App Compatibility and Lack of IT Resources Tops Windows XP Migration Woes

As some of you know, we're hosting a survey to get an idea of why Windows XP migrations are slow or stalled. In April 2014 is Fast Approaching and Organizations are Still Thick with Windows XP, we showed some numbers from NetMarketShare that indicates that Windows XP still has a pretty hefty desktop ownership. There are many reasons why Windows XP is slow to die in companies everywhere, but we wanted to give you the opportunity to help us understand which reasons actually top the list.

With over 323 people surveyed so far, here's the current stats:

As you can see, application compatibility and lack of proper IT resources top of the list. And really, 'too many other projects going on' also relates to lack of IT resources. IT is simply too busy with so many other projects going on, there's not enough time to test applications or dig into researching how to efficiently, yet quickly, move from the dying, 12-year old operating system. To me, this is a great opportunity for consultants and migration tools vendors to take part in a mass migration effort. But, time is short.

The survey also offers participants the ability to comment or add their own reasons we may have missed. The comments are also telling, citing cost, corporate politics, slow networks, and hardware cycles (computer leasing) scheduled beyond the April 2014 cut-off as some other major reasons.

PARTICIPATE: You can still participate in the quick survey here:  What Is Bogging Down Your Windows XP Migration Plans?

We appreciate anyone who can take a few seconds to add their voice through the survey. The information provided will help us build content and educational resources to help get everyone as close to migrated by April 2014 as possible. A conversation with a VP at Microsoft a week ago, resulted in the individual saying, "Please, please, PLEASE! Do whatever you can to evangelize migrating off of Windows XP!"

It’s a dire time. Microsoft has extended Windows XP support before, but they won't (probably not) do it again.