Slashdot Mirror
Windows 7 Share Grows At XP's Expense
CWmike writes "Microsoft's Windows ran to stay in place last month as Window 7's market share gains made up for the largest-ever declines in Windows XP and Vista, data released today by Web metrics firm Net Applications showed. By these numbers, Windows 7's gains were primarily at the expense of Windows XP. For each copy of Vista replaced by Windows 7 during November, more than six copies of XP were swapped out. Meanwhile, Apple's Mac OS X lost share during November... betcha Ballmer is having an extra giddy time with that news. Linux came up a winner last month, returning to the 1% share mark for the first time since July. Linux's all-time high in Net Applications' rankings was May 2009, when it nearly reached 1.2%."
Year of the Linux Desktop! Seriously, Windows 7 seems to have answered many of the complaints of Vista. "I'm a PC and designed Windows 7 (by complaining loudly)."
One ring to bind them - should probably have more fiber and less rings in their diet.
Linux has more than 20% of the non-MS market share!!!
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
I wonder how many of those are people who bought Windows 7 and how many are just people who bought a computer that came with Windows 7?
"Maybe this world is another planet's hell"
Aldous Huxley
Yes, 7 is ***cheap*** for education.
It's time to realise that Abble's products are the biggest abomination these days. Just say NO to the dumb iAbble way!!
That article was basically a graph in text form.
How on earth do you accurately measure OS installations. I only say because I think the Linux/BSD/other non MS/Apple OSs are probably under represented. For example like a few other people, I stamped an ext{x} shaped boot on the ntfs partition on my computers.
Those computers officially run some sort of Windows but there is no Windows on here but I'm sure my PCs are counted as running Windows by Dell/HP et al.
Sadly - for balance - I can't point at a machine that came with Linux pre installed and had it replaced by Windows.
I mean, the headline makes it sound like Microsoft isn't do so well, but the full summary suggests that Apple is the one lowering its Market share to Linux.
I mean, Considering PC's have the most market share, anyone who doesn't use Windows is essentially using whatever their alternative is (OSX/Linux) to get AWAY from Windows (Especially Vista, that pushed a few people I know towards a Macbook).
So, was Windows 7 expected to Rip all thsoe Happy Mac customers back to Windows? Or was it majestically expected to make Linux users go insane?
Windows Users use Windows, and Windows 7 will only grow from the market share of other Windows operating systems. It'll be a long while before Mac and Linux users go back to Windows, and the four horsemen of the Apocalypse will be just as stumped as I will be.
hey, windows 7 doesn't make me want to throw my laptop out the window (pun intended), nor does it bring up pure hatred and rage from within me like vista did. Big Plus There.
that said, application launch time ARE slower, by a few seconds, compared to XP. especially when opening MS Word or Excel, i'd say more than a few seconds..... NOT a deal breaker, though.
but one thing that gets me about the reviews of windows 7 is the shutdown time. while MY netbook does shutdown quickly, for giggles timed the shutdown times of the atom netbooks at the big box stores. hang on, let me find the times... here we go: 33, 18, 28, 20, 39, and 60 seconds. sure, those are display units subjected to lot's of kids opening ie to check their myspace (only to think the netbooks don't work when the page doesn't come up, due to secured wifi...) but still, using windows 7 certainly doesn't guarantee your machine won't end up with long shutdown times...
For each copy of Vista replaced by Windows 7 during November, more than six copies of XP were swapped out.
Well duh! That's because there are more than six XP users per each Vista user!
/* No Comment */
I just ordered a new laptop. Naturally it will ship with some variation of Windows 7 pre-installed. Personally I have a loathing hatred for crapware and OEM branded operating systems. So I bought a full retail copy of Windows 7 to go with my new laptop. (First task ... format and install my clean retail copy.) Unfortunately I couldn't buy the same laptop with FreeDOS or something like that. And even more unfortunate, even if I could, it would actually cost more than having Windows already on it. (All that crapware keeps the costs down.)
So my 1 purchase will count as 2 copies of Windows 7 being sold.
Certainly how is it bad news for microsoft? It's just saying that people are upgrading from XP to 7
Windows Mobile's 0.04% market share is not included in the 92.52% of Windows machines reported, but rather, part of "other":
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=8
Therefore, the non-MS market has just been downsized to 7.44% and Linux's share of that is accordingly bumped up to 13.44%.
However, the iPod touch (0.07%) is also not counted in the iPhone's 0.36% market share, so Apple's relative share of that same market goes up to 74.60%.
Another interesting tidbit from these (questionably reliable) numbers: Blackberry and Android are roughly tied in market share based on web traffic, both registering at 0.03%. This is probably a testament to the superior browser on Android rather than actual market share by units sold (and the same with the iPhone).
Net Applications confirms it.
Property is theft.
Assuming whole 1.36% consists of just and only Symbian devices, that puts Windows at 68 billion copies. Looks like very reliable statistics... not.
How has Microsoft not heard of the concept of "Coding yourself into a corner."... Hopefully by the time my XP boxes die there will be enough anti-annoyance utilities for 7 so I can play games on it.
"Apple's Mac OS X lost share during November... betcha Ballmer is having an extra giddy time with that news."
Techs breathed a sign of relief when for the first time in years the sound of a chair striking a wall was in celibration instead of rage.
Why is this being reported as some kind of loss for Microsoft? Isn't this *exactly* what they wanted? XP users who didn't switch to Vista to switch to 7?
While using site stats is probably quite accurate for desktop OSes (they are all used virtually the same, most of them networked...and as a matter of fact, probably mostly some Windows machines aren't), it is totally meaningless for mobile phones.
Too many external factors.
Besides, we have some decent stats from other sources (there's a graph at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartphone , though only for smartphones of course...)
One that hath name thou can not otter
PC gamers are abandoning XP and Vista and moving towards Windows 7. For the first time ever since Valve began publishing their hardware survey back in 2003, Windows XP usage among Steam users has finally dipped below the 50% mark, and is losing ground relatively fast. Steam Hardware Survey
You are assuming that 100% of Symbian devices sold are used for web browsing. Considering the amount that some phone companies charge for data access, I very much doubt the figure would be anywhere near that percentage. Given how quickly people seem to upgrade their phones, I would also doubt that a lot of those devices are still in active use.
A year ago half of global population had mobile phones, now probably around 4.5 billion. Nokia has around 40% of that. There's no way Symbian smartphones amount to half of their produced handsets (just look around you...and remember that you live in developed world; in reality, S30 and S40 (which are NOT Symbian) dominate)
BTW, a billionth Nokia phone, sold in 2005, was Nokia 1100. As far from the "smartphone" as it can be...
One that hath name thou can not otter
The statistic has nothing to do with units manufactured. It tracks only web browsing habits of connected devices within their sample group.
Assuming you're correct about one billion Symbian devices sold, how many of them are still in use and not in a landfill, recycling center, or the back of someone's closet? How many of them are connected to data networks? How many of those are actually used to browse the "real" Internet? How many of those do so frequently enough to register on the trackers? It's just a small fraction of that one billion.
Second, Symbian's reported share is 0.19%, not 1.36%, so that would in fact be 487 billion copies of Windows, except that this data doesn't reflect market share by units sold or units in use, but just based on web presence.
The numbers are suspect, even as "web presence" figures, for a long list of reasons, but that's not one of them.
I have not. Sure, in server rooms I've seen some Gnome desktops lit, mostly so the sysadmins could surf. But in the wild? Not once, in 10 years of looking. The closest I saw was a BSD laptop brought in by a job applicant for an IT position.
My brother and I both use Linux desktops, he more faithfully than me -- I have a multiple boot between Windows 7 and Ubuntu 9.10 (Karmic Koala), but I tend to boot into Windows and putty ssh to administer Linux server boxen and use a vmware guest of centos for my php scripting work. He's very hard core -- all Linux, mostly Fedora, no multiple boot and no vmware. He's seen some Linux desktops, but only at meetup.com meetings and local LUG meetings.
I'm in Canada, in case that is significant, and I gather there is more Linux in Europe than here (Linux Format is expensive but awesome). But 2%? Or even 1%? I don't think so. I walk by a university's glass wall a few times I week, but the only thing I've noticed there is that 50% of the students use mac books.
So I ask you: have you ever seen a Linux desktop in the wild? LUG meetings do not count. Here's my definition of what counts: coffee shops, restaurants, airports, trains, lobbies, office cubicles, etc.
Of course people are upgrading from XP to 7 - if they are upgrading at all. Who upgrades from Debian to Windows? Or, Solaris to Windows?
Oh - 6 XP users upgrade for every Vista user? Surprise, surprise!! Probably half a billion people in this world THOUGH about upgrading to Vista, but decided not to when Vista proved to be such a bomb.
Let's remember, Vista wouldn't run on old equipment, while Win7 runs on anything over a gigahertz with a gig of memory. A lot of XP users COULDN'T upgrade to Vista!!
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
I could have sworn that XP's share relative to Windows 7 would grow once 7 was actually released. Because I'm Commander Cuckoo Bananas, woopwoopwoop!!!
I bet most of those using Windows 7 bought new PCs with it installed. Most people do not upgrade the OS their PC uses. And businesses as well as others who need to get work should wait until MS releases the first service pack before upgrading. Wait until MS fixes the bugs and holes.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
Steveo gave a presentation to investors in Feb.2009 and the graph he was using shows the desktops and 1 was Windows, 2 was Windows pirated and the graph looks like Linux is slightly ahead of Mac.
Was Ballmer lying to investors?
I dont know but seems to me that "Ballmer says Linux desktops are higher than Mac." should have been better covered.
As for the 1% meme that became popular this year, go back 3-5 years and you will see the numbers spouted back then were 2-6%.
Really. I just did a survey of all the computers in my house. Three were running Ubuntu Linux, one was running Windows Vista.
That's a 75% market share!
I think the recession plays a major factor in Apple's slight drop. Apple's smart in holding the line, however, since they don't want a large line of low margin products that will have heavy support costs. After the recession fades, they want to look consistent with their pricing.
Also, I wonder if they counted virtual machines in the survey?
According to these numbers there are three times more Linux users than iPhone users. The iPhone is generally considered a huge success. Why is Linux percieved so differently?
Windows 7 has been a huge seller and revenue generator for Microsoft, breaking all previous OS sales records (While at the same time reducing support and maintencance costs of Windows XP since it is cheaper to support Windows 7 than Windows XP, so more XP -> 7 conversions = less cost to MS), but according to the article this is somehow running in place? All companies wish to be so lucky...
Ah, but how many of those Windows 7 sales were new PCs that got wiped and Linux installed in place? Also, we know how prejudiced Net Apps numbers are.
I suspect Net Apps numbers. I don't see any Macs defecting to Windows. Why should they? I also don't see Macs trading for Linux. Macs are used primarily by artists, and Mac faithful. I think perhaps they are playing with their numbers. I'd like to see the raw numbers and their methodology.
Not to mention who knows how well/bad they are weighting the numbers. Odd, too, that they changed their methodology two years ago. Why? Do the weights really reflect the internet populations of the other countries? Are the visitors from other countries to the websites they track typical users of those countries? In my experience, with interactions with non-US users outside of the tech areas, is that the number of Linux desktops is a tad higher than what Net Apps reports. According to my experience excluding geeks and IT association is somewhere between 5% and 10% of users are Linux users. But, my numbers are anecdotal at best, and I have a fair number of non-US contacts. We also don't know what those 40,000 sites, they monitor, are? Do they include any windows support sites? Do they include any sites likely to be used by Linux users?
Furthermore, maybe the Linux numbers are lower because Linux users tend to hit different sites more and the ones they are tracking less? Lastly, is the methodology robust enough to say that Mac users really fell 0.14% or 0.0014 fractional? Is their methodology really accurate to FOUR decimal places!? Wow! That must be the best damn population estimation algorithm EVER! They ought to patent that sucker! Just kidding. Sure there are math techniques to get 4 place accuracy, but you're making an statistical approximation of an estimated population based on an estimated random distribution! And that is going to be accurate to four decimal places! Wow. Just WOW!
I installed Windows 7 64 bit at work this week. I'm rolling back to XP.
Maybe you can contribute my problems to being 64 bit. But, the apps I need to do my job aren't going to work. I asked around the office and discovered other developers are running all of their important apps on XP or Vista VM's.
I tried to install VS 2005 32bit (which I need for existing apps). The installation warns of "known issues" and recommends an update. Even it won't install properly and the update can't find the install. I just don't need those kind of aggravations. So, count me as one of those "switchers" who upgraded from Windows 7 to XP.
Wake me up when I can install the apps I need.
How many Windows machines also have a linux distribution installed? I would bet a tangible percentage of the windows market share would also have a Linux distribution in dual boot. Bare in mind here Net Applications market share research is based on visits to web pages. There is a way that many more linux installations could be hiding out there: It's plausible a good number of such systems may see Windows used for surfing/chilling, but linux not heavily used for visits to web pages. In any case clearly 1.2% market share does not fairly characterise the total number of non-server linux installations on PCs.
Do any 'dotters know of any research out there where someone surveyed the major distributions to gather statistics on the number of active installations?? As they should be able to get this data from updates downloaded from repositories etc. and then work towards finding a total number of systems in use. I would presume Microsoft has excellent statistics on usage from monitoring their update servers.
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
And I don't think there are 487 billion copies of Windows.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
But this isn't good news for Linux, but rather bad news for Microsoft.
They successfully made an ad campaign to trick users into feeling that early adoption would be a safe bet, yet in all my interactions (about 8 different Windows 7 run computers) the upgrade from XP or Vista was a major step back in stability and driver compatibility; not to mention all of the Vista users either saw no important difference if not a decline in usability and features.
So why I say this is bad news for Microsoft is that they effectively made an ad campaign that disguises a broken Vista as a super XP and conned people out of a lot of money, meaning once the wave of popular publicity dies out (stops being funded by MS)- 7 should have an even worse reputation than Vista ever did. Because really, this has nothing to do with a good OS and everything to do with early adopters always getting screwed on everything they adopt early. ... and now that Vista has had some work done it's actually better than XP or 7 in my eyes and the eyes of all my fellow nerds who are not on the "dis Vista band wagon" just because it started off like crap.
Assuming a similar number of people bought a new computer that came with Vista and it took 5 months to reach the same market share as Win7 in 3 weeks, I would say that a good portion of Win7 sales is on upgrades and not new computers.
I wonder how many of these swaps were corporate users finally dumping their very old XP machines after having avoided Vista for so long? If so, I hope they like their pre-SP1 OS...
Net Applications measure OS Identified by Web Browser Share not Market Share and not really anything relevant to market share. Please correct the summary. (I did not notice tfa calling it fms)
My main gripe with the percentages that they commonly cite is that it is worldwide and includes every computer that runs Windows or Mac/Apple/etc ever made, despite the fact that what we should be concerned about is new sales only. Counting legacy hardware in that percentage is extremely disingenuous to say the least, since almost nobody uses 10+ year old PCs these days. Counting every PC on the planet is also bonus as well, since that also includes pretty much every obsolete computer that can possibly connect to the net.
***I found this tag line in a current article***
In November, 89.6% of users who connected to the Web sites that Net Applications Inc. monitors did so from systems powered by Windows
***
So what that means is that if you don't connect to one of those sites, you're not counted. If you have it set up so that you don't give out that information to remote sites, you're not counted either. If you are running Windows 98 or even 3.11 and connect, you're counted as a Windows machine. If you connect more than once or hit more than one of their monitored sites, well, you're counted all those extra times as well. It's simply put, the collection method is full of holes and makes for bogus statistics.
What matters in commerce at almost every level is what's being sold and moved out the door. We don't care about how used car sales are doing, for instance. We care about NEW ones and how the companies that make NEW cars are doing(or not doing as the case seems to be lately)
***I found this online in the news feeds, dated 10/25/2009***
Apple's US retail desktop revenue share for October was 47.71 percent, up from same time last year when it hit 33.44 percent.
***
Current actual sales data from October shows Apple at 47.71% of the new computer market in the U.S. and a whopping 91% of $1000+ sales in the U.S.
You can even tell because internally, it calls itself Windows NT 6.1, and Vista is Windows NT 6.0.
The reason they called it Windows 7 was branding. Windows Vista suffered from bad marketing. There were three basic problems:
1) People tried to run it on old, slow systems and it didn't work well. Of course rather than saying "Man, my hardware is too old for a brand new OS, I should upgrade," they blamed the OS for being bad. This was much less of a problem with 7 since there had been 2 years of hardware advances. While dual cores were still a bit of a high end item when Vista hit the market, they are the majority now.
2) 3rd parties had poor driver support. This is pretty much always the rule for when drivers change around. While some companies, notably Intel, AMD and nVidia tend to be extremely on the stick with new drivers, many others bitch and whine and drag their feet. So many systems had problems, printers that wouldn't work or sound cards that were buggy and such. Again, people blamed the OS rather than the companies who made the hardware. Well, most companies have gotten on board now and have their drivers out. Also, Windows 7 didn't change much with regards to driver architecture so most Vista drivers required little to no effort to port. Thus 7 had support for most hardware.
3) There was a highly effective FUD campaign against Vista. A very small part may have been people who were actually maliciously trying to spread misinformation. A larger part were people who simply didn't know what the fuck they were talking about. Peter Gutmann was one of those, he wrote an extremely inaccurate article about what he perceived to be audio DRM in Windows Vista that was, in fact, his soundcard (and drivers) being a piece of crap. However the largest amount was just an echo chamber effect. People heard bad stuff about Vista and repeated it without knowing anything about it. I encountered that all the time, people who would tell me how bad Vista was that had never even seen it running on a system, much less used it. All the time on Slashdot you'd see people espouse the problems with Vista that had never used it, and probalby used XP very little, they were just parroting what they heard. Well this didn't happen with 7.
Thus you have people who crow on about how great 7 is compared to Vista. In some cases, it is people who used Vista and had a bad experience because of an old computer or unsupported hardware, but don't with 7. In other cases, it is people who never used Vista because they were sure it was horrible, but tried 7 and discovered they rather liked the new Windows. They probably would have liked Vista, had they tried it.
So no, there really isn't a major change with 7, just a change in perceptions. It has been refined a bit, for example it works better on systems with 1 gig of RAM whereas Vista really didn't, and 7 seems to be more responsive in the UI (supposedly it has better multithreading of that), but it is a minor refinement. I find that I like 7 because I liked Vista, it is just an improvement on that.
That's likely the whole reason there even was a Windows 7. If not, we'd probalby still be on Vista with a service pack introducing the 7 features like DX11. However they realized that they'd never convince people that Vista was something to try, so they just rebranded it.
Seems to have worked.
A decline in Linux and MacOS X marketshare doesn't necessarily mean people switched to windows 7
But it can mean that people are buying new computers with windows 7 pre-installed
I got karma to burn.
Been a switch-hitter between Linux, FreeBSD, and Windows for years. For the past year or so, it's been Ubuntu and Vista. I'd say I spent equal time in both. I've got Ubuntu tweaked to my liking, and when I was mobile, usually used Linux because of the fast boot and wake-from-RAM times. Vista had to be there, well, because Linux multimedia just blows. It took me the good part of a week to get my laptop dock's S/PDIF port to work, and that was only after manually ripping out ALSA and building OSS4 from scratch, and even then, it only ever saw the S/PDIF port as 44.1kHz, 16-bit capable. That said, I enjoy using it, I'm not afraid of the command line, but we've still got a long way to go. I'm not quite yet comfortable with recommending Linux to firends and family. Kudos to getting back up to 1% though!
Windows 7 got clean-installed about a week ago. To me, the UI seems much smoother (No more bajillion clicks to get to a NIC's IP settings page), even the Start menu was given a once-over. To me, it's just as good as Windows 2000, and a marked improvement over XP. But who knows, It's only got a week of clutter on it yet.
Windows 7 Netbooks are selling pretty well, better than XP Netbooks did, and unscientific, anecdotal evidence indicates that a good percentage of PC users (Including laptop owners) are buying Netbooks to add to their "fleet".
It's hard to argue with a $200 price tag.
Trying to cast the story in the beset possible light, the OP has to fold, staple and mutilate the simple content of the TFA to avoid its real negative implications for Linux market share now and in the future. Look for instance at this graphic (also from hitslink.com), which really shows how hopeless the situation is for Linux.
This is not a self-referential sig.
You have a point about Linux users but the Mac users, especially the switchers are a fickle bunch who would happily go back to Windows if it meant their MSN Messenger would work the same as it used to. Mac's gained a small amount of market share over vista's crappiness but this has all been fixed(TM) in Windows 7 at least according to MS marketing.
I am one of those switchers, and I don't use MSN Messenger. The only IM client I have used is Yahoo! Messenger, which besides Windows in available for OS X, there is also a web based version. I didn't switch because of Vista's happiness's either, I switched because I wanted something stable and because I hate being treated like a criminal. I first switched to Linux for my desktop, which has the capabilities so I can setup it up as a server. Then for a laptop I got a MacBook Pro.
Many of the switchers I know were just as unhappy with their Macs as they were with their Vista boxes
Before I ever got my Linux PC and Mac I wondered why I ever got a Windows PC instead of a Mac, back when I got my first Windows PC you had to be a wizard to install and use Linux. But SGI Irix PCs were available.
so many are jumping at the chance to go back to 7 after being promised that it was all fixed(TM)
As long as Microsoft requires activation and spyware I will not willingly buy Windows or a Windows PC.
what about us dual booters. Like many Linux users I'm counted twice as I dual boot most machines I own.
Currently I have one PC that dual boots Redhat Linux and NT4, but I have not booted it up in years. I plan though to setup my Mac I'm typing this on to dualboot, Snow Leopard and Ubuntu.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
At least Microsoft can finally compete with itself again. It used to be a running joke with Vista.
"MS to leave OS market, XP's competition too strong."
Or Just me? I have several NTFS formatted Seagate 2.0 Terabyte drives that are fine under Linux, XP SP3 and Leopard that appear as 99.9 Megabyte (NOT GigaByte) drives under Windows 7 and without any files. Rendering Windows 7 totally useless with my data. Yes, All drivers and the BIOS are both up to date for my GA-EP45-UD3P motherboard.
No shit, Sherlock.
The whole point is that the extrapolation is grossly invalid (and that Nokia has shipped one billion handsets, not one billion Symbian devices).
So Windows 7 is "growing"? Sounds like I should "upgrade" by changing my general.useragent.override sometime soon, all those sites who do not work if you admit GNU/Linux as OS but do work if you are "using" Windows will probably start working great "using" Windows 7 sometime in the near future.
9/11: Never forget it was a false-flag operation
All you people are liars. Nobody uses Linux. Nobody! Just read our statistics. There are no real Linux users here. All those other people on all those other sites bashing windows are fictional too! The Free Software Consortium has hired a hundred thousand unemployed Haitian bloggers to type away at these comments sixteen hours a day under the cruelest conditions for pennies a day. They live in cages and actually use Windows 7 and IE 8 and have to pretend to hate all that is right and good. It's inhuman and must be stopped.
What's worse is the FSC funds their immoral astroturfing with the funds from their hacker network, exploiting and pwning our precious Windows machines from their secret hideouts in Eastern Europe and China. It's true! They pore over every orifice of every application desperately seeking to penetrate the purity of Windows and Office in a vile attempt to convert the world to the cruel tyrrany of their "freedoms" and "choice".
Help stamp out iliturcy.
If you cherry pick the profitable users, with their high-margin high-ticket glitterboxes Apple's doing well. But what really matters is umumble mumble.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
...dang...was gonna post that meself till I saw it already posted...neva mind... :)
YankDownUnder Veni, Vidi, volo in domum redire
I sure wish someone would set up a virus or trojan to cause people's browsers to report a phony OS. Think of all the panty knotting in Campbell and Redmond when they both lost 5% marketshare to AmigaOS, or Lynx on VMS, CP/M, or a PDP8...
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1435180&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=30021114
Per my subject-line: Read that, & get back to us on that (since you are allegedly a dev mgr. @ MS)...
Also, please, realize this (because you have avoided my asking it of you around 10x by now):
This isn't to "antagonize you", but, rather to help you folks @ MS spot possible problems in Windows VISTA/Windows Server 2008/Windows 7 especially, due to their WFP/NDIS6 firewall design, problems in the local DNS cache client, & in HOSTS files.
Thanks for your time.
APK
P.S.=> I am not sure WHY you've avoided my points, because they are to help "make a better Windows" is all, but I assume because of your being busy. However, your business is making Windows allegedly, so why not take a peek @ something that may point to issues!
(Definite possibles per:
1.) ROOTKIT.COM's findings on unhooking the WFP/NDIS6 firewall easier than the older Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 setup apparently, WITH CODE THE SAID DOES SO NO LESS in the url pointing to it
2.) Problems in the local DNS Client cache (fails/lags for folks that use "LARGISH" HOSTS files (plenty of us, many 1000's, per Spybot S&D users + folks @ mvps.org (to only name a small few) & even folks like Mr. Oliver Day espouse the use of HOSTS files, finding they make him go faster, AND SAFER, online by far as evidence to it, as well as users who have used a security guide of mine, of which HOSTS are a major part, not seeing any malware intrusions AND GOING FASTER ONLINE TOO)
3.) MS seemingly intentionally removing the ability to use the smaller & faster 0 based blocking IP address in a HOSTS file (when it was MS who put it into Windows, from 2000 in a SERVICE PACK, not its original OEM CD release distro mind you, & leaving it there clear into VISTA, until 12/09/2008 MS patch tuesday, when it (a good thing) was removed for SOME reason (makes no sense, unless somehow the dual IPv4 + IPv6 setup in VISTA onwards facilitates the need for this, & I do NOT think it does @ this point)
AND, more...)
Again, thanks for your time, & I hope this aids MS in "making a better Windows than Windows is", per those points... apk
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I get this problem a lot. I wonder how many folks go to mostly ad-free sites as I do. Most of the .gov and .edu sites are probably not installing "Global Market Share" on their servers.
The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
with the 3 month release cycle I'm surprised that Linux does not have a larger share with more than 500 major companies, and numerous individuals contributing to Linux. not just a desktop OS, Linux is a major player in the internet backbone.
"Linux came up a winner last month, returning to the 1% share mark for the first time since July. Linux's all-time high in Net Applications' rankings was May 2009, when it nearly reached 1.2%."
1% is a winner? Wow, that's quite hilarious. Linux is as the bottom- of the bottom feeder market and yet you think you are the winnar!
Or at least, the point of the verbage. It's news that people who buy an upgrade stop using the old version? Is news is that people weren't buying Vista and and people are convinced that Windows 7 is the Windows upgrade that Vista was supposed to be all along. I'm not trying to be sarcastic, I really don't get what point is being made here. All the responses I've seen have been about the effect on the Linux/MacOS market, and that might all be true, but it doesn't seem to be the point the OP is trying to make. Or is the point really just "here's some sales numbers" and the headline is just the best one can do with such a bland piece of news?
Indeed.
The Year of the Linux *Desktop* might not have materialized yet.
But the Year of the Linux *At Home* has passed long time ago : given that almost every house today has a router / cable-DSL-modem / WiFi and most of the time such device are running Linux in their firmware, almost every household has a machine running Linux without even knowing it. Now throw in multrimedia player/harddisk enclosures and/or consumer-grade SAN/NAS into the equation and it's hard for anyone NOT to have Linux at home.
(And still, regardless of this omnipresence, most current viruses are still targeting Windows)
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
> Linux came up a winner last month, returning to the 1% share mark for the first time since July.
Psst, I think we're winning.
We're like... the Hells Angels, or the Warlocks, or the Mongols! 1%er's baby!!! ;-)
Someone should put a 1%er's biker club logo on Tux :-)
"Linux came up a winner last month, returning to the 1% share mark"
Mod OP comic.
Microsoft's Windows ran to stay in place last month as Window 7's market share gains made up for the largest-ever declines in Windows XP and Vista, data released today by Web metrics firm Net Applications showed. By these numbers, Windows 7's gains were primarily at the expense of Windows XP.
Let me be clear and state that I'm not a fan of MS. That said, really? This is how we phrase things these days? They own a metric crap ton of the market share and it's the next version of their OS..OF COURSE most of the purchases are by users of the previous version. I'm pretty sure that Snow Leopard most often replaced Leopard and not something else as well and they have a MUCH smaller market share but we didn't see a slashdot posting stating that "Apple ran to stay in place". It's almost like we try to top ourselves here on every story. I almost picture the moderators in some sort of IRC session going "no the language isn't anti-MS enough"...."but it's an article on clean water technology in the 3rd world"..."yeah but is there any way we can write it so it read MS not involved in clean water technology project?". Come on....do better.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1467692&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=30349432
3 replies there you ought to look @, Foredecker...
APK
P.S.=> Thanks for your time... apk
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1467692&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=30349432 [slashdot.org]
3 replies there you ought to look @, Foredecker...
APK
P.S.=> Thanks for your time... apk
The actual number of products such as Active Directory are only used in a limited way by a limited few corporations and other entities. It is disappointing to think that (of the billion or so computers used worldwide) people here seem to think that the vast majority are part of those few corporations and are used within Active Directory at that.
There seems to be some contention in this thread about what the value of Win7 is when you can use Linux (or other free OSes) instead. The obvious retort by the Win7 fans is that it supports Active Directory. No matter what you think that product just isn't a product for the vast majority of users in the world. Not only do they not use it they wouldn't even begin to know what it means. Not only that they wouldn't have a clue what to do with it if they knew what it meant.
People need to take a step back and ask themselves what they are justifying and whom for. You don't justify win7 by saying the average user can use Active Directory (or other features) if they don't use it nor ever will. In regard to other OSes, while LDAP is considered by some to be a major element of Active Directory, OpenLDAP is available. Thus that eliminates the Win7 advantage (except that Active Directory offers other benefits), but nonetheless there is no need to even consider any argument as the vast majority of computer users will never use and do not need any LDAP feature or Active Directory feature).
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.