Slashdot Mirror
Vista Share Drops for the First Time In Two Years
adeelarshad82 writes "Windows Vista lost market share last month for the first time in almost two years, a sign that users are already abandoning the oft-ridiculed operating system in favor of the new Windows 7. According to Web metrics firm Net Applications, Vista dropped 0.2 percentage points during September to end the month at an 18.6% slice of the operating system pie. Windows 7, meanwhile, gained 0.3 percentage points, its biggest one-month gain since Microsoft began handing out the new OS to the public in January 2009. Windows 7 powered an estimated 1.5% of all computers that connected to the Internet last month, also a record."
This shows something, that Windows 7 is good enough that people are running the trial of it en masse. The date that will confirm this trend is when W7 gets released to the street for both upgrades and bundled with new PCs, on October 22.
Sorry I didn't realise there was an actual release of Win7 already... it doesn't even have a fancy name. Not too bad for MS to have more market share than Linux for an OS that is not even officially released.
Why is Vista "stupid?" Why do you think XP is better? Why didn't you buy a Mac if you wanted a Mac?
A lot of Vista's original criticisms revolved around drivers (since the entire driver architecture got re-invented). After a lot of the driver issues got resolved (*cough* Nvidia and Creative *cough*) the OS became no better but no worse than XP.
If I purchased a laptop today I'd rather have Vista than XP since I lose nothing but owning Vista but I lose a few things by owning XP (low privileged IE, UAC, et al).
A lot of people who continue to bash Vista are just sheep that have no real clue why exactly Vista was bad or why Windows 7 is better (hint: Vista paved the road for 7).
Yes. Good job Microsoft. You have successfully beta tested a version of Windows and actually made money from it too by selling it to your customers. You got all the negative feedback that you need to improve it, so now you get to charge all them poor saps all over again with Windows 7! I despise this company, but I gotta admit. They are business geniuses.
*plays the Apogee theme song music*
Add to that list: Windows 200 and Windows XP. (...) Windows 200 had major problems with hardware drivers.
Eh, 200? And you're repeating it twice? And what was probably the best Windows releases for business (2000) and home (XP) ever? I'd mark you troll, but I figure stupid is more on target...
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I work in consumer electronics retail, and I'm still getting calls asking about downgrading to XP, or buying XP, or buying a machine with XP on it, even from users who actually know about W7.
Damn, I remember the days when XP was the abomination. I guess if you beat people up enough, they learn when to say "uncle".
Do you see what I did there?
Vista's been decent for the last couple of years. They released some patches soon after its release that really sped it up. Trotting out FUD like that contained in your post doesn't help anyone.
What you're saying about wine not being up to snuff is true for most recent games, or ones that rely on fps. Older games like Warcraft III however, often run just great. I run linux as my primary OS and Warcraft III is one of those that runs very well using wine, I even run things like Myth II and other older stuff. I even get a little icon added to my application list when I install them. If I were you, I'd try install Ubuntu on a spare hard drive and see if you are happy with it.
Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
a prime reason FOR those issues in usability is because lots of users don't know how to actually use them properly
Just a minor nitpick, but if the user can't figure out how to use it properly, that is a usability problem.
Sorry dude. That never works as an excuse when some Linux interface baffles the average user, so I don't see why it should let Microsoft off the hook here.
Besides which, these same people knew how to use XP just fine by and large, so you're not talking about naive users baffled by computers in general. The complainers, on the whole tended to be seasoned Windows users who didn't get on with the new O/S. That's got to be a black mark, however you look at it.
It wouldn't be so bad, but (in technical terms, at least), user interfaces are what Microsoft do well. I don't have a good word to say about MS on the whole, but aside from two or three glaring exceptions, they do seem to have a knack for making things accessible to the less technical end of the user spectrum. So when someone tells me that if they couldn't even get that part right, I have to wonder what horrors lurk elsewhere.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
... They can't afford to get it wrong.
I'm afraid they can. They can force it on every new machine, like Vista.
No they can't. Not if they want to maintain their status for a few more years. As you said they forced Vista on new machines and after 3 years it still has 19% marketshare, compared to XP which has 72%. But the biggest failure of Vista was that even regular users noticed it. It was the first time that non advanced users where really unhappy with Windows and sought alternatives, either downgrading or switching. If 7 proves to be another failure (I don't think so) people won't stick with XP for another 3 years.
It may be 7 digits, but at least it's a semiprime
I'm sure MS will spin this in a positive way but let's face it. This just goes to show how shit Vista was.
XP users will have to abandon XP for hardware support if no other reason. MS can just stop releasing updates that prolong XP's life by adding support for new hardware. Gamers will have to upgrade because of DX10. We all know game tech advances rapidly, it won't be that long until games that require DX10. And despite some expectations to the contrary, nobody hacked together DX10 for XP. Then there's hardware like USB 3.0, no XP support for that has been promised and MS can decide not to implement any to accelerate XP's demise. Then there's the whole issue of RAM. The memory limit of 32-bit XP started to matter practically some time ago, and honestly switching to 64-bit XP wouldn't make much sense, it has serious driver and compatibility issues. XP really is old and if people weren't "persuaded" to abandon it purely for software reasons, they'll have to do so for hardware reasons.
I will probably be modded into obscurity for this, but hell, I have karma to burn.
I would venture that many of the Vista Haters have never really spent any time with the OS. A poster above commented that the initial release was flawed, primarily due to crappy driver support (and I was burned on the nVidia chips in my laptop), but by the time that the first SP came out, it was solid, reliable and, dare I say it, almost a pleasure to use.
My new job demanded that I go back to XP, and it reminded me of how much I prefer Vista over XP.
The true test will be how long will it take for major corporate IT uptake in Win7. Perhaps the learning curve of watching Vista and the polish that Win7 has added will begin migration plans. I sure hope so, 'cuz I can't stand XP.
Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress
Windows 7 forces me to use the retarded new start menu and the retarded new task bar
No it doesn't: if you right-click on the Windows 7 start button / taskbar, you can select "properties" and revert to Vista-style behaviour.
There's a surprising number of Anonymous Cowards spreading falsehoods about Windows 7 in this thread...
I had a Microsoft refrigerator, top of the line. My neighbor couldn't figure out how to set the temperature with the foot pedal and built-in accelerometer, so all her food spoiled. The stupid woman took it back and got one of those Apple refrigerators that doesn't have a built-in accelerometer or foot pedal, choosing instead to have one that matched her decor. I painted my kitchen fuschia argyle to match and it looks AWESOME!!!11!!1!!eleventy. Why would you use a refrigerator that doesn't let you have that level of control?
Maybe this is nitpicking but both of his points are valid.
Windows 2000 had an awful process scheduler, which I'm guessing caused the problems GP referring to. By the way never attempt to run vmware-server on Windows 2000 box. Also Windows 2000 didn't have plug-and-play whereas Windows 98 did.
XP was okay until Microsoft silently added genuine advantage in it, incidentally that was one of the big reasons for me switching to Linux. Now it's been 3+ years using Debian. I'd rather live with flunky wireless card than a computer that holds me in contempt.
Lots of people gave Vista a bad rep because -- get this -- they didn't know how to use their damned computers!
I'm sure that must be it. I've only personally owned computers since 1982, taught myself assembler to write faster games on a C=64, hacked hardware on an Amiga, switched to Linux in '98 or so, got a Slashdot login some time the same week, picked up FreeBSD a few months later, snagged a degree in CompSci, built the home server sitting next to me from Newegg parts, and turned an HP Mini into a Hackintosh last month. That must be why my wife's dual-core laptop with 2GB of RAM and Vista ran like crap from the day we bought it, even after I stripped out the OEM junk and have almost nothing running at startup: because I'm a technophobic newbie who doesn't know how to use my damned computers.
Yeah.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
The difference is there is no reason to expect people are switching from Windows computers to Macs. There is plenty of reason to expect them upgrading from Windows to Windows.
Yeah, okay...get back to me when you don't need to tweak xorg.conf just to make video work okay...with Compiz no less.
I remember the days when XP was the abomination.
I keep hearing that lately, but I saw it happen. When XP came out, everyone was still stinging from ME. They had been happy with 95 because, like it or not, for the day, it was a pretty decent OS. ME came out and was a horrible. Then XP came out. It added the shiny of ME plus some, and the stability of 2000. The only people that I ever heard complaining about XP were the people who were already running 2000, had no interest in playing games, and were offended by the rounded edges of XP's interface. That was a pretty small group. Beyond that, all I ever heard were people who like the massive improvement in stability.
As far as I can tell, this XP hate is just revisionist history.
Uh, Windows 2000 definitely had plug-and-play.
Millions of people on every forum on the Internet are bashing a product they've never really spent any time with that's actually great.
That's plausible. Why didn't I think of that?
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Yes. That's exactly my point.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
Consider yourself 'gotten back to' as of last year. Hell, you don't even need an xorg.conf on Slackware any more. If it's shown up in Slackware, it works.