presumption of an OS as good or bad has nothing to do with how a business feels about it. So I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that a company enjoys using Windows 98. Infact, there actually ARE companies which rely on windows 98, office 2000, visual basic 6, etc and I have seen them in action. Believe me, the satisfaction level is indeed very high.

Migration is not an easy business for many. You need to train an entire workforce to accept a change and to do things differently. And as people grow older, their learning capability reduces. Its hard for a 50-year old clerk in some office to suddenly start using windows vista, when he hardly manages to use windows 98 for example.

For the very same reason, migration to Linux is also often heavy. How do you expect a several thousands of workers to suddenly use an OS which is as different from windows as communism is different from capitalism ? The REAL cost and time involved in training, which includes the loss in productivity during the training period, alone would make it much cheaper to continue using windows products.

And take a look at the economic situation today. Thanks to some brainless economic policies followed by some american banks, world is in recession and profits of several companies are dipping and most economies are slowing down. In such a situation, to expect companies to upgrade their hardware is nutty.

Besides, there is a role of common sense too for companies which are satisfied with Windows XP. If it ain’t broke, why replace it ? For the same reason, I have seen several billing machines in various department stores still use windows 98, and sometimes even windows 3.1.

However, going from an individual consumer’s perspective, if someone needs to buy a new rig, it always works out cheaper to buy vista than XP. That’s a solid fact which nobody can deny. But for a company which deploys several rigs for their work and which has already been using windows XP, windows vista is a costly affair indeed.

Windows XP has become more of a trap than anything else to most of the firms that use it. Vista might be easier to use, but when XP has been around for 7 years, people obviously find it easier since they are used to it. Most hardware can’t run vista. Migration to Linux needs several hours of training, while migration to mac means nothing more than having to spend money on not just training, but also software and hardware. It does not make sense in these uncertain times to make dramatic changes to the way a company functions, nor does it make sense to invest funds which could otherwise be used to rescue the company from the hard days ahead in front of them. Look at what happened to Satyam which tried to buy Maytas.

To conclude, continued use of Windows XP is a necessary evil. There is little most corporates can do about it. However, nothing stops individuals like you and me from moving away. Infact, its actually encouraged, so that when the time is right, a smooth migration can occur from XP to other OSes.