Skip to main content

Windows 10 Migration Delays: 39% Won't Meet January 14 Deadline

Rex McMillan

For IT professionals responsible for upgrading users to Windows 10, it's crunch time.

End of regular support for Windows 7 is nearly here (January 14, 2020) but as many as 59% say that only a portion of their users have been migrated to Windows 10. This is according to a new survey from Ivanti which includes responses from more than 500 IT professionals. Consider these key findings:

2 in 5 Organizations May be Writing a Big Check

Just 39% report that they have completed Windows 10 migration for all of their users. For those still migrating, 38% say they "almost" have 100% of their users on Windows 10, while 23% report that their users will be migrated by the Windows 7 end-of-life date. That leaves nearly two in five organizations (39%) that will not be ready when the January deadline hits – a risky and costly proposition!


As Microsoft has announced, after January 14, any PCs operating Windows 7 will become more vulnerable to security risks and viruses because new security updates will no longer be available from Microsoft. To avoid this, Microsoft does offer options for extended support, but the cost can be as high as $200 per Windows 7 PC for just one year's worth of OS security updates.

Fear that Updates May Break Applications

So, with high costs looming, and the fear of security risk mounting, why hasn't everyone completed their migration? The Ivanti Survey found that high resource and time requirements as well as migration costs (57%) were the top factor preventing the completion of Windows 10 migrations. The need to focus on other, higher IT priorities (47%) was the next most common factor while the fear of application readiness or support for Windows 10 (40%) followed as a close third.

In fact, application compatibility concerns are high across the board, preventing many organizations from performing needed software updates. Fear that new updates and patches will "break" applications was reported by 58% of respondents, while 48% don't want updates and patches to impact user productivity and 29% say updates and patches are too manually time consuming.

Costs to Maintain Windows 10 Expected to Be the Same, or Lower

Even though many organizations are still not prepared, the Windows 7 end-of-life date in January was the top priority driving the timing for those that have migrated to Windows 10 (44%). Other priorities driving the timing for a Windows 10 migration included the mitigation of security risk (23%), mitigation of operational risk (11%) and improving user productivity (10%).

The cost of maintaining Windows 10 compared to Windows 7, however, was not a factor. As many as half expect the cost of maintaining Windows 10 to be the same as Windows 7, with 20% even expecting maintenance costs to be lower.

Physical Still Far Outweighs Virtual

The lack of a significant maintenance cost impact for Windows 10 may be working to retain the use of physical devices, compared to the use of virtual or cloud-delivered workspaces for Windows 10. Even with Microsoft's recent focus on promoting Azure-delivered cloud workspaces and Windows Virtual Desktop, 70% of IT professionals still say they will use Windows 10 on physical desktops and laptops, while only a quarter expect to use a hybrid mix of virtual and physical desktops.

Automation to the Rescue

To avoid paying expensive support fees after the January deadline, companies may want to look to tools to help automate their migration, patching and update processes. This can dramatically relive IT from migration resource and time demands while minimizing cost and ensuring seamless support for user applications.

The Latest

Like most digital transformation shifts, organizations often prioritize productivity and leave security and observability to keep pace. This usually translates to both the mass implementation of new technology and fragmented monitoring and observability (M&O) tooling. In the era of AI and varied cloud architecture, a disparate observability function can be dangerous. IT teams will lack a complete picture of their IT environment, making it harder to diagnose issues while slowing down mean time to resolve (MTTR). In fact, according to recent data from the SolarWinds State of Monitoring & Observability Report, 77% of IT personnel said the lack of visibility across their on-prem and cloud architecture was an issue ...

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 23, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses the NetOps labor shortage ... 

Technology management is evolving, and in turn, so is the scope of FinOps. The FinOps Foundation recently updated their mission statement from "advancing the people who manage the value of cloud" to "advancing the people who manage the value of technology." This seemingly small change solidifies a larger evolution: FinOps practitioners have organically expanded to be focused on more than just cloud cost optimization. Today, FinOps teams are largely — and quickly — expanding their job descriptions, evolving into a critical function for managing the full value of technology ...

Enterprises are under pressure to scale AI quickly. Yet despite considerable investment, adoption continues to stall. One of the most overlooked reasons is vendor sprawl ... In reality, no organization deliberately sets out to create sprawling vendor ecosystems. More often, complexity accumulates over time through well-intentioned initiatives, such as enterprise-wide digital transformation efforts, point solutions, or decentralized sourcing strategies ...

Nearly every conversation about AI eventually circles back to compute. GPUs dominate the headlines while cloud platforms compete for workloads and model benchmarks drive investment decisions. But underneath that noise, a quieter infrastructure challenge is taking shape. The real bottleneck in enterprise AI is not processing power, it is the ability to store, manage and retrieve the relentless volumes of data that AI systems generate, consume and multiply ...

The 2026 Observability Survey from Grafana Labs paints a vivid picture of an industry maturing fast, where AI is welcomed with careful conditions, SaaS economics are reshaping spending decisions, complexity remains a defining challenge, and open standards continue to underpin it all ...

The observability industry has an evolving relationship with AI. We're not skeptics, but it's clear that trust in AI must be earned ... In Grafana Labs' annual Observability Survey, 92% said they see real value in AI surfacing anomalies before they cause downtime. Another 91% endorsed AI for forecasting and root cause analysis. So while the demand is there, customers need it to be trustworthy, as the survey also found that the practitioners most enthusiastic about AI are also the most insistent on explainability ...

In the modern enterprise, the conversation around AI has moved past skepticism toward a stage of active adoption. According to our 2026 State of IT Trends Report: The Human Side of Autonomous AI, nearly 90% of IT professionals view AI as a net positive, and this optimism is well-founded. We are seeing agentic AI move beyond simple automation to actively streamlining complex data insights and eliminating the manual toil that has long hindered innovation. However, as we integrate these autonomous agents into our ecosystems, the fundamental DNA of the IT role is evolving ...

AI workloads require an enormous amount of computing power ... What's also becoming abundantly clear is just how quickly AI's computing needs are leading to enterprise systems failure. According to Cockroach Labs' State of AI Infrastructure 2026 report, enterprise systems are much closer to failure than their organizations realize. The report ... suggests AI scale could cause widespread failures in as little as one year — making it a clear risk for business performance and reliability.

The quietest week your engineering team has ever had might also be its best. No alarms going off. No escalations. No frantic Teams or Slack threads at 2 a.m. Everything humming along exactly as it should. And somewhere in a leadership meeting, someone looks at the metrics dashboard, sees a flat line of incidents and says: "Seems like things are pretty calm over there. Do we really need all those people?" ... I've spent many years in engineering, and this pattern keeps repeating ...

Windows 10 Migration Delays: 39% Won't Meet January 14 Deadline

Rex McMillan

For IT professionals responsible for upgrading users to Windows 10, it's crunch time.

End of regular support for Windows 7 is nearly here (January 14, 2020) but as many as 59% say that only a portion of their users have been migrated to Windows 10. This is according to a new survey from Ivanti which includes responses from more than 500 IT professionals. Consider these key findings:

2 in 5 Organizations May be Writing a Big Check

Just 39% report that they have completed Windows 10 migration for all of their users. For those still migrating, 38% say they "almost" have 100% of their users on Windows 10, while 23% report that their users will be migrated by the Windows 7 end-of-life date. That leaves nearly two in five organizations (39%) that will not be ready when the January deadline hits – a risky and costly proposition!


As Microsoft has announced, after January 14, any PCs operating Windows 7 will become more vulnerable to security risks and viruses because new security updates will no longer be available from Microsoft. To avoid this, Microsoft does offer options for extended support, but the cost can be as high as $200 per Windows 7 PC for just one year's worth of OS security updates.

Fear that Updates May Break Applications

So, with high costs looming, and the fear of security risk mounting, why hasn't everyone completed their migration? The Ivanti Survey found that high resource and time requirements as well as migration costs (57%) were the top factor preventing the completion of Windows 10 migrations. The need to focus on other, higher IT priorities (47%) was the next most common factor while the fear of application readiness or support for Windows 10 (40%) followed as a close third.

In fact, application compatibility concerns are high across the board, preventing many organizations from performing needed software updates. Fear that new updates and patches will "break" applications was reported by 58% of respondents, while 48% don't want updates and patches to impact user productivity and 29% say updates and patches are too manually time consuming.

Costs to Maintain Windows 10 Expected to Be the Same, or Lower

Even though many organizations are still not prepared, the Windows 7 end-of-life date in January was the top priority driving the timing for those that have migrated to Windows 10 (44%). Other priorities driving the timing for a Windows 10 migration included the mitigation of security risk (23%), mitigation of operational risk (11%) and improving user productivity (10%).

The cost of maintaining Windows 10 compared to Windows 7, however, was not a factor. As many as half expect the cost of maintaining Windows 10 to be the same as Windows 7, with 20% even expecting maintenance costs to be lower.

Physical Still Far Outweighs Virtual

The lack of a significant maintenance cost impact for Windows 10 may be working to retain the use of physical devices, compared to the use of virtual or cloud-delivered workspaces for Windows 10. Even with Microsoft's recent focus on promoting Azure-delivered cloud workspaces and Windows Virtual Desktop, 70% of IT professionals still say they will use Windows 10 on physical desktops and laptops, while only a quarter expect to use a hybrid mix of virtual and physical desktops.

Automation to the Rescue

To avoid paying expensive support fees after the January deadline, companies may want to look to tools to help automate their migration, patching and update processes. This can dramatically relive IT from migration resource and time demands while minimizing cost and ensuring seamless support for user applications.

The Latest

Like most digital transformation shifts, organizations often prioritize productivity and leave security and observability to keep pace. This usually translates to both the mass implementation of new technology and fragmented monitoring and observability (M&O) tooling. In the era of AI and varied cloud architecture, a disparate observability function can be dangerous. IT teams will lack a complete picture of their IT environment, making it harder to diagnose issues while slowing down mean time to resolve (MTTR). In fact, according to recent data from the SolarWinds State of Monitoring & Observability Report, 77% of IT personnel said the lack of visibility across their on-prem and cloud architecture was an issue ...

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 23, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses the NetOps labor shortage ... 

Technology management is evolving, and in turn, so is the scope of FinOps. The FinOps Foundation recently updated their mission statement from "advancing the people who manage the value of cloud" to "advancing the people who manage the value of technology." This seemingly small change solidifies a larger evolution: FinOps practitioners have organically expanded to be focused on more than just cloud cost optimization. Today, FinOps teams are largely — and quickly — expanding their job descriptions, evolving into a critical function for managing the full value of technology ...

Enterprises are under pressure to scale AI quickly. Yet despite considerable investment, adoption continues to stall. One of the most overlooked reasons is vendor sprawl ... In reality, no organization deliberately sets out to create sprawling vendor ecosystems. More often, complexity accumulates over time through well-intentioned initiatives, such as enterprise-wide digital transformation efforts, point solutions, or decentralized sourcing strategies ...

Nearly every conversation about AI eventually circles back to compute. GPUs dominate the headlines while cloud platforms compete for workloads and model benchmarks drive investment decisions. But underneath that noise, a quieter infrastructure challenge is taking shape. The real bottleneck in enterprise AI is not processing power, it is the ability to store, manage and retrieve the relentless volumes of data that AI systems generate, consume and multiply ...

The 2026 Observability Survey from Grafana Labs paints a vivid picture of an industry maturing fast, where AI is welcomed with careful conditions, SaaS economics are reshaping spending decisions, complexity remains a defining challenge, and open standards continue to underpin it all ...

The observability industry has an evolving relationship with AI. We're not skeptics, but it's clear that trust in AI must be earned ... In Grafana Labs' annual Observability Survey, 92% said they see real value in AI surfacing anomalies before they cause downtime. Another 91% endorsed AI for forecasting and root cause analysis. So while the demand is there, customers need it to be trustworthy, as the survey also found that the practitioners most enthusiastic about AI are also the most insistent on explainability ...

In the modern enterprise, the conversation around AI has moved past skepticism toward a stage of active adoption. According to our 2026 State of IT Trends Report: The Human Side of Autonomous AI, nearly 90% of IT professionals view AI as a net positive, and this optimism is well-founded. We are seeing agentic AI move beyond simple automation to actively streamlining complex data insights and eliminating the manual toil that has long hindered innovation. However, as we integrate these autonomous agents into our ecosystems, the fundamental DNA of the IT role is evolving ...

AI workloads require an enormous amount of computing power ... What's also becoming abundantly clear is just how quickly AI's computing needs are leading to enterprise systems failure. According to Cockroach Labs' State of AI Infrastructure 2026 report, enterprise systems are much closer to failure than their organizations realize. The report ... suggests AI scale could cause widespread failures in as little as one year — making it a clear risk for business performance and reliability.

The quietest week your engineering team has ever had might also be its best. No alarms going off. No escalations. No frantic Teams or Slack threads at 2 a.m. Everything humming along exactly as it should. And somewhere in a leadership meeting, someone looks at the metrics dashboard, sees a flat line of incidents and says: "Seems like things are pretty calm over there. Do we really need all those people?" ... I've spent many years in engineering, and this pattern keeps repeating ...