For whatever reason (e.g. failure to grasp, denial, personal blinders, etc.), you aren't admitting what it means that Windows Vista can't run a mainstream Windows 2000/Windows XP program like Peachtree Accounting's "ACT!"
And what it means is that Windows Vista isn't backwards compatible with Windows XP (or with Windows 2000, or with Windows NT, or with Windows 98, etc.).
This fact has *enormous* implications for proprietary software...in other words, the software that each business writes in-house to run their operations.
Knowing that Windows Vista isn't backwards compatible with mainstream XP software like "ACT!" means that any company that upgrades company-wide to Vista en masse is risking *all* of their deployed software.
To put it simply, everything that they've written in the past may not run...or may run with bugs in unexpected places.
Proprietary software, after all, typically complies with fewer standards and seldom ports as easily to new OS's as does commercial software.
So when a mainstream commercial package like "ACT!" fails on Vista...well, that pretty well sounds alarm bells for all in-house tech deployments.
Vista isn't backwards compatible. Companies looking to upgrade to Vista are facing new error checking tests at the least, and potentially new software re-writes from scratch at the most...
...but those re-writes wouldn't even offer new functionality. Companies would be spending new money just to have what they once had under XP and Win2000.
Well, that's not going to be very attractive to the average CIO. Why spend money to get what you've already got?!
Thus, Vista's lack of backwards compatibility is a hurdle for every corporate software salesman to overcome.
Dude get over your snotty asshole condescending self. I will not continue to respond to a dick like you who cannot speak on normal terms but instead find it necessary to immediately insult, if thats how you run your day I am surprised you have any friends. So 'for whatever reason (e.g. failure to grasp, denial, personal blinder, etc.)' I will not respond to you again, as you see I have personal choice in life just like OS customers due in making decisions to upgrade there OS. Now continue on and cry to somebody else dickhead.
OK I am over you insulting me twice in two posts.
Let me actually respond to your post.
ACT 2007 is compatible with Vista with a patch. If you are running an older version of Peachtree that more than likely means you can't run Vista anyways. Besides that any CIO worth his salary would not upgrade any PC's to Vista just because its a new OS. If you would need to replace a PC on your system for some reason, guess what, the corporate XP license is still going to be good.
SO basicly I am saying a company would not migrate to an OS until all implications of what they are running is considered in the matter, if they deem the migration necessary then they will adapt to it.Once again ANY change by any corporation if done right will be weighed properly and shouldnt effect them. Vista itself is not forcing itself on anyone, it is the choice of the company to make.
This isnt a failure to grasp its reality. It costs a company zero dollars to maintain what they have. Sure eventually they will migrate to a new OS but eventually they will also update there other software also(shock, but hey its OK for the other software just not the OS, right?)