Don't Fall for IT by Munir Kotadia

The world of tech is full of broken promises, marketing spin and schizophrenic behaviour. Munir Kotadia, editor of ZDNet Australia, attempts to bypass the drivel and tell IT like it is.

Microsoft: Don't kill our old friend XP

Posted by Munir Kotadia @ 14:06 42 comments

It's just two months until Microsoft plans to pull the plug on Windows XP — arguably its best operating system to date.

At present, Microsoft finds itself in an unenviable position — its customers want to continue buying and using Windows XP, while its stockholders demand it makes those customers upgrade to Vista.

In an attempt to please both camps, Microsoft has created a licensing loophole — it sells its customers Vista but allows them to continue using XP using so called "downgrade rights".

Because of this, HP and Dell both plan to supply PCs loaded with XP well past the June 2008 deadline set for XP's execution. Essentially, they will be selling XP machines with a prepaid upgrade to Vista included — if and when the customer chooses to do so.

All that pre-release bragging about how well Vista was going to be received didn't convince anyone. Microsoft may even have known Vista was going to be a flop — and a loss in the lawsuit alleging it lied about what constituted Vista-capable hardware could prove it.

Microsoft has a history of delaying the death knell of its operating systems. Back in 2004, Windows 98 required constant rebooting, security wasn't even an afterthought and the dreaded blue screen of death was an everyday occurrence and yet, people still refused to swap it for XP and Redmond decided to keep the superannuated OS on life support for a while longer.

It took another 18 months before Microsoft finally killed off Windows 98.

Back to 2008 and XP is stable and relatively secure. This time, it looks like Microsoft is going to have a much bigger fight on its hands getting customers to forget an old OS.

Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer recently said that the US$500 million (that's $500,000,000) already spent on marketing Vista wasn't enough and more cash was needed to generate "excitement" around the operating system.

This week another Microsoft executive claimed that people simply have a bad perception of Vista. He said that Vista is brilliant and if only people went out and bought it, they would love it.

How long do you want to keep using XP?

All these pronouncements are signs that Microsoft is desperate to try and turn around sales so it does not have to further delay the death of XP.

From speaking to local CIOs, more than a year after its launch and even after the release of SP1, Vista is still far from being a priority.

Over the years, I can't remember how many times Microsoft has claimed it listens to customer feedback and responds.

I think the ears may be a little waxy. Let me sum it up for you Microsoft: even though you are making your customers pay for Vista they are still using XP. That alone should tell you what you need to know.

Extend the life of XP until your customers are ready to upgrade. That day will come. One day.

Like this article? Click below to send it to your mobile for free!

Advertisement

Talkback 42 comments

  1. Amusing... Dan Warne -- 02/05/08

    I find it amusing that before the release of Vista, everyone was howling that XP was a creaky, six-year-old operating system close to collapse and that Microsoft's delays in releasing Vista were inexcusable.

    Now that we've SEEN Vista... well... XP looks rosy in comparison.

    1. hmmmm.. Yves -- 03/05/08

      you're right you know

  2. XP will outlive the Vista pain Gary Allardyce -- 02/05/08

    I purchased a notebook with Vista about 12 months ago. After 3 weeks, I went back to using my old XP notebook. I recently applied SP1 to the Vista box, but the only thing I use it for is the Solitaire game. Vista brings back memories of Windows Millenium Edition, which was outlived by its predeceessor Windows 98. I believe that XP will outlive Vista - XP is a very good operating system, mature and almost faultless.

  3. XP Anonymous -- 02/05/08

    We'll use XP until a better Windows comes out.

    1. XP JAB_au -- 04/05/08

      Will use XP until a better Windows comes out.

      Fat chance of a better windows coming out. Windows Vista was an exercise in not allowing users to use their computer the way they want. It was all about taking power away from the user. It was the trusted computing model, they decided, not, to trust you.

  4. When will it end? William -- 03/05/08

    People are also stubborn and if Windows 7 doesn't 'excite' them enough, what is it going to take to get consumers to move forward and on to bigger and better things? I think Microsoft are doing the right thing for pushing people along because often they don't know that it's for their own good (the Win98 to XP upgrade mentioned in this blogpost being a prime example).

    Looking forward to seeing what Windows 7 is going to be like, especially from a design perspective now that the creator of Adobe Lightroom is allegedly contributing...

    1. When will it end? When MS listens to customer. Thomas W -- 04/05/08

      People are also stubborn, because -- like myself -- they've gone through a Vista setup, tried to use it, found it's a load of old toss..

      And had to rebuild the machine & reinstall XP over it, to get a clean decent efficient machine to use.

      THE CUSTOMER IS WHO PAYS THE MONEY.

      Neither Microsoft nor Mr. William, should *ever* forget that. And by the way -- Abode products have always seemed horrible to me.

      Awkward UI and amazingly, somehow incapable of doing things which theoretically, the underlying featureset should allow.

      Aldus Pagemaker & Google UI's, have always seemed far better to me. Even MS, on their better products, have better UI than Abode.

    2. XP over Vista Ian Dodd -- 06/05/08

      Why would anyone change from XP when they have spent good money on plugins that wont work with Vista. Somebody please tell me the positves with Vista. I have been a windows user since day one and XP has proven itself even though their have been SP1 & 2 updates. Come on V7 I say. Lets not prolong Vista's demise.

    3. Vista positives Simon -- 07/05/08

      It generates new income for MS and helps control the way you use your PC. This reminds me of the cdma closure where the only real benefit to customers is the expense of a new handset and a higher monthly plan. The fact you may have been happy with the old service doesn't come in to it. Corporates must have growing income or they don't work.

    4. wndows vista ultimate german lopez -- 22/06/08

      is the best of the market, no one could compite with macro monster and i hope Mr. Bill Gates give us another chance to probe around the world..... Ah...... by the way I noow personally to Mr peter Norton The greta symantec professional and his theme. Its a greta honour for since and i have been a Norton User from Commander and all the way ther is nothing like Norton Comannder . I hpor thre is a version for windows Vista Ultimat. Congratulations to both of you

  5. Vista is better for me BChau -- 03/05/08

    Maybe some like XP more, but I found that I like Vista better. Solid and reliable. I have been using Vista for over a year now and wouldn't dream of going back.

  6. I agree with MS Exec Anonymous -- 03/05/08

    "He said that Vista is brilliant and if only people went out and bought it," Totally agree 100%. I have been using Vista Ultimate 64bit SP1 and couldn't be happier with it. For your information Vista is not a flop and never will be. The main problem with Vista is that people are trying to run it on low spec machines. You need at least 2-4 gb of ram for it to run really nicely.

    I ran Win98 and WinMe for years and never had a blue screen. You had to know the correct way to install it and find the right drivers. Any misinformation being spread about blue screens normally comes from the Mac/Linux fanboys that hate WinTel machines.

    Could I just point at to all concerned that there was an OS in between Win98 and XP it was called Win2000 !

    1. Sure, Windows Me and Vista are marvelous ! Michael L. -- 04/05/08

      You're so very right Anonymous, Vista is really a great OS, just like Windows ME was, never heard of anyone having the slightest trouble with those two marvelous products. Just don't know why Microsoft retired ME so quickly. Strange isn't it ?.

    2. Vista Rulez ... Not Warren Buffet -- 04/05/08

      Nice to see the MS Marketing budget also pays for shills.

      LOL

    3. 2-4GB RAM Anonymous -- 05/05/08

      You do realise that not everyone has this amount of RAM and not everyone can afford to simply upgrade their computer.

    4. So stay with XP until you upgrade Numble McHumble -- 22/07/08

      If you don't have that much RAM and you're not getting a new computer, don't worry about it then. All new computers come with at least 2GB these days, so by the time you get around to buying the cheapest Dell you can afford, it'll run Vista no worries.

    5. Win2K Anonymous -- 06/05/08

      And the problem with Win2K - which was admitted to by a Microsoft Helpdesk technician in Europe - was that the memory resources reserved for things such as drop-down menus in Word, Excel etc, did not clear when e.g. a program was ended. These resources were limited to only 16 Kilobytes. So you would use Word, and when you ended Word, it was still holding on to the memory resources it had required. Open Excel or your email program, end it again and the same thing happened. So after a couple of hours of serious work, the 16Kb "memory basket" was full and you had to restart to clear it. Win2K was a disaster.

    6. Win2K was great Numble McHumble -- 22/07/08

      I don't know what you're talking about, I've got an office full of people that swear by it. Win2K was basically XP without the Fisher-Price interface. It never ran out of memory and this 16KB "memory basket" you talk about is almost surely imaginary.
      Every program run since about 1988 has needed MUCH more than 16KB of memory.

    7. Rubbishand you know it rob -- 08/05/08

      Ultimate 64 bit, 2-4gb of ram? What do you have? a server? This isn't what you get on your dell or Hp when you order it. You get a basic 32 bit mchine with 1gb of ram. To upgrade cost a couple of hudred bucks. If you get the best of the best of course it will work fine. You shouldn't need that kind of power just for the operating system it's badly designed. Independant non-MS tests have proven xp SP2 runs up to twice as fast as vista sp1.

      You are talking like a tech. The right way to install it and the right drivers? How many people know that. I'm a tech and have seen literally hundreds of blue screens in my time. Compuers are supposed to make peoples lives easier.

    8. huh? Anonymous -- 12/05/08

      The "correct" wasy to install it? Find the "right"
      drivers? People like you give comfort to those Mac/Linux fanboys!!!

      I always thought the "correct" way to install it was to boot from the Win98 CD. And the "right" drivers were the latest ones downloaded from the OEM's website...

      And why do I need 2GB of RAM just to do the same things I did 10 years ago with 64MB?

      Anyone notice that every new version of Windows is significantly slower than the previous one - and I mean on the appropriate hardware. I have an ancient Win98 P3 that I keep around 'coz it's loaded with old games and emulators, and it whoops my XP machine. It's just a little wobbly sometimes :)

  7. MS is desperate Gill B. -- 05/05/08

    MS is desperate because no one wants their Vista.
    You can see just how desperate in that they are pretty much giving away Windows 2008 (Vista+SP1) for free! You can download it right from MS and run it *fully legally* for a whopping 8 months without ever inputting a serial or activating it!
    So with a single reinstall every 8 months (which would be recommended anyway), you can keep running it 100% free.
    That was never possible with XP or Windows 2003 and just shows how desperate MS is for people to try out Vista.

    1. You're out of your depth Numble McHumble -- 22/07/08

      Windows 2008 is a server OS, you wouldn't want to run it on a home computer (unless you knew what you were doing) and besides: Running a business on trial server software with no support is not something anyone would ever consider doing ever at all.
      On top of that, I'm pretty sure reinstalling it would be a license violation so while you might be able to run it "100% free" for longer than 8 months, you'd probably still be breaking the law.
      FYI, Windows 2003 (also a server OS) and Vista are available in trial formats, either as installable ISO's or VHD's.

  8. Vista's hardware requirements Hamish -- 05/05/08

    Someone pointed out that Vista runs fine on "at least 2-4 gb of ram". There are lots of people who simply cannot justify the hardware upgrades required to make Vista work. With the increasing mortgage costs, etc, people just can't afford to go an upgrade their PC's just because a computer operating system company tells them they have to. Which also raises the question of just why an operating system needs so many resources just to run (I am not talking about applications here, just the underlying OS)?

    I am a full-time student. I have a laptop that is *less* than 2 years old: Celeron M 1.6 GHz, 1 GB RAM, ATI Express 200M video card. I am not even going to bother thinking about Vista.

    Especially when it has been running Ubuntu Linux for over a year very happily :-) I can even get the funky 3D desktop effects to run on this.

    Hamish

    1. Vista's hardware requirements Tony Marsh -- 07/05/08

      Yeah good choice of OS Hamish - I like the way Ubuntu Hardy seems to have got multimedia support working well - Im dual booting Vista sp1 and Ubuntu Hardy on my new hp notebook - but its a 2Ghz dual core with 2gb ram - this is my first vista pc - Ive been servicing too many that run like crap because they dont have the hardware to support the os - whoever was marketing vista on these poorly resourced machines got it badly wrong

  9. Biased Poll Tim Biggin -- 05/05/08

    What a ridiculous poll! Where's the option for "Less than 12 months" or "ASAP"?

    I'm sure you'll get the result you're after so you can take that straight to the headline "100% of XP users don't plan on switching in the next 12 months". Laughable journalism.

    1. Right On Anonymous -- 06/05/08

      I'm not really concerned about the Vista issue, but Munir's journalism leaves a whole lot to be desired. If you want a laugh AND a cry, read the rest of his articles.
      In this case he even manages to get it wrong while he's getting it kind of right. You should see the mess when he REALLY screws something up.

    2. Right The Heck On Numble McHumble -- 22/07/08

      Truer words have ne'er been spoken. Despite my other posts, I don't really care too much about Vista vs. XP. Use it, don't use it, I don't care. The real issue is this:
      Munir Kotadia's journalistic "efforts" are shocking and routinely contain errors of fact (and opinions based directly on those erroneous 'facts').
      As an example: Downgrade rights have been sold for many years in the corporate sector, Microsoft has not created anything new in their licensing system. That's just off the top of my head. A quick look through some of his previous articles finds some absolutely laughable and useless works.

  10. Classic change resistance Beanie -- 05/05/08

    I've heard the same arguments every time an new OS is introduced since DOS days. "I'll never move to Windows - I can do everything I need in DOS and it is much better", I heard people say. Yeah, right - how many people run DOS now? I say get over it people. There have been a few hiccups (e.g. DOS6.0, ME - which was really just a stop gap measure when MS realised that adoption of 2000 on the client for home use was not really feasible), but generally each MS OS release has been an improvement over the last. You just need to decide whether you are an innovator and get the new OS as it comes out and accept that there will be a few bugs here and there or wait a while until they are ironed out.

    Personally I am happy to run XP on my current machine and wouldnt recommend anyone upgrade on machines that are more than 12 months old. When I replace it though I will get Vista. The idea that you replace your machine just to run Vista, as some suggest, is ridiculous but so is the notion that you keep running the same rig for 20 years. After 5 years the cost of maintaining a PC can outstrip the cost of buying a new one.

    1. Hickups? LOL Anonymous -- 06/05/08

      Quote from Beanie"There have been a few hiccups (e.g. DOS6.0, ME" Unquote!

      LOL, is it possible Vista is a hiccup? LMAO

  11. Change for Change sake Gav -- 06/05/08

    Microsoft! Listen to your users.... They DON'T WANT IT!!! If I'm going to be forced to change an entire network where they re-jigged the GUI and made it hard for users to find their way around and then made it nearly impossible to patch the PC's due to driver issues then why would I buy Vista. It means a total retraining of users plus lost productivity. SP1 will only load on about 25% of the PC's that are currently running Vista so if I'm going to move away from XP it might as well be to a Linux flavour. Now all I have to wait for is MS to stuff up Office. Here I was thinking that the word collaboration was what Microsoft was all about. Obviously they forgot to talk with their loyal users and vendors!!

  12. xp -v- vista diane connolly -- 06/05/08

    how many more times do i have to learn yet another os. Please please think about the 'little' people not just big business's with it departments and paying 'geeks' big dollars. there are millions of others like me who have to do there own thing with computers. leave us alone and leave xp alone well and happy as well

  13. Long live XP Anonymous -- 06/05/08

    I was a Win98 fan who only changed to XP when I had to. (I'd been using Windows since 3.1 then 3.11 etc. and in fact I still use Dosshell now and again :-)) I have never regretted the change. I have tuned XP exactly to my own preferences and it is superb, fast, user-friendly and will run anything I throw at it.

    The problem with Vista is, that it appears to have been primarily programmed for computer illiterates, ignorants and newbies. It's "all done for you" so anything remotely advanced such as finding the command line to enter e.g. "msconfig" needs a frustrating 10 minute search. My husband has Vista on his laptop and is constantly asking me to come and solve a problem on it for him, programs don't work, the sidebar disappears at random when he wants it, or is displayed when it's been switched off, navigation is atrocious, it's bulky and streaming newscasts from the internet via our broadband are slower than on my old reserve/test laptop attached to a 56k modem...
    They should have thoroughly tested Vista before releasing it and will probably still be releasing patches and fixes when they replace it. Long live XP I say.

    1. Vista Start Run dialog Sneaky Pete -- 09/05/08

      Anonymous the start/run is one click away in Vista. Click on the Start button and then type in msconfig, cmd, mspaint etc. If you really want and need the Run dialog box hit Win + R or right click on Start select properties, select customize and then tick run command to give you a permanent Run button which you don't need lol.

      I would say 95% of computer users are noobs. Those of you that have tried Vista for longer than a couple of hours, how many have tried to share an Internet (ethernet/ wireless) connection over a home network ? I would say hardly anybody. This would have to be about 100 times easier to set up with Vista than with XP. Vista is a huge improvement in many many ways compared to XP.

      And what are all you noobs still doing on 32bit OS ? We all have 64bit CPU's now do we not ?

      XP 32bit cannot address or use more than 3gb of Ram ? For me this OS gets 0/10 for this startling handicap.

      All you noobs/kiddies keep playing with your matchbox cars/XP while the real men will be racing around in their muscle cars/Vista.

    2. word up stinky pete - you are in the 95% Anonymous -- 12/05/08

      A 32-bit address space = 4GB noob!

      Anyway, I seem to recall that 16-bit PCs and OSs could address more than 64K (if not more than 640K -but we got around that one too!) so "startling handicap" my behind.

      If, as you say, setting up a home network/shared internet connection in Vista is about 100 times easier than clicking through the Network Setup and New Connection Wizards in XP, then yes, even you should be able to manage it.

    3. Good one Anonymouse Sneaky Pete -- 13/05/08

      Anonymous be educated goto

      http://www.dansdata.com/askdan00015.htm

      and try to understand why XP 32bit can only see/use 3gb ram. Let me know if the article is too technical for you and I will try to explain lol.

    4. still wrong Anonymous -- 14/05/08

      and so is dan. you can still have >3GB, if not the whole 4GB.

      it's all academic to me, i have 384MB :( and even then i can't address it all

      and at least my XP/98 home network (which took about 1/2hr to set up) doesn't slow down when I play mp3s

    5. Actually... Numble McHumble -- 22/07/08

      You can access the full 4GB in XP and Vista with the right boot commands but you can potentially screw up some other stuff.
      I read about it in the Ars Technica forums. However in XP (not sure about Vista) individual applications can only use 2GB of RAM each.

  14. Really, eh? Anonymous -- 22/05/08

    So Mr. "The world of tech is full of broken promises, marketing spin and schizophrenic behaviour. Munir Kotadia, editor of ZDNet Australia, attempts to bypass the drivel and tell IT like it is."

    ... this seems a little one-sided to me. Regardless of what the market thinks of the products, isn't YOUR job to "tell it like it is"? This seems more like "tell it like we think the market wants to hear it and take another swipe at a successful company - that's what sells".

    It annoys me that journos with a responsibility to tell the truth, tell the opinion-masquerading-as-truth instead. Did you do any research before posting this? Methinks not...

    Bottom-line - Windows Vista has already outsold Windows XP; it's already more popular and is way more secure and reliable than XP - compare the first 18 months of XP to Vista - you'll see the facts.

    Tell it like it is mate, not how you want it to be - and let the customer makes their mind up on their own.

    1. mr anon Anonymous -- 22/05/08

      this is a blog. opinion. get over it!

    2. customers have made up their mind. they want xp! Anonymous -- 23/05/08

      "This seems more like "tell it like we think the market wants to hear it and take another swipe at a successful company - that's what sells"."

      i think you must work for Microsoft. Get off your marketing bandwagon, install Ubuntu and get a life.

  15. Ubuntu is THE upgrade from XP when you do change Graeme Harrison (prof at-symbol post.harvard.edu) -- 06/08/08

    I've used M$ OS since DOS v1.0 in 1982. I was on the team of five which developed the original spreadsheet (Visicalc) at Harvard Business School in 1978.
    I've seen just how little M$ cares for reverse compatibility... from every version of DOC causing people to unwillingly upgrade M$ Office just to be able to read DOCs sent to them. I've also seen that Server2003 dropped API support that was in prior server, making web-server software non-upgradable to later M$ server OS versions (without a complete re-write).
    But I've also followed Linux developments for years... And the latest Ubuntu really is fantastic.. You need no skill with unix-like commands - it just boots up and recognises everything and auto-sources the right drivers from the internet... it is now a far smoother install than M$. Remember ALL of Google runs on Linux, and most web-servers in the world run Linux for robustness. Further Linux has required password confirmation for ANY changes to program area, whereas M$ has had 26 years of mixing executables with data, and only now is trying to implement a Linux-like security solution.
    Remember, with any commercial OS, the supplier WANTS your OS and software to get out of date and useless. That way they can come back in 3-5 years and sell you a new one. But the Linux model is that you get free auto downloads every week, and you never have to learn a new OS. Most users just want their PC to keep operating - they'd never upgrade OS if the one they were on supported the newer classes of devices, eg firewire, bluetooth, etc. But I've found that when I put most people on an already-logged-in Ubuntu system, they can't tell they're not on XP. Linux and XP are just so similar in look and feel.
    APC mag recently pronounced Ubuntu as the 'Vista Killer', and I think they are right. There is a lesser impost, more benefits, far more stability, more virus safeguarding and less re-learning to go from XP to Ubuntu than to go from XP to Vista.
    And Vista requires 2-4GB, yet Ubuntu provides similar functionality and runs happily in 256MB. I recently took a 10yo laptop (Toshiba Tecra) that I hadn't even used for 3 years and took it to a weekender to save lugging my new laptop. While it did allow web browsing etc, it lumbered under Win98, and the AVG anti-virus said there were no longer any updates for Win98. So I switched it to Ubuntu and the 500MHz CPU with just 384MB of RAM performs wonderfully. It seems as fast as XP on most tasks... except the 10yo CPU is just too old for running MPEG4/DivX videos (it pauses)... but it could never run them under Win98 either! And Linux runs even better on 1-4GB, as everything above 256MB is used for disk caching. When you have hardware you are thinking of throwing out, go to www.ubuntu.com and download the CD ISO image and try it. For your main PC, you can even 'try it' by booting off the CD-ROM and it gives you the option to run from CD, writing nothing to your hard drive, just so you can test it out on your hardware. I think the world will hear a lot more about Open Source in the coming years.
    So, if you are running XP now, go to www.openoffice.com and download the Open Source equivalents to M$ Office. Also go to www.mozilla.org and download and use both Firefox (the best web browser) and Thunderbird (rock solid email app)... that way you will be used to the Open Source apps for all major functions, so when it comes time to switch (upgrade) to Ubuntu... your choice will be easy.

  16. Don't believe the quoted number of users of Vista Graeme Harrison (prof at-symbol post.harvard.edu) -- 06/08/08

    User 'Anonymous' (above) claimed Vista had already 'outsold' XP.
    You should not base any view on the claimed number of users of Vista. If you recall, when Vista was released it was priced near A$1,000 and everyone thought, 'Gee, it must bring a lot of benefits to cost that much!'. Well now, just a year later, you can't buy new hardware without getting Vista "thrown in". Indeed in Australia it is almost impossible to avoid the "forced bundling". And yet, as the salesman will explain to you, you can exclude Vista, but it won't change the price of the package. So now Vista is EFFECTIVELY priced at zero! Now, if you ever wanted proof that M$ is chasing a 'claimed installed base' number, then pricing at zero is that proof. Many users would RATHER not have Vista, and wouldn't have paid one dollar extra for it. Indeed it is hard to use the term "outsold" when you're giving a product away!
    I've previously asked the ACCC to look into the continued use of forced bundling in Australia. If you go to www.dell.com.au you'll find all new hardware comes with Vista (like it or not).... but go to www.dell.com and look for Ubuntu bundles and you'll find Dell offers the VERY SAME model numbers (eg currently prime/volume laptop offering Dell 1525) with Ubuntu. Search on 'Ubuntu' on Dell site and you'll find Dell in USA spruiks benefits of Ubuntu, but won't even consider that you might want a non-M$ OS if you're an Oz customer.
    And the argument in the 1980s that forced bundling was OK, because people didn't already own a suitable OS is now long lapsed. If the US market demands Open Source, why can't Australia? Are we genuinely stupid, or are we just silly enough to allow multinationals to do deals offshore that would be illegal under the Trade Practices Act if entered into in Australia?
    In fact one Dell Oz user comment on Dell's web site re 1525 (as at date of this posting) says "Would be even better if able to be optioned with windows XP"... so clearly some people getting Vista don't want it.
    Further, you have to factor in the number who now have Vista but aren't using it.
    In summary, don't believe much of what you read about the number of happy Vista users, as most were given nil choice in the issue.

Add your opinion


Munir Kotadia

Munir Kotadia

Editor

[+] Read bio

ZDNet's CIO Vision Series

Customs | Murray Harrison, CIO

Australian Customs CIO Murray Harrison dislikes SLAs and runs away if a vendor talks to him about innovation. In this interview, he also explains why getting excited about gadgets can be dangerous and talks about how Customs' outsourcing strategy has evolved.

Sponsored content

Power Centre - Content from our premier sponsors

Tags

Back to top

Featured