Like any long term relationship
XPerience and familiarity fall aside to the new shiny model
Windows 7 has, finally, become the world’s most popular desktop operating system. It overtook Windows XP in the first ten days of October with a 40.18 per cent share of the market, according to statistics gathered by Statcounter. At the latest measurement, 38.66 per cent of desktop computers in use online are powered by XP …
XPerience and familiarity fall aside to the new shiny model
Anyone that has the misfortune to do an XP build nowadays can easily expect to wait all day for updates to go through.... starting with an XPSP3 + OIffice 2003SP2 base build can easily download and install 800Mb+++ extra (even WSUS doesn't really help) and on the slower PCs XP tends to run on you're backwarding and forwarding for hours watching all these updates install. Slooooowly. These days I just sling the old tech and get the client nice shiny new W7 stuff, job done in a fraction of the time even after 300mb of post sp1 update stuff.
Windows XP sp3 (KB936929) is ~ 320 MBytes
Windows 7 sp1 64-bit (KB9768932) is 947 MBytes
I tried to download the Win 7 sp1 patch from home, and gave up after three failed attempts, the Microsoft Download servers WILL abort the download somewhere along 400-600 MBytes if you have only 2 MBit/s DSL. Had to download this at work and use an USB stick to carry it home.
This SUCKS, really!
The day I brought home a shiny new Macbook Air, I downloaded something around 1.6GB of updates (wish I'd written the exact figure down).
And no, it was not an OS upgrade, merely updates. On my 8Mbit home ADSL, it stalled "only" twice.
My latest Ubuntu install also did an incredible number of updates, big and small. To be fair, it contained a lot of non-OS software and localization files for Turkish. I have no idea about the total size of the updates. I only remember it took hours, but went without a hitch.
That is IF it allows you to
Last time I tried installing XP windows update kept saying I had to update windows update to update windows update... This was after I put SP3 on...
you could just slipstream the updates into the xp build
If you use an nLite disc to install XP then you're talking maybe only one minute of actual keyboard-bashing for a system that's configured the way you want from the outset. I don't know of any way to custom-install 7 that works as well or as simply.
As for more licenses sold, I wonder if that includes licences foisted onto new computers whether the buyer wants them or not? If so it may show a very skewed result.
I updated my father in laws MacBook Pro, and my own MacBook Pro recently and it took an age and multiple reboots before it said my software was up to date.
Neither was an OS update (in fact the 1.xGB of mine was immediately after updating the factory Snow Leapard to Lion!)
A very windows experience! Especially the way the time remaining seems to fluctuate (no one told me before I fot the machine that Macs are worse than Windows in time estimation!)
Are you not aware of the fact that you can easily download service packs and updates from the Download Center ONCE and slipstream them into XP setup using /s switch. Who downloads all of them every single time you reinstall?
Is this the same statcounter that gets routinely blackholed in most decent linux hostsfiles?
"Is this the same statcounter that gets routinely blackholed in most decent linux hostsfiles?"
Statcounter does not count me. It is blocked in my hosts file and in the APB Tracking filter subscription for Adblock Plus. Such blocking methods are available for Windows users, but I know of none that use them. Linux users are another story. I suspect a large majority use such methods. Who knows, our usage levels could be triple (almost 3%) what Statcounter reports.
mobile os figures are interesting, especially given the anti-nokia stance many comentards have
I see Mac OS X is catching up with Vista.
So the most "advanced" operating system in the world is finally catching up to an utterly despised version of windows? Well done, thats really awesome. Guess it must be those advanced full screen apps that have cause the OSX marketshare to marginally incrase over 2 years.
Speak for yourself - I still rather like old XP...
It is hardly a market share issue if XP is no longer available to most people.
while XP is no longer available in the retail channels, it is to commercial customers, particularly big ones with thousands of seats. My uni is still going through testing Win7 against its rats-nest of disparate backend systems (we are still stuck on IE7 for the same back-end-system compatibility reeasons).
It is really frustrating for my department as we are then forced to use old versions of other major software we have purchaced for OS compatibility. We are going to be on Win7 for next year though: either central IT will come through with their promise to fast track our upgrade or we will be pulling out of central management and going back to managing our own systems (since I am the one that would get lumped with the latter job, I am very much hoping for the former!).
The most telling fact from that graph is really nothing to do with the inevitable replacement of XP systems with Windows 7, but rather the fact the Linux has now firmly fallen below "other" leaving it about the most irrelevant platform on the client side imaginable. But next year is the year of the Linux Desktop right?
> But next year is the year of the Linux Desktop right?
Isn't it always?
"I want to believe"
I thought it was the year that the politicians fix whatever the latest problem is.
This year, like the last 12 or so before it, is the year of the Linux desktop as far as my ability to get useful stuff (TM) done on it is concerned.
Most other folk seem content to be unaware that it is the year of their Linux phone, webcam, broadband router, set-top box, TV, Cable/Satelite box, NAS box and most of their web applications. Guess that's why there seem to be more Linux than Windows users these days. But how long before they realise it ?
since they didn't call out Win 2000 or 9x, those are lumped into Other as well, and I expect that sort of spikes the number.
Given all the XP machines that are behind corporate firewalls, are being used as POS etc and not connected to the internet, or in embedded systems it seems that Windows7 probably isn't there yet.
"...their counts only measure computers that are connected to the internet."
Have you tried using a computer that isn't connected to the internet lately? I recently moved house and had no broadband for a week. I thought I could use the computer to play games or do some word processing for work, but all I got were dialog boxes complaining about needing an internet connection.
...and of course each of those purchased Win7 licenses has a free upgrade for Win8, right? Right???
That is all.
I'm one of those new users which Windows gained, having been using linux at home for about 30 months prior to this summer (and Win2k before that). My new laptop had Win7 on, the setup made a dual boot look tricky to install, so I started using Windows again and found it's pretty good. All I really want from an OS is that it lets me get to my applications and files and then shuts up. Win7 does that very well, and the security is much improved too.
Would you have bought the same laptop if it had Ubuntu on (for instance) and £130 off the price? I would.
(I am also trying win7 now because very little else is available as retail for laptops).
It only cost £320 so I doubt Windows costs £130. It's got Excel and Word started (add-supported) editions too. I have Ubuntu on my netbook but needed Windows for my work. The netbook came with a Dell version of Ubuntu and was £200, but considerably smaller and less powerful than the new laptop.
Windows 7 Pro 64bit (Inc:SP1) (OEM) DVD can be purchased for £75.
Got one just a few weeks ago to build a new PC for my sister, new PC actually dual boots with the old XP disk, but it is noticeably slower than W7 due to all the thousands of patches/bodges that are in XP now.
Linux may be free, but it does not run the software most people want in a PC environment.
Microsoft also gained me temporarly when I refreshed my work laptop earlier this year. I decided to give Win7 a fair shot and for a while it was ok... but I just missed certain things that Linux could do.
I was also working in a number of countries in Europe at the time and noticed many of my peers had opted for Fedora or some other flavour on their work lappies and were using a physically partitioned Windows install inside a VM... so after a few months it was back to Ubuntu.
It's probably based on the access data of people who don't have noscript or something. It seems unlikely that there's more MacOSX than Linux and that there's even more Vista.
One should always note that those stats vary a great deal.
Now, I'm a fully paid up Win/Lin/Mac fanboy... I have to say that the only way there is more linux than Mac is if you include servers, which by definition aren't going to be surfing the net.
>> One should always note that those stats vary a great deal.
It is true that published webstats vary.
But it is also true those most frequently quoted, Net Applications, W3Schools, and so on, have not been kind to Linux.
The trend lines within these sites for Linux are all pool table flat --- and that is more telling then the percentages. I think.
Dunno - might be right. I use Linux desktops continuously for work, but do pretty much all browsing on XP. This seems to be pretty common in engineering companies.
...he said, as though that implied any change.
I'm a mac os x user but I have 7 running on bootcamp and it's nice to see MS go back and properly rebuild the os from the ground up and build it properly. I much prefer it to the copy of XP that I run on the MBP (and like les said the twelve million upgrades!) and certainly better than the abomination and paint it shiny shit coat that was vista! I still prefer os x, but if apple exploded tomorrow, it wouldn't be the horrible walk through hell to switch back that it used to be.
Now if only ms would admit that you can't just chop down an operating (7 starter) and bung it on to low spec machine and hoping it's good enough to run and just write a proper os for netbooks they'd be on to a winner!
Rebuild it from the ground up? are you serious? Windows 7 is Vista with a service pack and different GUI MS have certainly NOT built it from the ground up!
2nd fiddle to Vista - hardly good news for Apple.
No WinPho figure in mobile OSes yet? Too early?
These guys see Vista+Win7 combined still 8 % behind XP for September 2011:
That'd got to be complete bollox. They've got iPhone as 1.65%.
...which makes their statistics completely irrelevant to anyone except other web developers.
... if they'd never even released Vista.
i never had a problem with it, i think vista especially bfore the SP fell victim to a bad image, once it got out there that was it, to be fair thats usually been MS problem for years, WP7 is another good example of a media frenzy which, at least to me, was baseless.
One thing for sure with vista is that you need a good system
Should MS not have released it, hmm, No, i think it was important that it did go out there, it soaked up a lot of the flack (some largely bassless) which gave Win7 a clean sheet to play with
Or Windows ME
Win 286, 311, 95, 98...