Intel: Windows 7 will deploy faster than Vista

Intel's sales chief said Wednesday he expects Windows 7 to deploy at a faster pace than Vista did.

Intel sales chief Sean Maloney

(Credit: Intel)

Intel made a splash last year when it said there was "no compelling reason" for Intel's IT department to upgrade to Windows Vista.

"This time I think it will go faster," said Sean Maloney, speaking Wednesday at the Intel Technology Summit.

"There was a reason not to deploy Vista because you're waiting for service pack X or (because of) compatibility issues," he said.

"There are really good reasons (to deploy Windows 7) for the business client. You've got compatibility mode that takes away that argument," he said. "Security, power management. A lot of good reasons," he said.

Maloney's comments were focused on business, but he said "consumer will happen, too."

He also addressed Netbooks saying that Netbooks will not attract first-time buyers. "The first time you buy something you want the real deal," he said, referring to mainstream laptops. He also reiterated a recent Intel theme that Netbooks will become more of a market targeted at children.

[Orion Blastar]

Windows 7 has such a large install size that most Netbook makers stick with Windows XP instead or Linux or Chrome OS.<br /><br />Windows 7 is Windows Vista SP3 IIRC, Windows version 6.1 actually.<br /><br />Compatibility is only available for Windows 7 Pro and up, the Home versions won't have the downloadable XP virtual machine aka Virtual PC 2009, to use and install. However, Windows 7 Home owners can download VirtualBox from Sun and run Windows XP inside of it. Provided they buy a copy of Windows XP Pro as the Home version does not allow use with a virtual machine.

[monkeyfun14]

I love how people look at a version number and say its the same.<br /><br />Its a reworked kernel with a similar version number to ensure compatibility.<br /><br />Amazing how they solve a problem and are still bashed for it.<br /><br />They're damned if they do and damned if they don't.

[rmva]

As a home/business user I did that compatibility thing with VirtualPC when I moved to Vista. It sat there with a forelorn copy of IE6. Finally after 18 months, I deleted the whole thing. Backward compatibility for home users is a non-issue.

[NewsReader_]

@Orion <br /> <br />You obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

[dhavleak]

@ Orion Blaster <br /> <br />1) A version number is just a number. Gmail was labelled "beta" until a couple of months ago. W2k's kernel version was 5.0 and XP's kernel version was 5.1. Base your purchase decision on your requirements instead of on something as inane as a version number. <br /> <br />2) We know absolutely nothing about Chrome OS -- isn't it a little premature to be considering it a favorable replacement for Win7 (in any segment)? It might very well turn out to be a good netbook OS -- but as of this moment Win7 exists and Chrome OS is just an announcement. <br /> <br />3) What do you mean by "compatibility is only available"?? Virtual XP you mean? Home versions don't 'not allow' use with a virtual machine -- they just don't provide Virtual XP, and don't include a license for XP - that's all. You're free to use the workaround you described..

[Shane39199]

you sir know nothing. win 7 is believe it or not smaller than a vista+service packs. it is a compact solid OS which has visual graphics that are...2009 worthy? never went to vista i love my XP but i am ready for win 7 the skinny smarter brother of the 2 vistas ;)

[Vegaman_Dan]

@Orion Blaster: <br /> <br />Wow... spoken like a person who has never seen, much less actually used the product. That would of course make you an expert. :) <br /> <br />Question- why would a home user need to run XP in a virtual machine? XP appls work just fine in Win7. There's only a small handful of business apps that don't work with it and those companies aren't going to be buying a home version in the first place. <br /> <br />As fior version numbers... wow. I suppose you can use the same argument with OS X, right? I mean, it's OS ten... and all those versions between 10.0 and 10.5 just don't count, right?

[Michichael]

@monkeyfun14<br /><br />To be honest, I see no performance or other tangable differences between Windows 7 and my stripped down and tweaked Vista install. As far as I can tell, from a user standpoint, it is Vista with tweaked GUI that is really crappy anyway (Hello restore quick-launch). I think the only feature in 7 I liked was the auto-sizing when I docked a window. <br /><br />On the home front: not worth paying for an upgrade when I'm still waiting for those Extras I was promised as a Vista Ultimate customer. I'm pretty displeased. I mean hell, to me it seems like it IS vista, just with fewer steps to get it actually working.<br /><br />On the business standpoint, the "Windows XP Mode" is a joke. The virtual machine doesn't join the domain or have any domain level access, it's impossible to run network based legacy software, and nobody but a techie is going to understand how to make it work. Not something I'm interested in. I will say that some software was naively compatible with 7 that wasn't compatible with Vista.

[Commander_Spock]

Re: "Windows 7 is Windows Vista SP3 IIRC, Windows version 6.1 actually...."; and, quite still obviously "Codes-Base OS/2". And, just perhaps - OS/2 what OS/2 Warp 5 should have been.<br /><br />Hopefully, they did sit down with the "bankers" and the "international financial analysts and economists" this time around to know what "functionalities" are needed and not what those on the "Redmond Campus" think they need.! <br /><br />Time alone will tell.<br /><br />Cool!

[chrisx1]

Businesses will use the Professional version of Windows 7 and Compatability Mode won't even be needed that much because any software or drivers that were updated in the last 3 years for Vista will work on Win 7 and the majority of XP software works with Windows 7 and Vista anyway. <br />If you are a business that as a critical old app that can't run in Windows 7, then you can use Compatability Mode for that app and move on for everything else. <br /> <br />Any hardware that can run Vista can run Windows 7 in addition to some hardware that was too slow for Vista, so everyone doesn't need to go buy a a new PC like they did for Vista. <br />The lowest bottom of the line $399 desktop PC or $499 laptop you can buy in any store has enough power for Windows 7 well, so you don't have the issue where only midrage and higher processors could handle Vista when Vista was released. <br />There are lots fewer roadblocks to upgrade to Windows 7 today than there were upgrading to Windows Vista 3 years ago.

[empirestatebuddy]

My guess is that Vista's market share will drop much faster than XP's, if only because most netbooks will still be using XP. While I already orderedd my copy of Win7 for my regular laptop, I'll probably just keep XP on my netbook.

[jtjt145]

Anyone who thinks Windoze7 will in a major way improve the computing experience is delusional!<br />Get your cool-aid fast!<br />Micro$oft is sitting on a slippery slide targeted at the drain-pipes. I agree, they still sit somewhere on top of that slope, but all indications are: ITS ALL THE WAY DOWNHILL, BuhBuh MICRO$OFT!<br /><br />And, good riddance too!

[dhavleak]

Easy on the haterade dude..

[Vegaman_Dan]

Let's assume for some crazy reason that you're right. Who steps up to take over from Microsoft? <br /> <br />Apple? No, they already made it clear they have no intention of being more than a niche product maker. They are not ready for the enterprise market. <br /> <br />Google? With the DoJ, the EU, and now even consumers all looking at them and their recent actions regarding data privacy and the use of that private data for commericial purposes, it casts serious doubts if they can gain or regain the trust of the public and business. <br /> <br />Linux? That will require all the big box OEM's to start putting it on their products, then a complete retraining of the entire IT helpdesk infrastructure. That's going to cost billions with larger corporations having to pay millions in retraining. <br /> <br />It's a nice pipe dream, but it just isn't realistic.

[Mr. Dee]

Stay off the liquor, please!

[Inconnux]

when you use words like 'windoze' and 'micro$oft' and mention drinking kool-aid all you are proving is that you you think/act like a 13yr old. You lose all credibility.

[macksumum]

i think that the mad rush to develope windows 7 drivers has resulted in some drivers not working the way that they are supposed to work.i installed the windows 7 beta and even though i got sound the sound didn't work right,if i press the test audio button the sound was normal but if i tried to listen to anything the sound would be very low no matter how high i turned the audio up.the biggest problem is that because it was a windows 7 driver they won't be making any other driver because they feel that there is nothing wrong with the driver.

[technewsjunkie]

Quicker adoption than Vista??<br /><br />That should be easy.

[Mr. Dee]

Have you witnessed the sold out pre-order launch already? Windows 7 is a hit. Its fast, resource efficient and really easy to use.

[sanjayb]

He's agreeing with u Mr. Dee. Get the hate out of your eyes and read more carefully!

[baconstang]

W7 should spread a lot faster than Vista, although that's not saying a whole lot. Too bad folks aren't as flush as they were when Vista was released.

[Inconnux]

People using Vista are very happy... they can't wait to dump it.

[jpg27]

Windows 7 should sell once MS convinces the majority of people that it is better than XP and crappy Vista. I have used the beta release on my Macbook via VirtualBox and it is excellent! Much better and less buggy then vistacrap! Runs like a Leopard :)

[shellcodes_coder]

Windows 7 will rule!!

[GEO2003]

TO THE GUY WITH AUDIO PROBLEMS. <br />Just use the original XP driver man, this will show you not only that Win 7 can handle drivers for XP but also give you what you want. <br /> <br />Try it out.

[teifaelshair]

thnx 4 accepting meeeeeeeeeeee