Microsoft giving Vista Business / Ultimate users 'downgrade' to XP option

It's no shock that Windows Vista isn't, shall we say, universally loved, and it's also unsurprising that a plethora of businesses have voiced their preference to keep on runnin' their operations on Windows XP. Presumably in response, Microsoft is "quietly allowing PC makers to offer a downgrade option to buyers that get machines with the new operating system but want to switch to Windows XP," but the program only applies to Vista Business and Ultimate editions. The likes of Fujitsu, HP, Lenovo and Dell all have processes in place to ensure that customers have the ability to downgrade if they so choose, and while some firms are still selling their PCs with XP pre-installed, debates are already swirling around how long that tactic can remain in place.

[boe @ Sep 21st 2007 5:05PM]

Great - in January, you'll be buying PCs with Linux installed (saving money on Windows) and then you can install XP on that PC - no junkware to remove with a fresh install. MS will have more and more people exploring linux as that will come on their PC slowly eroding some of their market share - Bill could be strict but he was very smart - Balmer just has momentum (partially from his girth).

[stephenbratz2 @ Sep 21st 2007 5:30PM]

Awwww, look at the cute little Linux boy. Mommy told him 8 years ago, and every year since, that this was "The year of Linux", and he believed her (just like when she told him that he was a handsome little boy). And you still have not broken the 5% marketshare yet. Don't worry I am sure that next year will be "The year of Linux" (snicker).

[TeddyN @ Sep 21st 2007 6:21PM]

That was harsh. Boe didn't make any of the allegations of which you accuse him.

[gee @ Sep 21st 2007 6:00PM]

No one buys Linux. Linux for the average user at Starbucks or Stickam is never going to happen. Never going to happen linux fanboys!

[Charles @ Sep 21st 2007 6:07PM]

gee - "No one buys Linux"

Yes, that's because it's free!

[jason51873 @ Sep 21st 2007 6:15PM]

LOL @ stephenbratz2

Your a joke dude...

[Jesse S @ Sep 21st 2007 6:48PM]

Actually, aren't there some loonics distributions that are charged for?

Ummm...Red Hat? I don't really know, I haven't used Linux in years...

[Greg Poole @ Sep 22nd 2007 9:18PM]

"slowly" is right. I'm all for Linux as a complement to Windows, but surely you have to admit that none of the distributions are anywhere near mature enough to be distributed with a new PC to people who've grown up on Windows or Mac OS. When I have to spend 4 hours compiling various libraries to get my MP3 player synchronised I know that something isn't quite finished yet. Until there is a seamless graphical interface for absolutely everything in the OS it just isn't ready for mainstream consumption, and right now that's not the case with any of even the friendliest Linux distros.

[BAS @ Sep 22nd 2007 4:39PM]

He still has a good point that this creates opportunities for other operating systems. And if there's more interest, there will be more development. It's obvious now that there is a big market of people who are frustrated by bad quality Microsoft software who can't afford (current) Macs.

[Alex @ Sep 21st 2007 5:05PM]

I don't know what all the whining about Vista is about. Sure they had some kinks to work out, as it has been for every new Windows release but my machine is working far better than XP ever did. Can't really picture it performing any better. Hoping that SP1 will take it that extra step forward though. =)

[David Clark @ Sep 21st 2007 5:30PM]

I've been using Vista for quite a while and I have very few problems. In fact, my only problem was solved with the patch that was leaked a few weeks ago. It's stable, beautiful, and does _very many_ things my mac mini can't do.

Anyone who thinks Vista has issues obviously doesn't use the OS.

[jon @ Sep 21st 2007 5:44PM]

Yeh I cant find any problems caused by vista by it self. However I did buy a new computer recently and I am going to install my own copy of vista because I have had allot of problems because of all the crap companies put on it to make it "easier" to use. And I don't mean just demo's I mean their own software 2.

[fischju @ Sep 21st 2007 6:07PM]

I agree, and why don't you guys ever "blog" about the various fixes that have come out over the past couple of months that have fixed nearly every problem?

Nothing you can argue will make Vista run slower or worse than XP on my PC

[Alex @ Sep 21st 2007 6:10PM]

Of course Engadget won't blog about the improvements in Vista. They're too busy having their noses up Apple's ass to do it. Besides, I don't think their contract with Apple would allow it.

[Brian @ Sep 21st 2007 6:41PM]

Please remember kids that just because YOU don't have problems that's not to say other people don't. Some of this is to do with legacy programs (of which one of my clients has two applications that stop them moving to Vista) and some are to do with Microsoft's own software working with Vista i.e. Visual Studio. Vista has problem like any OS but blindly denying this fact doesn't get these issues fixed.

[Leoedin @ Sep 21st 2007 7:13PM]

My attempt at running vista over the summer ended in disaster. I ran it for a week, but my system ran slower, I couldn't use my webcam, joystick, DVB-T tuner and half my USB devices. In the end, I reinstalled XP.

I will try vista again - probably when SP1 is released. However, until then I'm sticking with XP.

I know that my hardware manufacturer is partly to blame, but I feel vista should have more backwards compatibility with drivers. Anyway, I liked 3/4 of vista and disliked the rest. Unfortunately, the 1/4 I disliked got in the way of day to day usage more than the 3/4 I liked.

Leo (Hi fishjew)

[mani @ Sep 21st 2007 10:43PM]

I agree, have been using Vista for some time now, I had a few minor problems right after the install but was able to resolve everything. It has been running just fine without any problems for many month now. I like it and I think it is a lot nicer than XP.

[Alex @ Sep 22nd 2007 3:24AM]

Brian, first off, I'm probably old enough to be your father. Second of all, we aren't denying the fact that Vista has problems, we are simply stating that there are fixes for everyone of them and Vista has been pretty open about them, while Engadget never mentions it. Most people are just ignorant or don't have the patience to get things working and they want it done right away, regardless of the possibilities this new OS can give them, hence why they settle for something easy and basic (Mac OS).

Leo, Microsoft didn't just upgrade a pre-existing OS like Mac OS are done. They completely started from scratch and have revolutionized the file system to a much more secure and reliable state. Vista wasn't a runoff like XP was to 98, and 98 to 95 and so on. It's supposed to set new grounds for future OSes which is exactly what .NET is all about: being dynamic. I guarantee you that future OSes won't have this incompatibility issue as everything will be derived from this root. People just need to be a little more understanding and not bash something they have invested so much on and obviously know that in the long run will be beneficial for both them (Microsoft) and the customers they rely on.

PS - I do not work or intend on working for Vista. I just know good things when they come my way.

[Carbonize @ Sep 22nd 2007 4:18AM]

XP was not a 'run off' of 98. Windows 98 was DOS based and used the FAT32 file system. XP is NT based with a DOS emulator and uses the NTFS file system by default but also had support for FAT32.

DOS -> Windows 3.x -> Windows 95 -> Windows 98

Windows NT -> Windows 2000 -> Windows XP

[GazzyC @ Sep 22nd 2007 8:35AM]

Vista, well IE crashes out of the box on some PCs, I have seen a few high end systems that refuse to boot Vista but I have also seen customers that are very happy with their Vista computers and the IE problems can be sorted with Firefox or Opera so I guess its just down to luck!

[IgnoAlex @ Sep 22nd 2007 1:29PM]

@Alex
"Most people are just ignorant or don't have the patience to get things working and they want it done right away, regardless of the possibilities this new OS can give them, hence why they settle for something easy and basic (Mac OS)."

And you cite ignorant people, Alex? Pot calling kettle. I've been into computers for over 20 years, and have used many different OSes. THink I am "ignorant" or just can't handle the complexity taht is Microsoft? No, I don't use MS because they make crap.
Ignorant people just blindly walk into a computer store and buy the cheapest garbage box, and that is how they end up with Windows. Sort of the same wayu people end up with a Kia when they go buy a car. Then, if they make any progress with it, enough to impress one of their equally ignorant friends, they too end up with the same Microsoft garbage. Influencial ignorance. Then, there are the people who listen to someone like you, who is also ignorant, just on another level.
I'm sure you are mighty impressed with yourself & autocad, and your video editing and consider yourself an *expert* and easily impress the uninitiated. Then recommend they use Windows. What a disservice...
Fanboys are always annoying but a MS fanboy is much more so. Like a Bush supporter, a blind followalong. Most people who actually research the two end up with Macs.
But unfortunately, it isn't a purchase many look into before the plunge.

"Microsoft didn't just upgrade a pre-existing OS like Mac OS are done. They completely started from scratch and have revolutionized the file system to a much more secure and reliable state."

Yes, that is What Apple did too, SIX YEARS AGO. Mac OS9 & MAc OSX are completely different from the ground up. Little late in the game MS with your Longhorn, oh, I mean Vista.
And even after all that time to catch up, they HAVE NOT.

To listent ot you babble on about all the wonderful MS technologies is like listening to a Jehovah's Witness try to convert a normal person, the brainwashing is apparent.

BalmerBrainwash?
*shudder*

[Alex @ Sep 22nd 2007 12:54PM]

IgnoAlex, first of all, I am not going to stoop down to your level and begin calling you names. Apparently, you don't know the definition of ignorant so I'm going to give it to you:

1. Ignorant: lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact.

I didn't mean to use the word insultingly, but simply to point out that the majority of consumers are people that are using the machine for basic tasks such as web browsing and word processing and are unaware of fixes to problems that are present.

Now, your knowledge on Mac OSes and the complexities of 98 and XP is impressive, but your 5th grade attitude isn't. Now to say that MS makes crap has discredited anything you had to say. I'm not going to get into a MS/Apple battle with you because your cult-prone personality won't get the discussion anywhere.

Enjoy your "Appl3" buddy (don't know if they added that word as well to their dictionary of copyrighted words and don't want to get sued).

[IgnoAlex @ Sep 22nd 2007 1:41PM]

" Ignorant: lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact."

Yes, and that encompases your post to a T.

You label me an Apple fan, yet you are the one posting anti-apple comments every chance you get. MS DOES make crap - their security is atrocious, their memory footprint is giant, and to run the full version of Vista, you need to have quite the hardware set up. Microsoft has thier market share for multiple reasons, but none are quality. Sort of like McDonalds - great marketing, lousy food. How many billion burgers have they sold? And they were all delicious, I'm sure. You are resistant to anything Apple, and that is obvious. I spend time with both OSes daily, I bet you can not say the same, can you?

Yes, if people knew the complexities & could fix them, they would flock to Windows. Yeah, OK...
And if everyone were a mechanic, we wouln't need warantees on our cars. I guess all non mechanics are ignorant, according to your logic.

[Alex @ Sep 22nd 2007 5:58PM]

Hey buddy, I'm not even going to waste anymore of my time on this immature argument. You were the one who turned this into an Apple/MS argument, so just walk away.

BTW, it's warranty, not warrantee. And as far as the mechanics being ignorant, I don't understand how that follows my logic? That would actually support my logic as they are knowledgeable and won't migrate to something lesser because of it. Dumbass.

Anyways, have a good life.

[IgnoAlex @ Sep 24th 2007 2:47PM]

*snicker*

just keep on proving my point!

And you call me the dumbass?

[boe @ Sep 21st 2007 5:09PM]

Try running it in a network environment - SLOW file transfers unless you have a 2008 server running IP6 and even then it is SLOW. And in case you think I'm wrong - just do some research - identical hardware using the latest drivers, no bells and whistles on, no AV or AS or firewall - still MUCH SLOWER in file transfers - not useful for business users. Also slows down Outlook clients - OH and for home users you'll get much better gaming performance running XP. OH - the security updates are so annoying that the first thing most people do is turn UAC off. No advantage to Vista except it runs DX10 for the 2 games that support it although there is very little visual improvement for those games.

[rzlmlchm009 @ Sep 21st 2007 6:12PM]

Actually, my version of Vista Business runs comparable to XP without the bloatware. The amount of drivers included with the install of Vista are excellent, and only a fool would disable UAC because it's "annoying." My firewall (on XP systems) can be annoying too, but I don't disable it. On Vista, I don't need to run anything besides antivirus. Oh yeah, games work just fine on Vista for me too and in some cases, they look better on Vista. I think that Microsoft should get some credit for a job well done.

[rzlmlchm009 @ Sep 21st 2007 6:25PM]

Sorry, this reply was meant for wslcrew. I'm not sure what happened here.

[Akiosarin @ Sep 21st 2007 6:28PM]

very little visual improvement?
DX10 isn't going to automatically update all old games an make them look absolutely f'king amazing (y)

[John @ Sep 21st 2007 8:05PM]

The slow file transfer/copying got fixed some time ago.

[Kamujin @ Sep 22nd 2007 12:31AM]

Actually, our Vista boxes clearly beat our XP boxes for both throughput and latency in our internal testing.

Vista is bloated though. I will agree to that.

[Rob @ Sep 21st 2007 5:08PM]

This is very interesting. To think that a company will promote downgrading their products. I particularly don't care for Vista. I've recently bought 3 computers and chose XP over Vista. Even the one that came with Vista, I changed to XP.

I don't want to pay for eye candy. Even my XP systems are changed to classic view so I can get the best performance possible.

[Andir3.0 @ Sep 21st 2007 5:29PM]

Vista's turning into the next ME?

[wslcrew @ Sep 21st 2007 5:41PM]

To. Andir3.0

Haha, I was thinking the exact same thing! I feel that the single biggest threat to Vista so far have been XP. Heck, I can get a free genuine copy of Vista right now from my school but I still won't upgrade.

[Rob @ Sep 21st 2007 8:19PM]

@ Jake,
Why are you acting like such an MS fanboy?
MS has had real problems introducing Vista to the masses and this "option to downgrade" is a clear sign of that. Other than being pushed down the throat of anyone who wants to get a new computer, people prefer XP because it's a tested and supported OS. Everyone that I've talked to has chosen to downgrade their systems from Vista to XP. And they're not alone. I've done it too.

So, unless you own stock in MS, try to stay focus to the subject being discussed. Engadget is an equal opportunity basher. So, don't take your defense of MS too personal. I'm not taking cheap shots at you or being disrespectful. But, Vista has not been well received by the masses. And please, don't push the "40 millions copies sold" or whatever number MS has thrown around. Because, when you decide to buy a new pc, you haven't had much choice. It wasn't until the summer that companies like Dell started to offer you that choice. Otherwise, you were stuck with Vista. So MS is doing what it has no choice to do; and that's to allow people to downgrade to XP without any hassle. So the interesting thing to find out is how many people have downgraded their systems from Vista to XP. That'd be a nice number to show MS's real success with Vista.

[Ellianth @ Sep 21st 2007 8:56PM]

Wait.. You turn off the themes in xp for a performance boost? I'm curious, what are your system specs?

[Rob @ Sep 21st 2007 9:38PM]

@ Ellianth
I've been doing that for a long time. I tend to use my P4 2.4 most of the time for internet browsing. But, I use a Core2Duo E6550 for video and audio production. Anyway, I still try to turn off as many services as possible, turn themes off, work on the "Startup" section so I don't have unnecessary applications running. I'm no expert, but common sense dictates that the less non-required programs/applications I have running, the more cpu power I get. What I do is go to "Control Panel", "Sytem", "Advanced" tab, in the "Performance box select "Settings" button, then click on "Adjust for best performance." That works well for me.

[Chris Macdonald @ Sep 21st 2007 5:09PM]

wow they pretty much admitted defeat right there

[ed wood @ Sep 21st 2007 5:17PM]

Instead of downgrading to XP why don't they upgrade to Ubuntu for free

[dj-kenpo @ Sep 21st 2007 5:19PM]

they should have just fixed up xp's issues, added the new skin, gadgets, etc isntead of wasting all that time going from scratch, then scrapping it, then rushing off another attempt.

I have xp with a vista theme installed and it's just fine, and runs work files like 3ds max/photoshop far faster than a vista machine with the same hardware.

ms coders need to learn a VERY simple lesson, you go over your old work. look at it and laugh, and say, wow, I could do the same thing in half the lines with what I know now.

if they went and did that to xp it would have been faster/better.

I can't understand them at all at this point, they've thrown all the basics out the window.

[Rob @ Sep 21st 2007 6:49PM]

Why would they spend more time and effort into XP when they can do all the fixes you've mentioned, but instead, sell it to you as Vista. I completely agree with those that think that moving to Vista is not the greatest idea yet. But, like Apple, MS makes money from their OS's. And they want to sell you the same product over and over again. Sure they make updates to them periodically. But, if they can squeeze $129 out of your wallet one more time, they're more than happy to do so.

[dj-kenpo @ Sep 21st 2007 7:27PM]

ummm... becuase xp came from nt.. so I'm saying vista could have evolved from xp...
I'm not saying they can't charge money for things. you've misread that completely.

instead they started from less. which means things like networking, which were stable and running on xp. now aren't.

[Kelmon @ Sep 22nd 2007 6:35AM]

@Rob

I'm moderately certain that Apple makes little money from sales of their OS. They do, however, make a lot of money if you buy a new Mac to run the new OS. As with software that Apple makes, it's mostly there to drive sales of Macs which is where the real money is made. Microsoft, of course, doesn't have this option and that goes some way to explaining the high cost of the OS and Office software.

[dj-kenpo @ Sep 22nd 2007 9:57AM]

kelmon, that was completly.. wrong. ms makes alot of money from windows, it's on almost ever single laptop or desktop being sold. they could charge $2 and still make billions, think about how many computers are sold per year.

[Wellard @ Sep 21st 2007 5:21PM]

Try getting the downgrade from Lenovo. We had a X61 Tablet from Lenovo and came with Vista Business pre-installed. Each time I requested the downgrade I was told to go to our supplier, they directed me to Microsoft, they directed me to Lenovo.

*sigh*

[Anthony @ Sep 21st 2007 5:22PM]

I don't know i'm in a small business environment running 25 vista business and one vista ultimate machine with Small Business Server 2003 and there hasn't been a noticeable hit nor a noticeable gain in network speed. All in all i say my machines run about the same as they did running xp. UAC is still on for all but a few users. Most of the PCs we're running were purchased in '03 so they're a few years old but they run vista just fine. I'm not saying Vista's perfect but this reminds me of all the clamoring there was when XP first came out, where people just didn't want to upgrade to XP in preference of Windows 2000. Now i wouldn't try to run vista on hardware from 2000 and i feel like alot of people are trying to do just that. Yes it requires faster hardware resources and it will run sluggish if you're trying to run it on a machine which just simply doesn't have said resources, but on any of the machines i've purchased in the last two years its been running just fine.

[dj-kenpo @ Sep 21st 2007 5:36PM]

it depends what you're doing.

running 25 vista machines with office at a law firm.

and running 25 vista machines at a video game company are 2 different things.

if you don't need cpu power, or large 2gb+ files transfers, then sure, I bet vista is fine.

a lot of people out there need their computers to do complex computational tasks besides keyboard input and that's where vista starts to choke.

[Anthony @ Sep 21st 2007 5:42PM]

That's the thing i'm doing 25 vista machines @ an architecture firm 10 machines of which are doing heavy 3dsmax work, the rest running autocad and photoshop mostly. So far none of the rendering staff has complained about slowdown, as to the other set of staff (of which i'm a part) we haven't noticed much of a difference in either direction, though i might be the exception.

[dj-kenpo @ Sep 21st 2007 6:10PM]

if you benchmarked them you'd notice a difference. if you still have an xp box around but the vista next to the xp machine, load the same scene, and render a 2300 frame file as an example.

vista eats more cpu cycles and ram than xp does, so how you haven't noticed a difference with that sort of work I'm not sure.

[Alex @ Sep 21st 2007 6:14PM]

I don't agree at all. It all depends on what software you're using. I would say that about 70% of my CPU usage time I am either using AutoCAD for school or editing my videos with Vegas 8.0 and Premiere. I can assure you that my render time have improved at least 25% over XP and I haven't had any of these programs crash on me once.

Like it has been said before, there are fixes out there to resolve all the issues. Whether it is third-party app fixes or OS fixes, it's out there.