Windows 10 market share jumps two per cent Microsoft's sometimes hard-ball tactics to get people running Windows 10 look like they're working. All three of the desktop OS market share data sources we track report a nice bump for Win 10 in May. Desktop OS market share March to May 2016 Desktop OS market share March to May 2016. Click here to enlarge There's the …
... and Microsoft would force feed Windows licenses on buyers.
Now PCs aren't selling, so they force feed "free" upgrades to a never finished OS to ensure their presence on the market in future years.
Numbers are misleading.. which % is actually "voluntary and somewhat informed" ?
You are spot on. You can smell their desperation.
Microsoft predicted the decline of the new PC market, where traditionally all their windows license sales came from. They knew it was being displaced by mobile, so someone took the strategic decision to let Blamer handle it for in the crucial decade all this was playing out. Hence they are in todays position of not only being nuked out of that market, but scrambling round to try to squeeze money from their existing PC users, because as we've just seen the number of new ones is declining dramatically. Forcing W10 down the throats of their current customers is about the only option.
In their minds they think they've tried the carrot and are just now turning to the stick. Users would disagree with the former.
PCs are selling - 20,000,000 a month - but they are buy-if-needed or replacement sales - and not as much upgrade-to-latest-and-greatest because-I-want-something-faster sales.
Moreover, with the world's increasing population etc. etc. the prediction is for their sales rate to increase somewhat over the next few years.
Microsoft lost faith in the PC, even though they were exactly the one company that should have been supporting it. They previously did the same with the tablet and the handheld.
Today, we're seeing a huge chance for revitalizing PC demand - VR - which just happens to be yet another paradigm-shifting technology that Microsoft has somehow managed to completely avoid! Instead, we hear rumors of a VR-capable Xbox One (maybe two years from now), indicating that instead of accepting a free gift to the PC - its core product - Microsoft continues to follow some demented corporate roadmap of its own.
Intel is clearly doing its best, but it's an uphill battle without a proper software partner. Valve has had the right idea, not because everyone is eager for Linux games, but because the PC world really needs an exit strategy from Microsoft's padded cell.
Well surely Office in the car will save them? What could possibly go wrong with that? After the mandatory multiyear microsoft delay its once again something they've just begun their usual comedy catch up act with.
I agree that VR will be niche. Gamers will want it, but no one is going to wear VR goggles to run Office, browse the web, check Facebook or watch cat videos on Youtube.
Pretty much the only people that can be relied upon to upgrade their gear every 2-3 years are gamers, so the addition of VR isn't "revitalizing" anything. It is just another reason for them to do the upgrade they were already going to do anyway.
I think waiting a few years before supporting VR on a console makes sense. The current generation of consoles weren't designed with VR in mind and probably wouldn't do it justice.
The PC market is slowing, so what's needed is a cool, compelling new version of Windows that makes people say "wow!" and enables really exciting new usages - instead of which, Microsoft have given us a succession of complete fusterclucks from Windows 8 onwards. Diminishing sales? Lengthening refresh cycles? A general feeling that what people have now is "good enough"? What a PERFECT time for Microsoft to decide to turn the thumbscrews on everyone, enforce mandatory upgrades/updates, introduce the TIFKAM wtf-batshittery, and generally poison any remaining goodwill towards PCs. Oh yes indeed.
How do we think Michael Dell and the other OEMs feel about Microsoft right now?
Grrr.
How do we think Michael Dell and the other OEMs feel about Microsoft right now?
Dell have been vacillating near the exit door on retail PC assembly for a while now, and focusing more on server and enterprise services. So I think Michael is probably fairly indifferent to whatever happens for the desktop and for home users.
For people like Asus, they have exposure to tablets, mobile, and to the Android and Apple device markets, and it is the saturation of all those markets that create a problem. But at least tablets and phones generally have a two year life expectancy.
I agree with your comments on Dell, but this paragraph made no sense to me:
For people like Asus, they have exposure to tablets, mobile, and to the Android and Apple device markets, and it is the saturation of all those markets that create a problem. But at least tablets and phones generally have a two year life expectancy.
First of all, how does Asus have exposure to the Apple device market? Do they sell some Bluetooth keyboard accessory or something? I'd hardly call that exposure to the Apple device market...
Anyway, tablets most certainly do NOT have a two year life expectancy. That's the whole reason the tablet market has been declining, current thought is that it has a PC like replacement cycle. My parents are still using their iPad 2, and I know a couple people still using the original one and it works just fine. Sure, a newer model would be faster, better etc. but a lot of people just don't use tablets or computers in a way that is at all demanding and doesn't need better performance. They might think it is nice to have, but not nice enough that they're willing to pay for it. PCs and tablets have more of a "when it stops working" replacement cycle these days.
With phones, yeah, they have a short replacement cycle but that may be changing. What reason does someone who has an iPhone 6 or Galaxy S5 have for replacing it with a Galaxy S7 or an iPhone 7? Is there any new functionality they can't live without? Will it make a big difference to them to have the improved performance? Phones may have reached the "good enough" point for most people....if Apple and Samsung see their replacement cycle start to lengthen, you can bet it will hit second tier phone manufacturers like Asus twice as hard because they are already playing in the budget market segment to begin with.
" Microsoft have given us a succession of complete fusterclucks from Windows 8 onwards."
Actually since XP and Server 2003. (NT 5.1 & NT 5.2?)
Windows 7 was after all not a new OS, simply a fix up of disastrous Vista, should have been free to Vista users.
The release of Vista (NT 6.0 I think) and Win 7 (NT 6.1?) left out almost all the "interesting" new features promised after Win2K/XP/Server 2003. Bugs in Explorer and other parts of windows since NT4.0 still are not fixed.
The GUI has become more inconsistent and each version of windows since NT4.0 has gratuitously moved were admin / set up settings accessed from GUI.
Mostly the default install is STILL based on a Server not a workstation with too many server type services and other stupid services running.
We are seeing the result of bad management over the last 15 years coming home to roost. It's like what Nokia did since 2002 (Killed S80 and touch GUI development back then, high point was the the first few Nokia Communicators). Where will MS be in 2020?
"The PC market is slowing, so what's needed is a cool, compelling new version of Windows that makes people say "wow!" and enables really exciting new usages"
If W7 has been doing pretty well what its users need then I can't see most users regarding anything as cool or compelling (unless you're thinking of enticing Apple users to move over ;). New uses, yes, if they need something that wasn't in W7 or, even better in their existing PC hardware(because it's sales of PC that the industry needs to stimulate.
However I don't think anyone has invented anything in that category for a good while now. Innovation seems to have moved over to what can be done online. If that needs a PC then the existing PCs are capable enough but the indications are that most such innovations can be done with a tablet, phone or chromebook.
XP refuseniks around 10%, 7 - 48.57% & even 8 holding on to 8.77%
So 'hardball' tactics not really worked then? & only galvanised those who dont want it by installing Never 10, un-installing KB3035583 or do whate ever else stops the feckking malware downloading & screwing up your other wise perfectly good PC.
Because Microsoft wont give a toss if it does.
Yeah well, from having one Win 7 Laptop I now have upgraded to Ubuntu and so impressed I have purchased a laptop of eBay and ungraded that to Ubuntu too !
So far from getting me to use that dodgy data slurping OS I now have two secure laptops on a completely different OS altogether - So shove that where the sun don't shine MS - Thanks for 20 years of Windows now F**k o** !
That might just be me being stubborn, but Linux isn't as difficult as everyone made out and I haven't found anything I can't do that I could do in MS Windows !
And all without being data slurped and for free !
"& only galvanised those who dont want it by installing Never 10, un-installing KB3035583 or do whate ever else stops the feckking malware downloading & screwing up your other wise perfectly good PC.
Because Microsoft wont give a toss if it does."
I think they'd actually prefer it if a PC was rendered inoperable than if the upgrade was never attempted. At least there was a chance the upgrade would work, and now the owner of the newly-bricked PC has a good reason to go buy a new PC with Windows 10 on it. It fits perfectly with their "throw caution to the wind" approach to pushing the upgrades without ever informing their own customers that there was risk involved and that a full backup image is a must.
If Windows users truly had informed consent before going forward with the upgrade, a certain percentage would decide it to be too risky and decline; that is an outcome MS is not willing to accept. Better to keep people in the dark and take the chance; any chance of success, no matter how slim, is worth pursuing, and no chance of bricking a PC is great enough to outweigh the chance that the upgrade may work.
With that kind of attitude from Microsoft, it is no wonder that people have dug in their heels and declared that Windows 10 will never be allowed on their computers. Even a lot of people who think 10 is otherwise a good product have been put off by this; personally, I find the product to be as bad as the techniques used to force it onto us, so I have no such dissonance.
I used to say that I have 3+ years to wait to see if 10 becomes a good product, but now I don't think I would take 10 even if they fixed all of the many things wrong with it. I've never liked MS the way that Apple fans like Apple; it's mostly been a grudging admission that they're not so bad rather than actual admiration, but now it is nothing but contempt.
Consequently, I'm writing this from Linux Mint (KDE), which is now set to dual boot with Win 7 on my main PC. The plan is to gradually transition to Mint fully, except for the things that won't run on Linux at all, and for those I'll keep Win 7, even beyond the cutoff date if necessary. Hopefully, WINE will be at a point in 3 years where the things I want to run won't need Windows at all, or there will be native Linux versions. I understand that the Linux forums are seeing a flood of new users who have previously only used Windows.
Congratulations, Microsoft; you've accomplished in a year what 25 years of propaganda from the Mac cultists have not: You've made me think Windows is terrible.
Analytics.gov give Microsoft 100% of the desktop market. The March, April, May figures for the others are:
Netmarketshare: 86.50, 83.64, 84.86
Statcounter: 85.91, 85.34, 84.61
So ABM have about 15% market share, and gain about .75% per month. As the figures are for desktops, not phones or servers we are looking at Apple, Linux, and a *BSD user, not Android, Openwrt, or the commercial Unixes. If Windows 10 can keep growing at this rate, Microsoft will be out of the desktop business in 10 years. In real life, Microsoft would need a sequence of spectacular fails to maintain this trend. Although I have confidence in their ability to screw up, they would need Stephen Elop back for such a consistent run of failure. On the other hand, ten years is far enough in the future for the desktop market fade into insignificance.
"Analytics.gov give Microsoft 100% of the desktop market."
that seems kind of, "odd", to me. or 'rigged'. I guess Obaka and Mrs. Clinton have received sufficient payoffs in the form of campaign contributions and contributions to things like "The Clinton Foundation" in order to play favorites in the analytics?
Visit their home page (analytics.usa.gov) and you can see their overall stats. Windows has just over 50% of their visits, iOS 21%, Android 16%, Mac 9% and "other" (Linux, Windows Phone, Blackberry, etc.) has 2%.
Obviously since these are measuring US government web site access it is mostly a snapshot of the USA - though 18% of their visits are international. I would have guess more like 1.8%! I remember seeing something where they showed how the stats changed on M-F days versus Sat/Sun to show the effect of access from work versus home - there was more Windows during the workday, more Mac and phone/tablet on the weekend.
The stats for browsers was particularly interesting. Is Firefox really only 8% of their visits, and IE only 18%? I can understand Safari at 23% given the iOS and Mac numbers, but where is Android? Are they all getting lumped in with Chrome regardless of what they're really using?
Is Firefox really only 8% of their visits,
I suspect that more Firefox users have NoScript, Ghostery, AdBlock and similar and thus don't run the Javascript that reports back to the stats site.
> and IE only 18%?
Yes. IE has been declining year by year.
Sorry thats not soon enough for MS to disappear with the complete arrogance they have shown that they don't give two hoots for security or privacy or anything except force feeding us what they want ti give us - and they say they want to listen to users feedback - but to do so you have to have a MS account ? Why, it would be simple enough for them to get the MS Widows S/N but no, what they really want is for you to register to get an MS account and then completely ignore what people want and to say look x million are using feed back and we are really listen to everything users say and then ignoring them and giving them what we feel is best for them like it or not !
Its a bit like the get Windows now or later debacle - no choice really except to jump ship to another OS !
The only real users that are willingly jumping are maybe gamers as they want access to DX12 - Well they don't need to - Soon Vulkan games will be out and they work on all versions of Windows and Linux and Mac and PS4 and Nintendo and Android and Xbox !
Yes it will take time, yes I know you are impatient and can't wait - All gamers are the same, they want it now, actually they want it yesterday ! Well this time you will have to wait but the wait will be worth it, AMD cards potentially because of the design (multi-threaded) that they will get a bigger boost than Nvidia but cross-platform game is going to be here - Ironically it will be down the the most efficient OS which will give the higher FPS which might give Linux an advantage, I don't know but that could put the cat amongst the pigeons so to speak - maybe !
The perception from the (small) sample of the public I deal with is that no one seems to have a good word to say about windows 10. Compared to windows 7 its a disorganised mess that spies on you and crashes a lot. Its not much of an 'upgrade' when helpful features like media centre, aero graphics and deciding which updates to run have been removed. The start menu is crap and bloated, control panel wrecked in favour of sticking the settings in two places rather than one, and the GUI designed by a colour blind member of Fisher Price's design team. It looks ugly and amateurish - which for an OS that seems to be the NSA's wet dream is surprising.
The only thing I've found that seems to be a genuine 'upgrade' is DirectX 12. But that's only really relevant to gamer's.
So far I've only met one person who actually likes Windows 10, but he also liked Windows 8.0 (yes .0 not even .1!), so it takes all sorts :-/
I'm happy with my venerable Win 7 for now (and Mint on the 2nd SSD).
Boothy: The only thing I've found that seems to be a genuine 'upgrade' is DirectX 12. But that's only really relevant to gamer's.
The excitement about DirectX 12 must surely be waning, given that, almost a full year after launch, there are still no significant, fully-commercial games that support it.
In the olden days, Microsoft had games rolling out Day One to support and promote its latest DX platform. As I've pointed out previously, it just might be significant that the guy in charge of gaming at Microsoft calls himself the "Head of Xbox"...
It also might be relevant that when Bethesda recently showed its new Doom running at 200fps on the latest GPU, they were using a version based on Vulkan, not DX12. Vulkan will allow developers to target every version of Windows, plus Linux, plus (eventually) the Mac. DX12 hits only that sliver of Windows 10 adopters. Which API makes the most sense at this point?
Visited a number of shopping centers recently, and in the well known high street seller of tvs/cameras/pc's etc, staff loafing around, made no attempt to ask me if I required assistance in parting with my money.
PC product range, pathetic and dumbed down.
Visited Apple stores, attentive and helpful staff, all occupied with taking money.
Loads of stuff to buy.
Now in the fruity store if I had been heralded by angels as I went in to collect my new shiny thing it would have been perfect, still 99.9% isn't bad.
Yes, but as a Reg reader you are in a very small minority of people who are clued up about all aspects of modern tech. Those stores are aimed at selling stuff to an average user, i.e. someone who doesn't know that much. That's why Apple are basically printing money with their stores, they make tech approachable, and market it as a desirable commodity, or luxury product.
Yes, but as a Reg reader you are in a very small minority of people who are clued up about all aspects of modern tech
… and that has what to do with a clothing shop for example? The comment applies… regardless of whether I'm shopping for shoes or software. If I walk into a shop, one of three things will happen:
* I either know exactly what I want, and will scan for that particular item, and in a well organised shop, I'll usually find it before I can be directed.
* I'm in there just to look around and see what's on offer, in which case the assistant isn't going to be of much assistance.
* I have some idea on what I'm after, but need assistance, in which case I'll seek out the assistant.
In none of the above examples, are sales people required to find me. Staff should be around in the situation that someone wishes to get assistance, it should not be assumed by default that the assistance is required.
As do I know what it is I want, but in that particular emporium, nobody approached me, in another well known electronics store that sells bits and pieces, I always get asked.
The point I believe the OP was trying to make is there is no apparent incentive to sell the products.
Apple Store pays the staff to sell Apple devices, computers being a large part of this, with a good margin/reward for them.
Electronics/computer store pays it's staff to sell services. The PC? Makes 10%-5% margin, gives 50p reward to the seller, is confusing and rather stale.
Yes it's the managements fault and a change in the market, less the staffs.
I'm sure the nagware contributes a bit, though. Also contributing to the W10 rise will be the malware part of gwx that suckers people into approving the downgrade or does it behind their backs, and the borkware that knackers working W7 installations with crap updates.
All that aside - PC sales will continue to decline vs mobile sales, I guess. The only thing I can see that would help to make them rise would be for the OEMs to realise that selling Linux-based alternatives would be a crowd-pleaser (a small crowd initially, but it would grow).
Desktop sales fall because there is no real need to replace anything under five years old and because people would rather replace with a laptop, phone or tablet. People who want Linux have been able to get a blank desktop or laptop for less than the cost of one with Windows for a few years.
The traditional PC distribution channel has always had good reasons not to distribute Linux: discounts for selling 100% with Windows pre-installed. Lack of crapware for Linux. Linux running on cheap hardware. No commission on AV and Microsoft Office (except for Dell, who would sell you MS Office with your Windowsless Desktop).
Pre-installed Linux sales come from outside the traditional channel, such as Raspberry Pi and phones. I do not see that changing until after the desktop market is thoroughly dead.
"The traditional PC distribution channel has always had good reasons not to distribute Linux"
[snip reasons]
Do you know what I think would be really, really nice? If, rather than a default OS - which in most cases, for all of those reasons, is Windows - a new PC came with a minimal OS that, with a network connection, would offer you a menu of different operating systems, and allowed you to choose which one to install. (Along the lines of the NOOBS cards for the Raspberry Pi).
A lot would still choose Windows, of course, because it's what they're familiar with - but some would try the alternatives (especially if it was made easy to reset the machine and go back to that starting point if the user didn't like what they've tried).
Even better still would be if some legal situation forced this to be the way of things - much like the case with Internet Explorer from a while back.
Believe it or not I can walk into most any PC-selling outfit around here (well, not that there are that many left but still) and in pretty much any of them I can get a Pc with... FreeDOS. I don't think I need to explain no sane person from either side of the counter expects that to remain the OS of that PC - it's just there so that there's some difference between that PC and a brick when the power button is pushed...
"Desktop sales fall because there is no real need to replace anything under five years old "
that's right.
For over 10 years "Moore's Law" has stopped contributing to "next year's model" being 50% faster/better. This is the primary 'thing' driving the so-called decline of desktop and notebook computers [it's a 'sales decline' and *NOT* a 'usage decline'].
Micro-shaft has made it clear that they're not interested in improving their own product's performance [not really], to contribute to any PERCEPTION of 'better' by installing a particular version of windows.
So people stick with what they have. LOUSY economy, plus no perceived improvement in "new", means *NO* *SALE*. [I've been saying this for MONTHS].
And we all know that Micro-shaft's version of "New, shiny" was Windows "Ape" (8.0). That got them an increase in windows 7 sales, maybe.
@bombastic bob - Many agree with your overall analysis. For most users, SOHO and enterprise, the 3 - 5 year kit they have is still perfectly adequate and runs the software they need. The only reason for them to buy anything is to replace dead kit. Throw in dodgy finances and the hardware improvements bring no real performance improvements and there will be softening demand.
Also, the PC market is primarily a replacement market with the total installed based growing very slowly and almost all the sales being replacement kit. Software has reached a point for many that they do not need the latest version of whatever because 1 or 2 versions back is overkill.
Microsoft could probably make a lot of money by making a product called Windows 7 SE (second edition), like they did with Win 98. People still want 7-- Win 7 DVDs with legitimate product keys sell for more than Windows 10 on eBay, and the almost-certainly-illegitimate sellers of Win 7 keys (which they claim are legit, of course) are making money by the fistful (just look at the number of previous sales each one lists). Microsoft could be making that money if they wanted to.
No kidding that people are not falling over themselves to buy PCs with Win 10 on them; the name has become about as toxic as Vista or 8 were. Bringing out a slightly improved (but keeping the UI!) version of 7 (to be sold at full price) with a full 10 years of extended support would be much more of an incentive, and it might get a lot of people holding on to 7 (original) to upgrade at their own expense (rather than take a 10 upgrade for free). It would capture the sales of people buying used (possibly illegitimate) Win 7 keys, and would restore a lot of goodwill in MS after this horrible GWX experience.
Since the entire reason for this silly "I'm a phone" UI on 8 and 10 was to spur app creation that would in turn sell Windows phones, and it's looking more and more like even MS is giving up on Windows phones, what reason is there to stick to a Windows version whose main feature is a half-phone, half-PC UI?
I know they won't do that, of course. I'm just dreaming. I just know I'd pay for 6.5 more years of security updates on 7 (10 years minus the 3.5 years I will get with Win 7 as it is now) and an implicit promise to not try to destroy 7 before that, rather than get 5.5 more years for free with 10 (even though MS said it was the last Windows ever, in the extended support column of their support schedule, it shows that security support for 10 is only guaranteed through 2025).
>> The traditional PC distribution channel has always had good reasons not to distribute Linux: discounts for selling 100% with Windows pre-installed. Lack of crapware for Linux. Linux running on cheap hardware. No commission on AV and Microsoft Office (except for Dell, who would sell you MS Office with your Windowsless Desktop).
Yep, there is that. And the fact that almost no-one apart from the readers on this forum want Linux on their computer
That Win 1 0 is getting a (small) boost in market share is understandable, the deadline for "not free" is fast approaching.
Microsoft needs all the market share it can get now because it'll be the last jump forward it will get on this. After June, it will be incremental steps only. Companies cannot switch easily or quickly, and private people who want 1 0 will have already got it. Any "new" installations will be of the buying-a-new-PC type, or when a company finally gets around to cycling its PC pool again.
Nooooo, the boost is because it isnt nagware any longer - too many people were saying "No". The latest version installs Win10 whether you like it or not.
Even switching your PC off wont help, it schedules a wake up, then installs itself!! (happen to my mums PC while I was visiting her on Wednesday).
"That Win 1 0 is getting a (small) boost in market share is understandable, the deadline for "not free" is fast approaching."
If that is the case, and I'm not sure it is, but if it is.... would MS not be better just dropping the price of Windows to ~$20. Maybe different pricing for enterprise, but otherwise, just have a single version of Windows equivalent to Pro for use by home and small business users for basically a minimal price to cover media distribution?
That would effectively mean giving it free to OEMs, but at least they might then increase the user base a bit more than now; cheaper PCs, slightly more upgrades... maybe?
In other news, Microsoft might in effect be allowing upgrades to Win 10 after the cut off date, providing you pretend to be are a user who requires assistive technologies!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
