Microsoft is making a lot ofnoise with its public statements that for most large shops -- the kindthat actually have portfolios of applications they have to test for ayear or more before an OS migration -- the pain of jumping from Windows XP will be about the same to Windows Vista or the forthcoming Windows 7. This got to me to thinking:

Why bother with Vista?

Asalways, my thoughts on tech are altogether too simplistic, I'm sure.But if -- and Microsoft is earning kudos for its candor in this regardfrom several analysts -- Vista and 7 are going to be essentially thesame code base, why on earth would a company choose to go through theexpense of rolling out an OS that folks just don't like? Particularlyif they are on a battle-tested XP SP3 build that will be supported, atleast on extended support for another five years or so?

Just to clarifiy: Microsoft promises that Vista and 7 will be highly compatible. In fact, the Windows for your Business blog postthat kicked off much of the conversation advises companies to test appsnow running on XP against Vista, and to take that as a valid watermarkof how nicely those apps will play with Windows 7.

Thereare only three plausible scenarios I can foresee to warrant a Vistarollout at this point. I gotta be honest -- I foresaw this kind ofhazily until I read Mary-Jo Foley's post about her interview with Redmond's Gavriella Schuster. But it just seems like common sense to me.

• Yourproprietary applications are so dated that major coding can't wait theyear (or more, based on past performance) that waiting for Windows 7will add to the update cycle.
• You app vendors are no longer supporting XP, or more likely are releasing new, must-have versions that are dicey on XP.
• You are buying a ton of new hardware right now (hey, processors are cheap)and the added expense of XP installs -- assuming it is an expense inyour licensing scheme -- is gonna be hard to rationalize for a coupleyears' peace of mind. (This one's a stretch, since IT is largely in thepeace-of-mind business and Vista SP1 has turned out to be something of a drag, as well)

Foleysurmises that Microsoft's pitch has evolved in a day or so from"waiting for Windows 7 won't make migration easier" to "just get off ofXP, would you?" -- particularly since more than 70 percent ofbusinesses still run XP.

Butwith a few exceptions -- surely there are more and better reasons thanI listed above -- the main reason people didn't jump at Vista upgradesis they don't like it. I mean, they really don't like it. Our own CTOthis morning told me that he equates Vista with the dreaded Windows ME-- an incomplete, interstitial release against a largely new code build.

Withcost containment once again the most pressing issue on everybody'sminds, that's two strikes. And if from a migration standpoint the jumpfrom XP to either Vista or 7 is essentially the same deal, why hurry?