Microsoft announced at TechEd North America that Windows 7 SP1 beta would be released this month. IT groups everywhere are analyzing Windows 7 budgets, many of them giving quarter-end updates this week to let management know the status of the Windows 7, 64x and related application virtualization projects. Much like the 10 p.m. news used to open with “It’s 10 p.m., do you know where your children are?” many CIOs are asking, “It’s July 1, do we know where our Windows 7 project is?”
One of the challenges IT teams face is how to determine the budget around application compatibility. In a recent conversation, an industry leader told App-DNA™ that managing app migration from Windows XP to Windows 7 will be the single most expensive component of migration projects. Many articles and blogs have speculated hardware would be a big cost center, but many people underestimate the impact—and cost—of managing application migration and application compatibility for the Windows 7 project.
Get a handle on the reality of what’s needed for application testing and application compatibility – and the potential costs – with a free and straightforward Application Migration Workbook. App-DNA gathered insight from Fortune 500 and FTSE 100 customers, industry partners like Microsoft and Citrix, as well as systems integrator partners. The result is a resource guide complete with worksheets to help estimate the cost of manual testing vs. automation, the math on application churn, and the ROI on a day-to-day app management process. Download the free ebook at http://app-dna.cambuilder.cw.com/Resources/eBooks/App-DNA-Migration-Workbook.aspx
Have your Windows 7 timeline figured out, but not enough pages left on the calendar this year? Check out how static analysis can speed the testing and remediation cycles of your project.
Comments? Questions? Worried about your timeline? Drop a line to info@app-dna.com or on Twitter @appdna – we’re happy to share insight to help you keep track of your Windows 7 project.
86c14aa9-c3c2-414f-8234-bf8f3929259b|8|2.6