back to article Windows hits the skids, Mac OS X on the rise

According to two different web-analytics groups – NetMarketShare and StatCounter – Windows' market share has dropped to below 90 per cent for the first time since the mid 1990s and the juggernaut that was Windows 95. As SeekingAlpha reports, NetMarketShare calculates that Windows' market share – that's all versions of Windows …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. eulampios

    IMHO, It would be fair

    to compare the shares of each OS actually installed by users themselves removing the preinstalled, bundled, non-reimbursable ones. Or, at least explicitly putting them in different categories.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: IMHO, It would be fair

      Sounds nice, but hardware differences do not make it as transparent as it should be in order to make such a plan truly commercially viable - it is asking for a support headache if there ever was one. Regretfully this is why manufacturers pre-configure their OS installs - a common base point for tech support and easy OOB experience for the vast majority of customers.

      Microsoft's future salvation? "Windows 9" = Windows 7 with a new Explorer shell and a few backend updates :p Microsoft, just as so many other companies, is simply too stubborn to accept the failure of Windows 8 and get with a program of rip-and-replace.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: IMHO, It would be fair

        "but hardware differences do not make it as transparent". That was funny, what kind of headache are you having, smoking something, perhaps.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Rip and replace....

        From a technical standpoint, Windows 8.1 is better than ever. So why doesn't Microsoft simply give in and provide a Classic Windows mode to boot into (complete with XP, Vista and 7 skins)? People sitting in offices, working on documents, or performing engineering tasks, do not need TIFKAM. As good as the 8.1 improvements are, the modern interface still gets in the way a bit, if you don't have a touch screen or a modern (touch enabled) mouse or trackpad. FFS give the user base a compelling upgrade, with compelling benefits.

        1. Stephen Channell
          Unhappy

          Windows 8.1 is a fine half-an-OS

          Once you add Classic shell and go through and disable all the chimes, it is not bad, but leaves a lingering taste in the mouth, and resentment that you've debugged, hacked & fixed something they could have finished so easily.

          "it may very well slip into – caducity" is understatement (as anyone who's tried to follow MSF will tell you) caducity is the stage they're at already with windows, but MS is not a frail human body.. they have the power to rebuild it.. but can they be bothered?

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Rip and replace....

          "So why doesn't Microsoft simply give in and provide a Classic Windows mode to boot into "

          They do already. Since the 8.1 update, you can select to boot by default into Desktop mode, and to show Desktop apps first in Modern view (effectively providing your old Start Menu).

          1. Anonymous Bullard

            Re: Rip and replace....

            Since the 8.1 update, you can select to boot by default into Desktop mode

            Oh cool! Now, there's a company that listens to customer feedback.

    2. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      Boffin

      Re: eulampios Re: IMHO, It would be fair

      ".....the shares of each OS actually installed by users themselves....." Yes, but what about all those trial users that download a Linux variant, maybe run it for a bit, get fed up and then go back to Windows? It happens, I know several people who have done exactly that. I myself over the last dozen plus years have downloaded and tried scores of Linux variants out of tech curiosity, all of which the Linux community would love to claim are individual and persistent "users", but the reality was each was a short-lived experiment that replaced a previous Linux variant, whilst my main desktop and laptop carried on being a Windows PC.

      1. Scroticus Canis
        Gimp

        Re: eulampios IMHO, It would be fair

        @Matt Bryant - "my main desktop and laptop carried on being a Windows PC."

        Just being a masochist or couldn't you afford a Mac?

        1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
          Stop

          Re: Talking Scroticus Re: eulampios IMHO, It would be fair

          ".....or couldn't you afford a Mac?" LOL, more like - having plenty of experience with FreeBSD and Linux - I didn't WANT a Mac. I have two clustered Proliant SERVERS in my attic, kit more expensive than any Mac. The only Apple devices we have ever had in the house are my wife's iPad and my daughter's iPod, both gifts from technically-illiterate people. I have Windows kit because I need proper Office and because the majority of the games I (now infrequently) play are Windows ones, and Linux because it does everything else I need (sorry, I dropped FreeBSD when ZFS was forced on us). Why on Earth would I want a Mac, let alone pay the ridiculous Apple tax to own one?!? Seriously, give me one technical feature not already offered by Linux and Windows and then admit your fanboism is just the result of fashion-driven masochism.

          1. Paul Crawford Silver badge
            Trollface

            @Matt "sorry, I dropped FreeBSD when ZFS was forced on us"

            Come on Matt, you don't need to be shy on El Reg's forums - everyone here knows you use Solaris on the desktop and simply like to protesteth too much :)

            1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
              Meh

              Re: Paul Crawford Re: @Matt "sorry, I dropped FreeBSD when ZFS was forced on us"

              ".... everyone here knows you use Solaris on the desktop....." Well, plus one for humour. Back in the day, if I had a server project and the boss said I couldn't use RHEL or hp-ux, or even AIX on Power, but had to use Slowaris on UltraSPARC, I'd shrug and go ahead as at least it should be reasonably stable. Whilst I think SPARC-Slowaris was probably the worst UNIX option (just my opinion) at least it was stable and reasonably well supported 24x7. Today, if the boss insisted I had to use Oracle Slowaris on Dell or hp Xeon server I'd grumble but accept it. But if he insisted on ZFS I'd tell him to give the project to someone else. Having seen ZFS massively fail in production - destroying data, constant resilvering slowing everything down, dropping and then rediscovering disks which led to more resilvering, simply not working with RAID cards, not clustering, and generally being a shameful pile of crack compared to even FOSS efforts, I would not want it near any production system or even a home desktop, thanks. Oh, and OpenSlowaris was one of those trial downloads that lasted about a fortnight - IMHO, definitely not good enough to replace CentOS or RHEL. YMMV, just don't expect those of us with different needs and experience to simply ignore them to align with your POV. Now, the really nasty question is would I choose Oracle Slowaris with ZFS over the equally unattractive Apple Mac Pro Server......?

              1. eulampios
                WTF?

                Re: Paul Crawford @Matt "sorry, I dropped FreeBSD when ZFS was forced on us"

                going from FreeBSD to MS Windows? Wow, what a turn?!

            2. Shoot Them Later
              Gimp

              Re: @Matt "sorry, I dropped FreeBSD when ZFS was forced on us"

              Strange - I have several FreeBSD systems running 8/9 and none of them has an unwanted ZFS filesystem. Sure they *support* ZFS, but there's a world of difference there. I'm sure anyone who really hates ZFS could build a custom kernel and omit the ZFS module.

              I'm all for complaining about unwanted changes to software/operating systems, but to whinge about something entirely optional seems a bit OTT to me. Reminds me of the grumbling that occurred when the SMP support was first mooted (IIRC)

          2. Dave 126

            Re: Talking Scroticus eulampios IMHO, It would be fair

            >Seriously, give me one technical feature [in OSX] not already offered by Linux and Windows and then admit your fanboism is just the result of fashion-driven masochism.

            That's the point. OSX isn't sold on *technical features*, it is sold on 'features for the user'. Apple might take a bunch of technical features and give them a polished GUI, like TimeMachine, or no GIU at all like FusionDisk. The user doesn't have to understand how they work, so a simple name will do. Easy to market.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Talking Scroticus eulampios IMHO, It would be fair

              "That's the point. OSX isn't sold on *technical features*,"

              Good job and all the more reason to refer to macs as "consumer products".

          3. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Talking Scroticus eulampios IMHO, It would be fair

            Two proliant Pentium III's, no less.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: eulampios IMHO, It would be fair

          "Just being a masochist or couldn't you afford a Mac?"

          Given the price/performance/reliability relationship of a Mac, perhaps he's just not a mug.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: eulampios IMHO, It would be fair

          "Just being a masochist or couldn't you afford a Mac?"

          Who would you buy a mac? the latest mac "news" story I read said they were busy improving "selfie" software with some crap iTunes revamp to cope with it -nothing about making them work better in Business or Enterprise.

          If fanboys want to see the precious fruit doing well in obscure stat exercises then split the stats into two groups -Business and Consumer.

      2. eulampios
        Linux

        @Matt, Re: eulampios IMHO...

        I am sorry sir about you being unlucky with your Linux trials. In my own experience, most of the people that try Linux would switch to GNU/Linux either entirely or at least as a dual boot option, providing they do care about things IT.

        1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
          FAIL

          Re: eulampos Re: @Matt, eulampios IMHO...

          "....you being unlucky with your Linux trials......" Doh, I see I didn't put things simply enough to penetrate your anti-Windows blinkers. I currently have two Linux systems running, one being a KVM instance hosting RHEL and SLES instances, the one running CentOS. They are on home-built PCs so did not come with OEM Windows installs. I did have a long-serving FreeBSD instance on a third PC that morphed into FreeNAS but that is gone as of version 7 and ZFS's inclusion. I regularly download new Linux variants onto the CentOS PC to test them to see if they offer anything over CentOS (not Windows) and - so far - I've stuck with CentOS. There has never been any real ideas of replacing the Windows systems. Now, the FOSS crowd would love to count all those trial downloads but the reality is they shouldn't count as they did not represent actual systems in long term use, and none of them replaced a Windows install.

          "....In my own experience, most of the people that try Linux would switch to GNU/Linux either entirely or at least as a dual boot option...." YMMV. In my experience, the only time I have managed to switch anyone off Windows was when I gave them Darkstar Linux which could be configured to have a WinXP-lookalike desktop. Since Darkstar is now dead that option is not likely to be happening again.

          "....providing they do care about things IT." Seriously? Get over yourself.

          1. eulampios
            Linux

            @Matt: reasons to switch away from Windows

            are aplenty for geeks and ordinary clueless users. Money is pretty much the last one, I suppose. I now experience them all when need to help a friend with his/her Windows problem. Such as

            -- an annoying trojan/virus

            -- slowed down system due to fragmented or "out of control" registry, or filled up disk (windows folder is known to grow with time), or some other unknown reasons

            -- "irrational" problems (like this one) not resolved by MS, OEMs, nor the so called "windows geeks" -- all offering their own mutually perpendicular solutions/workarounds , none of which would finally resolve the issue. My last shock was that an ntfs filesystem can be wiped out completely without any warning on a healthy hdd after playing a game

            My own reasons include:

            -- a proprietary, effectively non-modular architecture, that is, you can't separate, substitute various pieces of the system, like the kernel from gui, utilities, shells etc; one is a mess you might run into when a kernel patch won't let you boot, unlike with a typical GNU/Linux distros with multiple kernel versions option.

            -- less flexibility and configurability: would like to trim a system to my needs, build my own kernels, make my own persistent live media with ease

            -- lack of decent, proper IT culture around MS Windows and plenty of mouse-clicking clueless Windows "geeks" that know nothing but "reinstall Windows" solution to every problem.

            -- lack of a central repository full of most software with tested security mechanism (Win8 store was too late and still got very few) , like apt for Debian system; this should also be wise enough to take care of dependencies and able to prevent installing and running multiple copies of the same libraries

            -- etc

            I did like and run FreeBSD up to the version 8.1-RC. It was a nice learning experience that let me study an alternative Unix system. Stopped using it when the FreeBSD foundation had gone awry with their GPL intolerance and view of all support from the patent troll in Cupertino, CA

            In your turn, I haven't heard any argument from you, rather than you want to use a "decent Office suite", that is MSO from your other comment. Why LO/OO isn't decent enough for you? Is it a ribbon UI or a pivot table that you can't live without, or is it something else. The fact that the code of MSO is not portable is one big minus in my mind.

            As far as I am concerned, I rely much more on GNU Emacs , which is available on most OS'es, however, there are some oddities and less control when running it on Windows.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: @Matt: reasons to switch away from Windows

              >.Why LO/OO isn't decent enough for you?

              Technically, I'm sure they are good. But some other programmes are dependant on Excel. Solidworks, far example.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: @Matt: reasons to switch away from Windows

                Technically, I'm sure they are good. But some other programmes are dependant on Excel.

                I think that pretty much sums up the MS Office fanbois.

                It's all because they have been locked in, they don't want everyone else do use something else because they're afraid they'll be locked out, since Office doesn't handle open standard formats.

                1. Dave 126

                  Re: @Matt: reasons to switch away from Windows

                  >I think that pretty much sums up the MS Office fanbois.

                  >It's all because they have been locked in, they don't want everyone else do use something else because they're afraid they'll be locked out, since Office doesn't handle open standard formats.

                  Eh? I don't want anybody to be locked out of anything. I'll just use what works for me, here and now. I think that makes me a pragmatist, not a 'Office Fanboi', but whatever.

                2. Roland6 Silver badge

                  Re: @Matt: reasons to switch away from Windows

                  "I think that pretty much sums up the MS Office fanbois.

                  It's all because they have been locked in"

                  Yes we have all become locked in, both willingly and by deliberate intent!

                  I for example could make use of non-MS products, however, some of the really useful tools I use are built on top of the MS Office Suite (aside: my Office suite consists of Office Pro, Visio Pro and Project Standard). So whilst I'm aware of other tools, I would not be able to collaborate with colleagues and clients in the way that I'm presently able to do.

                  Hence we are now in a chicken and egg situation where people probably would like to change platforms, but are having problems because the tools they use have typically only been developed for a single platform, specifically MS Windows. Also we are still have cross-platform issues, so many are extremely cautious about things - for example I still tend to send out office documents in 97/2003 formats as these seem to be widely supported, with users getting a reasonably consistent representation of the document I intended them to see.

                  Obviously, as time goes by we are seeing developers beginning to respond to demand (or dipping their toes in the open source pond) and starting to support a wider range of platforms.

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: @Matt: reasons to switch away from Windows

              "-- an annoying trojan/virus"

              Linux isn't imune - it's just that with a 1.x% share of the desktop market - no one targets it. Enterprise Linux distributions and even the Linux kernel alone have historically had far more vulnerabilities that on average took longer to fix (more days at risk) than with any Windows based OS. If you look at a market where Linux is actually commonly used like webservers, you are actually more likely to be remotely hacked / compromised than if you run a current Windows server based system.

              "slowed down system due to fragmented or "out of control" registry"

              The Registry (B-Tree ISAM database based approach) is more scalable and powerful than parsing flat text files...

              "when a kernel patch won't let you boot"

              Yes that's a frequent issue with Linux. You compile the kernel for some reason (like the frequent security patches), and the whole system won't boot - and you have to screw around on the command line rebuilding compressed boot files. Nothing easy like in Windows where you can just select Last Known Good Cconfiguration, or roll back to the last System State snapshot.

              "lack of decent, proper IT culture around MS Windows"

              Total bollocks. Windows is the most frequently used server (75% market share), desktop and laptop (89% market share) platform on the planet - and the most common development platform too.

              "lack of a central repository full of most software with tested security mechanism"

              Microsoft Update and WSUS have existed for years. 3rd parties can submit drivers / updates if they wish. With Linux you have no such single central repository - and therfore frequently have to add new respositories and access your software from multiple soures - and you often have no guarantee how trustable they are, or even if the software has been compromised.

              "Why LO/OO isn't decent enough for you?"

              The vast majority of enterprises require a) documents to be interchanged seemlessly and look the same at source and destination, and b) to use add-ins, high end functionality (as you mention - pivot tables is a good example) and VBA macros, and c) to be able to centrally manage Office configuration via Group Policy - none of which works with the options you suggest. To a large degree, you get what you pay for!

              1. Chemist

                Re: @Matt: reasons to switch away from Windows

                "You compile the kernel for some reason (like the frequent security patches)"

                Oh it's you again !

                I use Linux all the time and I haven't needed to compile a kernel in - well I can't remember exactly but at least 15 years and my systems are all up-to-date

              2. hplasm
                Meh

                Re: @Matt: reasons to switch away from Windows

                "...The vast majority of enterprises require a) documents to be interchanged seemlessly and look the same at source and destination"

                That's MS Office out of the game then.

              3. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: @Matt: reasons to switch away from Windows

                "The Registry (B-Tree ISAM database based approach) is more scalable and powerful than parsing flat text files..."

                wow.. if you really believe that, then that statement alone demonstrates that you've never ever had to maintain any computer beyond your own personal computer.

                If you have, then you're in way over your head, and you bring shame on the rest of Windows us professionals!

                The registry is two main repositories. 1 for the machine, the other for the user. That means every time you need to access a key, you would have to search through all settings. That is why it is indexed - not because indexing is great, or a secret power of Microsoft.. but because something searchable at that size HAS to be indexed.

                The location of the config files is already indexed by the filesystem (which is scalable). It is parsed once at application start-up, then unloaded. Some applications may write new/all settings back to the file at the end - no indexes need to be maintained - just a simple file output. The "raw" file is in a human maintainable format.

                With config files, backing up, restoring, and transferring to another machine, is as easy as file copying (for you, that's a single drag/drop operation). Different config files can sometimes be specified on the command-line, if you wish.

                Since applications have their own files, there are no secret values hidden. When the application is uninstalled, the file is deleted. No gradual growth over time, no need for "registry cleaners".

                That gives you scale, power, flexibility, and resilience.

                I am a Windows user, have been since before the registry.

                (btw, tell the IIS team they're doing it wrong)

              4. Paul Crawford Silver badge

                Re: AC

                "The vast majority of enterprises require a) documents to be interchanged seemlessly and look the same at source and destination"

                That only works if you force them all to use the same version of Office and even the same damned printer. Otherwise use PDF as that actually works!

                "and VBA macros"

                No one wants to use VBA macros. Few really need to use VBA macros, they are 'needed' simply due to legacy lock-in and not even supported on the WindowsRT version of Office. Though I would forgive you for saying that is not a real version of Office...

                "To a large degree, you get what you pay for!"

                With MS you often don't even get that.

              5. Richard Plinston

                Re: @Matt: reasons to switch away from Windows

                > Total bollocks. Windows is the most frequently used server (75% market share), desktop and laptop (89% market share) platform on the planet

                Yes, what you say is "Total bollocks".

                Windows may have '75% market share' but that is a measure of the _cost_ (or revenue to the OEMs). It says _nothing_ about usage. The thousands of servers at Google, Amazon, and many other huge sites are not counted, corporates and individuals building their own CentOS (or many other) servers are not counted. In any case one could buy several Linux based servers for the cost of one windows server.

                It seems that you have no clues about the things you talk of. Frequency of usage is not the same as cost.

        2. This post has been deleted by its author

    3. JDX Gold badge

      Re: IMHO, It would be fair

      "IMHO, It would be fair to compare the shares of each OS actually installed by users themselves"

      No, that would be deliberately biasing results in favour of the result you want to see. It would also be asinine since uninstalling OSX on a Mac is an incredibly niche thing to do, and people don't uninstall Windows to install a new Windows (you said you wanted to measure people removing pre-installed OS). Probably 99.9% of manual Windows installs are done on machines which came with Windows in the first place.

      If we purely focused on % of installs regardless of previous OS, then you'd still see OSX users upgrading to newer versions of OSX but the vast majority would STILL be Windows installs.

      And that's even leaving aside the elephant in the room which is that most people are happy with the default OS. Saying anyone who doesn't re-install their OS isn't a relevant data-point is just stupid.

      1. eulampios

        @JDX

        No, the bias is in this generality that all OSes being counted were obtained the same way. No, they aren't, and we both know this well, don't we?

        Probably 99.9% of manual Windows installs are done on machines which came with Windows in the first place.

        Yes, let's count all the manual installs.

  2. Lars Silver badge
    Linux

    Never mind

    "StatCounter is only slightly more pessimistic", why not rather optimistic. But I wonder how these two decimal figures are counted. I am fairly sure that none of my Linux machines has ever been counted as Linux. Nor have I filled in even one death certificate (to the proper authorities). What would the number of ppl on the earth be if we believed in heaven on earth. Does it matter, (tears running down my cheek), not really. Let the shit hit Windows and leave me alone as the numbers count according to MS.

    1. Richard Plinston

      Re: Never mind

      > I am fairly sure that none of my Linux machines has ever been counted

      Exactly. I run NoScript and Ghostery. Those counters do not include my machines.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Windows mention share ..

    9 mentions of Windows + 8 mentions of Microsoft + 3 mentions of Bill Gates for a grand total of 20 gratuitous adverts for Redmond ..

    1. Vociferous

      Re: Windows mention share ..

      ...in an article about Windows losing market share. Oh the humanity.

      1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
        Holmes

        Re: Windows mention share ..

        It's straightforward Ballmerization, I say!

        1. Fibbles

          Re: Windows mention share ..

          The only thing straight-forward about Ballmerization is the trajectory of the chairs.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Windows mention share ..

      Scandalous... next thing they'll be mentioning Elon Musk in articles about Tesla and Zuckerberg in articles about Facebook.

  4. Christian Berger

    How do they count?

    If they are counting via flash of Javascript served by ad-brokers, for example, the results would be totally understandable. Most Linux users, for example, don't execute Javascript from sites they don't trust. It's a security feature.

    That also would explain the discrepancy between those numbers and what we are all seeing in the real world.

    1. keithpeter Silver badge
      Windows

      Re: How do they count?

      "That also would explain the discrepancy between those numbers and what we are all seeing in the real world."

      @Christian Berger

      I use GNU/Linux on my own laptop. I can imagine using a Chromebook in the future, and might use a tablet for convenient content consumption eventually as I slide into happy retirement.

      Plenty of fruity tablets, fruity laptops in cafes along with 15.4 inch consumer channel ones and some netbooks. I've seen a couple of Chromebooks as well. Tablets, phablets, electronic book readers in smaller numbers. The London train is solid Lenovo for the blue-shirted ones and iPads for the others.

      My world is pretty proprietary. What world are you in?

    2. Paul 135

      Re: How do they count?

      I'm not sure where you get the "most" statistic from.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: How do they count?

      > Most Linux users, for example, don't execute Javascript from sites they don't trust

      More importantly, in my experience most Linux installations (server and non-server) are not even exposed to the internet. They are also not bought pre-installed, and are not reported to anyone in particular, so seems a bit difficult to keep track of those numbers unless via direct surveys.

      > That also would explain the discrepancy between those numbers and what we are all seeing in the real world.

      Funny, I had the same thought, although I put it down to the sort of work I do.

  5. Anonymous Coward 101

    The thing that sticks out for me is the low usage of Vista compared with XP. It's as if that OS just slipped away and was forgotten about.

    1. Steve Todd

      What is more interesting

      Is just how badly Windows 8 is selling compared to Windows 7. Look at the curve when Win7 was launched. By this time in its life it was on about 3 times as many machines as 8 is. It even makes Vista look good.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: What is more interesting

        You CANNOT compare the curves as the environment has changed too much in the meantime. In particular, the combination of alternative mainstream form factors (tablets, smartphones) plus the general realisation that unlike back then most people have no reason to upgrade any more. Both these facts make any direct comparison meaningless.

        1. Jordan Davenport

          Re: What is more interesting

          "You CANNOT compare the curves as the environment has changed too much in the meantime."

          I'm sorry, but given that Windows 8 is marketed first and foremost as a tablet-friendly operating system, I'd have to disagree with you entirely. The numbers are indeed directly comparable or, if not, perhaps should be weighted even more than Vista's, given the numerous more devices that should be running Windows 8 in Microsoft's dream world.

          1. Phil_Evans

            Re: What is more interesting

            Bang on, both of you. Except that OSX is fairly and squarely a desktop operating system just like Windows. Microsoft may have shoe-horned it in a rather comical way onto mobile devices, but no-one with an ounce of sense seems to want one. If you want to roll Windows 'devices' like surface and phones into the comparison it goes from comical to hysterically funny. Android rules mobile with some iOS, Microsoft Rules PCs.

            Sticking to your knitting has shown some useful lessons here: MSFT Zune, dead. MSFT Bing, ping. MSFT Vista (read Swiss army knife), dead. That's a lot of crochet.

            What WOULD be useful would be for the likes of STATcounter to put out figures for Business v consumer. I'm sure the Jihad would subside a bit under that evidence.

    2. This post has been deleted by its author

  6. Fihart

    stating the bleedin obvious

    It's been obvious to me for an age that Apple has won the laptop game, never mind tablets.

    Glance in any branch of Starbucks (or similar) and check the little illuminated Apple logos. It may be that Apple owners are more likely poseur gits who hang around overpriced caffs, but factoring that in doesn't really explain the scarcity of other brands.

    But, given the preponderance of iPhones, once people realise that it's one of the easiest smartphones, it seems kinda logical to scale up to iPad or Macbook.

    Perhaps Microsoft's problem is trying a trickle-down from the other direction -- from a 19 inch screen Windows computer to a 4 inch Winphone.

    1. 1Rafayal

      Re: stating the bleedin obvious

      Apple have definitely not won the laptop game.

      Just because you see lots of wannabe hipsters in Starbucks with an Apple laptop does not mean that Apple has that area of the market all sewn up.

      For instance, take a walk through the offices of pretty much every company and you will see desks full of HP, Dell and Lenovo laptops. And these places tend to have a little more seating capacity than Starbucks.

      You may also be sad to hear that Android is the worlds most popular smartphone OS as well.

      1. PJI

        Re: stating the bleedin obvious

        Never mind S*ks. At least among real coffee drinkers, it is hardly relevant (overpriced and even a GB survey found it was the weakest coffee in the whole of GB; why would one buy coffee of a nation that beats all others to the worst coffee?).

        Walk along any commuter train, wander through any airport and see: business style (Dell for the cheap, Lenovo for the serious firms) or Apple. Even in many companies now, the number of employees armed with Apple is ever more noticeable, not just iPads and iPhones. Among contractors, every other one seems to take an iPad or Macbook Air (or even a 15" pro) to work to test stuff, hold documentation etc..

        No, it is not significant as a serious survey. But it is glaringly clear to see. I suspect most home Windows systems go to the average person who just needs a computer for the internet and email plus a bit of word processing and filling in official forms, or to those whose priority is games. More and more of the others want something easier, more reliable, prettier and better supported. Apple, like it or not, provides all that.

        An aside: I had occasion to play in some depth with W8. It won me over as being responsive and still providing all the usual command line stuff/registry fiddling etc.. Better than my work W7 and aeons ahead of the ghastly XP.

        Another aside: I have supported Linux at work, from Slackware to RHEL and lots in between. I have used several at home and worked too with BSD (my work stuff seems, now to be Solaris and RHEL). Then I found OSX. Linux sort of died, dropped dead really. I do install versions in VMs just to check. But, no, why bother, it's not even proper UNIX.

        1. M Gale

          Re: stating the bleedin obvious

          But, no, why bother, it's not even proper UNIX.

          That's not a bug, it's a feature.

          OS X is not "proper Unix" either. A Bash shell and BSD userland utilities does not a Unix make. Apple did however, grease the right palms in order to be able to say it is.

          And why the obsession with whether an OS is certified to be like an OS from the middle of the 1960s?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: stating the bleedin obvious

      > Glance in any branch of Starbucks

      I would not walk into one of those even if I was under threat of being made to drink a cup of their burning slimey gob.

    3. JDX Gold badge

      Re: stating the bleedin obvious

      Apple can "win the laptop game" without having majority market share. Just as with phones/tablets, by focusing on the top-end you maximise profits per unit. They aren't interested in selling products to people with no money (a H2G2 paraphrase).

  7. pominoz
    Holmes

    But do all Macs run OSX?

    I recently got my wife a 2009 Mac Mini to learn OSX (Mountain Lion) with, because the new company she works for happens to have 2 of them. Anyway, my wife has persevered, but absolutely hates OSX. When I first had a play with it, I felt like I'd been transported back to 1985. What on earth were Apple thinking when they invented that upper task bar thingy? It was obviously designed in a epoch where PCs only had one screen, and it was so tiny that it only made sense to have one program running at a time. Good grief, and that was just the start of our loathing of OSX. Anyway, happily I've managed to dual boot it with a trusty copy of windows 7, so OSX is gathering dust on a tiny corner of the MACs hard drive. Most other people I know with MACs actually also run Windows on their machines so I'm not sure if this really is a true picture of the total market share. I'm running Windows 8.1 on my laptop and even that is far preferable to OSX IMHO, but perhaps I'm just a hopeless MS fan-boy, who knows.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: But do all Macs run OSX?

      With the menus at the top of the screen you always know where the menu bar is going to be.

      Even with Windows only one application can have focus, so it's not as if you can select two menu options at a time in two different apps in Windows.

      Nothing is perfect, but it is generally a smoother ride. Windows changes too randomly and Win 8 for example may suddenly revert back to a Win 7 style GUI. It is this sort of random "all over the shop" style development that makes people want to use OSX.

      I have a Win 7 VM for doing to occasional techie thing I can't do on OSX. I'd not booted it in months, it took about 12 hours before I could use it properly as Windows needed to install 280 updates and reboot about 5 times. I couldn't live with that, I rarely reboot my laptop.

      1. csumpi
        Black Helicopters

        Re: But do all Macs run OSX?

        "With the menus at the top of the screen you always know where the menu bar is going to be."

        Works great for low IQ users. Unfortunately, sucks for everyone else.

        1. Peter 39

          Re: But do all Macs run OSX?

          No - sucks for you.

          There are reasons why Windows does it the way that it does. They have to do with windows (small "w") and not with usability. It is the way that it is.

          1. csumpi

            Re: But do all Macs run OSX?

            "No - sucks for you."

            Yes, it does. Big time. Give you a scenario.

            Let's say I have xcode on screen one, photoshop on screen 2. Working in xcode. Now I need to do something in photoshop from a menu. So I have to mouse over to photoshop on screen 2, activate it, mouse back to screen one, select from the menu, mosue back to xcode.

            And that sucks for usability. Maybe it works on a laptop, one screen, facebook browsing scenario. Not for work. But I do realize that most people only use their computers to update facebook profiles, so I guess they have 99% of the use case of the population covered.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: But do all Macs run OSX?

              So not "sucks for everyone" then? Thanks for clearing up your own point... :-/

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              @csumpi

              If you were the multitasking genius you claim to be you wouldn't be using the menu bar anyway - particularly in photoshop.

            3. PJI

              @csumpi: Re: But do all Macs run OSX?

              I think you need to learn how to use OSX. If you use different screens for different applications (I do, excellent), you have got several ways. The quickest is easy (default I think, configurable to your taste): use the shortcut, <ctrl>-<left or right arrow key>.

              If you learn how to use the powerful tool in front of you, you will realise just why OSX in GUI mode or terminal mode (i.e. BSD UNIX, pick your own shell) is increasingly popular.

              I should be ashamed to display my ignorance so publicly.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: @csumpi: But do all Macs run OSX?

                "terminal mode" Pffft...

            4. Dave 126

              Re: But do all Macs run OSX?

              >Let's say I have xcode on screen one, photoshop on screen 2. Working in xcode. Now I need to do something in photoshop from a menu. So I have to mouse over to photoshop on screen 2, activate it, mouse back to screen one, select from the menu, mosue back to xcode.

              Use the keyboard to switch tasks. Alt-Tab, usually.

            5. Tufty Squirrel

              Re: But do all Macs run OSX?

              >> Let's say I have xcode on screen one, photoshop on screen 2. Working in xcode.

              >> Now I need to do something in photoshop from a menu. So I have to mouse over to

              >> photoshop on screen 2, activate it, mouse back to screen one, select from the

              >> menu, mosue back to xcode.

              That's not only a fairly contrived example (I doubt many developers have XCode and Photoshop open at the same time for work on the same project), but it's also 100% wrong. I currently have emacs on my laptop's built-in monitor (along with Chrome that I'm typing this into, and a bunch of other crap), and IDA Pro (my old windows copy, running in a VirtualBox VM) on the external monitor. Now, should I need to touch the apple menu bar on the external monitor (rare with VirtualBox, it's got shit-all you'd want to fiddle with anyway, but the principle remains the same), I mouse over to the other screen (well, pen, actually, wacom tablet so no dragging needed), activate the app (one click, the same one you'd have to use under windows or a single-screen mac) and the apple menu bar automagically pops up on the external monitor. I'll grant that for a draggy mouse you'd have extra mileage to get to the other screen, but you'd have that under windows as well.

              Horses for courses, really. I use a mac because I like the way it works, it can be made to fit(t) with my workflow. I don't like windows because it can't. A lot of that is probably because it's what I'm used to, that my expectations of how my workflow should flow is at least in part based on the way I'm used to OSX (and MacOS before it) behaving - the same can probably be said regarding your experience and opinion.

              1. This post has been deleted by its author

        2. JLV
          Thumb Down

          >Works great for low IQ users. Unfortunately, sucks for everyone else.

          Yeah, hum, I take you expect us to think you are a high IQ everyman.

          I work on both Windows and OSX and a bit of Linux as well. Menu placement doesn't matter that much either way, it's a low-level aspect of the GUI and I don't sweat it much. A modicum of IQ allows flexibility, no?

          There are tons of other things I care more about in a GUI, such as pinning, task switching and adding shortcuts to start menus (Win 7 beats OSX in that regard and XP was even better. KDE 3.x was nifty there as well).

          I admit the mouse to menu distance in OSX can be annoying and you have to change app focus to get the menu you want. On the other hand, there being only one menu active means a lot of saved screen real estate which is something I am always very sensitive to.

          Besides, the first thing I usually do with a program is to figure out its keyboard shortcuts.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: >Works great for low IQ users. Unfortunately, sucks for everyone else.

            > There are tons of other things I care more about in a GUI, such as pinning, task switching and adding shortcuts to start menus

            KDE4[*] is for you then. :)

            [*] Die Arbeitsumgebung.[**]

            [**] With apologies to Volkswagen.

        3. Wade Burchette

          Re: But do all Macs run OSX?

          "Works great for low IQ users. Unfortunately, sucks for everyone else."

          I've been told that the best way to learn how to use a Mac is turn off your brain. I do not own a Mac, so I do not know if that is true.

      2. M Gale

        Re: But do all Macs run OSX?

        With the menus at the top of the screen you always know where the menu bar is going to be.

        With the relevant menu for the application in question being attached to the window of the application in question, you'll never know where the menu for the relevant application will be?

        Personally I have more of a problem with crappy "unified menu bar" interfaces like OS X and some Linuxy things. Sometimes the menu you want is not for a window that is in focus. Yay, more alt tabbing, yay more mouse clicking.

    2. jason 7

      Re: But do all Macs run OSX?

      In my experience of folks that have moved over to Macs they pretty much all run Windows 7 on them most of the time.

      As the known IT guy I do get annoyed when friends who have just spent £XXXX on a MacBook Pro call me up all cagey trying to scrounge a 'free' copy of Windows 7 off me. Yeah right, I'm just drowning in free give away licenses.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: But do all Macs run OSX?

        >>In my experience of folks that have moved over to Macs they pretty much all run Windows 7 on them most of the time.

        Balls. Some may run it as an extra, in case … via bootcamp or, more sensibly, in a virtual machine (I've still got XP, not used it for a while though).

        I suggest you enquire a little deeper or get to know a few more people.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: But do all Macs run OSX?

          USAians are not UKians or Australians. I noticed many Aussies are using Apples these days. Most of the ones I've seen have MacOS, and the ones I know personally have MacOS *and* Windows installed.

          It's hard to break the habit. It may be harder for USAians. Who knows? Does that mean that they are smarter because Windows is difficult to use? Or does that mean that MS has more advertising and history in the US. Who knows?

          What I do know is that both lick donkey balls. FOSS FTW! Fuck the government, etc. etc. etc. ;)

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: But do all Macs run OSX?

      To counter your argument - all the people with Macs that I know don't run windows on them, (and I know an awful lot of people with Macs - in excess of 100).

    4. JDX Gold badge

      "It was obviously designed in a epoch where PCs only had one screen"

      Like 99% of PCs still do now?

  8. Vociferous

    Interesting that Windows 7 increased linearly until 2012.

    That's the year the Windows 8 beta became freely available for download and the PR blitz started.

    But then the Windows 8 sales then never took off.

    If there is a causal relationship, it would indicate that the market was happy with Windows 7, stopped buying it when it anticipated a new version of Windows to be released -- and was then so underwhelmed by the release version Windows 8 that it didn't buy.

    Even more interestingly Windows 7 seem to have started increasing again in 2014. Perhaps the market no longer expect Windows 8 to replace it anytime soon.

    Depending on how pragmatic Microsoft is feeling, it might be a good idea to consider an overhaul of Windows 7 as a stopgap until Windows 9, and writing Windows 8 off as the unfortunate overreach that it is. The fundamental plan, to converge Windows desktop with windows phone and windows RT, could still go ahead, without the baggage of windows 8. One could even include Metro as an option.

    It might also be worthwhile to reconsider the plan to close Windows and corral users into a walled garden -- that approach is driving off the games distributors, and gaming is the only edge windows has left.

    1. Not That Andrew

      Re: Interesting that Windows 7 increased linearly until 2012.

      Good points. If MS had any sense the would definitely release another service pack for Win 7 and backport DirectX 11.2 and WDDM 1.3 as there is no technical reason for them being Win8 only. But as they have demonstrated to everyone's satisfaction they don't have any.

  9. WylieCoyoteUK
    Alien

    Others?

    I can't help noticing that the "other" category has risen to from almost zero to almost the same level as OSX, and is higher than IOS.

    IS this just a blanket label for unidentified OSes, or a conglomeration of windows2000, 98, and BSD?

    It actually has a higher growth rate than OSX.

    1. Not That Andrew

      Re: Others?

      Probably mostly smartphones and tablets that they aren't identifying properly.

    2. Gravis Ultrasound

      Re: Others?

      ChromeOS

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Others?

        Chrome OS? Is that an operating system or just a remote interface? How good is it with no network?

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Others?

        AmigaOS IS BACK!!!

  10. Brett Weaver

    As a late comer to Windows 8...

    I only just "upgraded" one of my PC's to Windows 8.1 - I am a software developer and I needed to know whether my products had an issue with the latest version.

    Well, I had to load tonnes of new drivers and the "upgrade" killed all of the non system applications.

    I ran into what seem to be every newbies issues: Why do these panels flick out and then never go away? How do I close an application? - I must admit I found the Microsoft answer to the latter breathtaking in its rudeness. It said that applications from the Microsoft store did not slow down my computer and so I should just leave them running...Why do they lie about it? I thought my resorting to Alt-F4 was anachronistic but it seems to be the way its done without having to stroke the hell out of a 26" touch sensitive monitor. Even then, it turns out the applications disappear from the task list on their own time.

    Microsoft make some pretty good software. This is not it. Blind Pew could have seen that people would not like this product. It gives pain for no gain.

    Not trolling.. Just had a singularly unpleasant time with this product and so was interested in the sales stats.

    1. JDX Gold badge

      "applications from the Microsoft store did not slow down my computer"

      Are you sure this isn't true, that they don't get suspended when not in use in the same way as mobile apps typically do?

      I've no idea if they do or not, but it is a possibility.

      1. M Gale

        Re: "applications from the Microsoft store did not slow down my computer"

        http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/hh986968.aspx

        They get "suspended" automatically and may be terminated at any time, which is basically shit outside of a games console and only barely excusable on a smartphone. How a store app can do background processing was not explained either by this document nor by the Microsoft reps that came to tell us students at the time, how chunderfully wonderful this spangling new Metro thing was going to be. How, if you can do background processing, this will not slow the computer down at all, is also similarly not explained anywhere.

        ALT+F4-killed apps are also suspended, and then terminated 10 seconds later, hence the delay.

        Apparently all those store apps are going to magically save all state reliably in the few seconds that the OS deigns to allow your app to have in order to do so. Honest. Yeah, no problems foreseen there. Nope, none at all.

        It's the iPhone and "you don't really need multi tasking or any actual control do you" all over again. Bleurgh.

  11. pirithous

    The Irrelevancy of Windows

    Boxed software is a thing of the past, and charging money for an operating system is becoming a thing of yesteryear. If Microsoft is betting on making money from their foisted failed app store -- you know, the one where they want to take a chunk of developer's income away to line their own pockets, they're taking a risky bet and one which doesn't have light at the end of the tunnel. The existing desktop worked perfectly in the sense of how developers were able to offer their applications, but the technical portions of Windows didn't work perfectly. Those in the know know that Windows is a kludgy mess, and isn't an example of technical superiority. It's not fast, has some major annoyances, and the backwards compatibility aspect really introduces a headache. I'm not saying Linux is perfect either.

    http://linuxfonts.narod.ru/why.linux.is.not.ready.for.the.desktop.current.html

    Linux and Solaris filesystems are way ahead of NTFS and ReFS, and the Linux kernel keeps improving at a rapid pace. In the open source software world, there's a huge effort surrounding projects with widespread interest to continue to make the source code better and more efficient, whereas with Microsoft, they hide their spaghetti code behind a closed source license. They only improve it if it's going to increase their bottom line. They don't improve it just because it's the right thing to do, or because there's a natural "hacker" incentive just to have the best code out there. Not only that, but their user subjugating feudalistic operating system has a known back door in the app store with unknown and undocumented potential, and the OS frequently does nasty things to the user such as spying, etc. Operating systems which have the entire source code available for viewing, studying, and modifying are the only safe choice to ensure the OS will not take advantage of the user. I am somebody that controls my machine, because I own my machine. The software does not control me, and will never control me.

    The whole Windows platform seems to be running out of steam. The paradigm in which it was sold is dying, people are moving to small devices that run iOS or Android, and developers are highly against the app store. It sure sounds like Windows is becoming irrelevant. The Linux desktop keeps improving all the time, and I think has a definite future. It won't happen overnight, but its market share will increase on the desktop in time. Many things still need fixing on the Linux desktop, and we are starting to see more of a concerted effort and less fragmentation, e.g., System D.

    1. JDX Gold badge

      Re: The Irrelevancy of Windows

      Selling an OS isn't an anachronism. Software is free either because it's open source, or because the creator uses the software to make sales in a different way. OSX is only free because you're paying a "Mac Tax" (I hate the phrase "MS tax" but everyone else uses it) by buying their hardware - buy a new Mac or a new PC and you get the OS for free.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Windows vs OSX - unless you have specific applications that require Windows then OSX is pretty much a no-brainer and within a few hours most people would have no issue with the differences. It has a great (and critically easy to use) backup system, full disk encryption, remote desktop (without needing premium versions) and free. Even if you have to run some Windows apps well you can use Bootcamp for that bare metal Windows experience or Parallels / VMware for a virtualised Windows environment.

    As for seeing lots of MacBooks around - again no surprise there - yes they may be more expensive to buy (although the Macbook Air is about the same price as other Ultrabooks) but they tend to last a long time, very well made etc. Some also have spec you just can't get elsewhere or get from Apple first / significantly earlier - retina screens, super long battery life etc. Even if I just wanted to run Windows I'd probably buy a Macbook to run it on.

    1. Tannin
      FAIL

      "free" OSX - what are we smoking today?

      OSX is "free"? Hoolie Doolie, that's the funniest stupid comment I've read for a long, long time.

      1. John Savard

        Re: "free" OSX - what are we smoking today?

        Well, OS X upgrades are free. And one's original copy of OS X comes bundled with a computer, so it doesn't have an explicit price, even if that computer clearly bears a premium price tag.

        1. Ross K Silver badge

          Re: "free" OSX - what are we smoking today?

          Well, OS X upgrades are free. And one's original copy of OS X comes bundled with a computer, so it doesn't have an explicit price, even if that computer clearly bears a premium price tag.

          Not what the AC was saying...

          If you bought an iMac which came bundled with Leopard, you aren't entitled to a free upgrade to Mountain Lion. You also can't do a free upgrade from say Lion to Mavericks as Mountain Lion is a prerequisite.

          The only exception to the free upgrade idea is Mountain Lion -> Mavericks, and I think most would describe that as an update rather than an upgrade.

          So can you explain how "OS X upgrades are free" as you say?

          1. Moeluk

            Re: "free" OSX - what are we smoking today?

            Wow, Ross..you need to chill out a bit before you have some sort of aneurism... however if it helps -

            OS X is free, if you either bought a mac at any point in the last 4 years, or spent a whole £20 to update to snow leopard at any point in the last 4 years, then it is free, and will continue to be free in the future.

            For a mac older than 4 years, i would say that I'd hardly begrudge £20 for an OS upgrade, when you look at the cost of either Win 7 or Win 8 (£154 and £90 respectively..for non oem home prem/standard versions)

            Anyway, you go take a little lie down now before your blood pressure starts to affect seismometers in your local vicinity.

        2. JLV

          >one's original copy of OS X comes bundled with a computer

          I think that point bears repeating.

          Regardless of the relative costs & merits of Windows and OSX I find it most annoying that as a consumer or SOHO you can buy a pricey laptop with Windows on it and it most likely will NOT come with a full-install Windows disk. So, if you want to reformat your system, you are left at the mercy of the vendor's recovery partition or recovery disk mechanisms.

          Ignore serial number activation issues and the like, MS wants to make sure you paid for the OS and that is their approach, like it or not. The problem is that you do not have a universal install media for something you paid for.

          Clearly, Linux users do not have to contend with that. And neither do OSX users.

          p.s. not to mention the annoying OEM/Upgrade/Full + Home/Pro/Enterprise Windows license permutation games.

          1. This post has been deleted by its author

            1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. Ross K Silver badge
      WTF?

      OSX is pretty much a no-brainer and within a few hours most people would have no issue with the differences. It has a great (and critically easy to use) backup system, full disk encryption, remote desktop (without needing premium versions) and free.

      Free, who told you that? Oh, you mean you burnt a copy of a friend's install disk?

      That's the great thing about OS X, no pesky serial numbers or WGA...

      Mavericks is a free update to Mountain Lion - which had to be bought and paid for through the Mac App Store. $20 was the price I believe.

      Lion? That cost $30

      Snow Leopard was $30 also.

      Leopard was $120-130

      1. PJI

        Cost of upgrade to Mavericks

        quote from Apple:

        "While you have the About This Mac window open, check what version of OS X your Mac is running. You’ll see it listed beneath your serial number.

        You can upgrade to OS X Mavericks from Snow Leopard (10.6.8), Lion (10.7), or Mountain Lion (10.8). Click the link below if you have an older version of OS X."

        https://www.apple.com/osx/how-to-upgrade/at

        And that is free of cost.

    3. Sandtitz Silver badge

      @AC

      "but they tend to last a long time"

      What's the point in (supposedly) enduring hardware if Apple has cut software support? Upgrade to OSX 10.9 is free IF Apple has deemed that your old Leopard/Snow Leopard era machine is eligible. Also, Mavericks (and earlier) certainly do not have 100% backwards compatibility with software or hardware.

      Anything older than OSX 10.7 aren't supported. Snow Leopard (10.6) was released almost simultaneously with Windows 7 and the latter still has a good 6 years or so of life support. Probably even more if Microsoft extends the kill date as they did with XP.

    4. Oninoshiko

      Actually, the backup system blows balls, particularly for an end user. The reason is that it silently fails to backup open files, Also, recent version of iPhoto require you to restore an entire library. There are numerous complaints about these behaviors, and it's unreasonable to expect the level of user Apple targets to understand these problems (hell, they make it hard enough for a technically literate person to find), all they know is their photo collection is gone.

      Oh and there is no way to set a reasonable time-length to keep backups on an external storage media. Time machine wants to take the whole thing, for some reason.

  13. Ross K Silver badge
    Gimp

    In Other News, Linux Is Still A Nonentity...

    Linux's market share stood at 0.62 per cent as 2008 came to a close, and has risen to 1.76 per cent as of this month.

    Wow! Linux desktop market share TRIPLED from nothing to still-nothing in only five short years.

    Gotta put a positive spin on it for the linux fanbois...

    1. Cirdan
      Linux

      Re: In Other News, Linux Is Still A Nonentity...

      Actually, Linux NOT having a huge market share is a good thing for me.

      I am happy that there are not many people with low technical skills using Linux, as that means that I am not targeted as often by malware that would target the less canny.

      Security through obscurity isn't a valid method for a business, but it's a heck of a good layer for a home enthusiast user.

      You know, nobody has stolen any of my cars despite the fact they all carry a full set of keys on the underside of the vehicle. But it saved me from a locked running car 400 km from home, and I talked my 69 year old mother through finding her buried set of keys over a cell phone while she was 200 km from home, locked out in a snowstorm.

      Linux... Does the job, price is right, fun to use, and less likely to get pwned by my own stupidity.

      Keep Linux market share small! I don't want to have to go BSD (or ReactOS, $Diety forbid).

      Windows 8.1 FTW!!!1!!!!!!!!111!!!!!!!

      1. Ross K Silver badge
        Facepalm

        Re: In Other News, Linux Is Still A Nonentity...

        Actually, Linux NOT having a huge market share is a good thing for me.

        I am happy that there are not many people with low technical skills using Linux, as that means that I am not targeted as often by malware that would target the less canny.

        Two things:

        (1) Malware isn't written for linux as there is no return on investment for the writer. Virgins living in their parents' basement generally don't have credit card numbers, or any other valuable information, to steal.

        (2) I guess I don't need to put a positive spin linux's dismal market share as the fanbois appear to be too deluded/demented to care.

        1. Cirdan
          Headmaster

          Re: In Other News, Linux Is Still A Nonentity...

          @ Ross K:

          Argumentum ad hominem.

          (Informal logical fallacies...

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem)

          ...Cirdan...

          P.S. This ends now. No flame wars. Been there, done that, got the mouse pad in 1994.

          Regarding your post:

          ">Two things:

          >(1) Malware isn't written for linux as there is no return on investment for the writer. Virgins living in their parents' basement generally don't have credit card numbers, or any other valuable information, to steal.

          >(2) I guess I don't need to put a positive spin linux's dismal market share as the fanbois appear to be too deluded/demented to care."

          1. Ross K Silver badge
            Gimp

            Re: In Other News, Linux Is Still A Nonentity...

            An ad hominem argument implies that I was attacking a personal trait of yours.

            Were you upset at being accused of being a virgin basement dweller, or of being a demented fanboi?

            Or both?

            BTW I had chose not rise to your comment that you're "happy that there are not many people with low technical skills using Linux", as if you and other linux users were some kind of ubermensch..

            Argumentum ad hominem.

            (Informal logical fallacies...

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem)

            Also, citing anything using a wikipedia link is the last refuge of the feeble-minded.

            Now that's an ad hominem... TTFN.

      2. JDX Gold badge

        "Linux NOT having a huge market share is a good thing for me."

        Yeah whatever. When it sucks and nobody wants it you Linux dweebs will be all "we like it this way, keep the software crap and hard to use so noobs will stay away". If it ever does start to challenge for mainstream market share, you'll change your tune faster than an iPos Shuffle and be crowing about how you knew this day would come, Linux is so awesome, etc, etc.

        Nobody is buying it.

    2. John Savard

      Re: In Other News, Linux Is Still A Nonentity...

      The benefit of a low market share for Linux, security, even if through obscurity, was mentioned.

      The drawback of a low market share is, of course, a more limited availability of third-party software. There's a reason why Windows sells so well, and it isn't anything written in nice, friendly letters on the box either. (Mind you, it would be helpful advice for when you see a blue screen...)

    3. Chemist

      Re: In Other News, Linux Is Still A Nonentity...

      "Wow! Linux desktop market share TRIPLED from nothing to still-nothing in only five short years."

      And almost everyone in that number chose to install Linux, either on a clean machine or dual-boot. That percentage is a massive figure given that most people have to accept what they are given, can generally only buy PCs with Windows pre-installed or don't know/care anyway. The figure probably represents ~~20 million users.

      Your sneering insult in your second post BTW only serves to highlight your ignorance and prejudice. It demeans you and taints any posts you make

      (non-virgin, non-sub-parentally dwelling, 39 years married scientist)

      1. Ross K Silver badge
        Gimp

        Re: In Other News, Linux Is Still A Nonentity...

        And almost everyone in that number chose to install Linux, either on a clean machine or dual-boot. That percentage is a massive figure given that most people have to accept what they are given, can generally only buy PCs with Windows pre-installed or don't know/care anyway. The figure probably represents ~~20 million users.

        What does choice have to do with it?

        So what if linux is installed on 1.76% of the planet's desktops?

        It's a nonentity, as I already wrote.

        I don't see how someone choosing to install it makes it worthy in some way.

        Are you saying it could have been something™ if it wasn't for the evil Gates and Jobs foisting Windows and OS X on the people with "low technical skills", those incapable of choosing to install linux?

        1. Chemist

          Re: In Other News, Linux Is Still A Nonentity...

          "Are you saying it could have been something™ "

          No, I'm saying what I wrote - that's what honest people generally do - not prevaricate or lie even. I don't give a hoot for Gates or Jobs if people want to use their software so be it.

          On the other hand I don't get your motive : are you really so worried by this 'small' percentage that you have to try to run it down. What is it to you ?

          People aren't being lured into Linux they chose as I said. It's been good for me for nearly twenty years, I don't use anything else and I can do everything I want. Edit/render HD video, develop RAW DSLR images, run GoogleEarth, Skype, use a 3G dongle, masses of scientific software and much more. I have a low-energy file server, 3 desktops, 1 netbook and two laptops including a brand new 4 core i7 and none have ever had Windows installed except an old laptop that was given to me because it was unusable after a Window update.

        2. Chemist

          Re: In Other News, Linux Is Still A Nonentity...

          "What does choice have to do with it?"

          "I don't see how someone choosing to install it makes it worthy in some way"

          Don't you understand ? As people actively have to install it it automatically means the installed base is small. Only if many PC suppliers provide a good selection of hardware pre-installed will it be possible to say what the potential Linux market is. Judging by Android it might be quite large

        3. keithpeter Silver badge
          Pint

          Re: In Other News, Linux Is Still A Nonentity...

          "So what if linux is installed on 1.76% of the planet's desktops?

          It's a nonentity, as I already wrote."

          @Ross K

          The raw numbers game does not matter too much when you don't sell the thing you are counting. Its all that fuzzy 'influence' stuff that matters a bit more. Mind share and all.

          (Each to his/her own. I'm just wasting a bit of time between bursts of work on a sunny Sunday.)

          Beer icon: should be a Guinness today. Parade is going past...

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Popular != best

            Linux doesn't benefit from billions spent on advertising campaigns. Instead, Linux is the victim of FUD and smear campaigns.

            It isn't forcibly bundled with new systems, and there are numerous hurdles for those installing Linux.

            The majority have already been using Apple or Windows for years, and there is 2 decades of vendor lock-in to break from.

            For someone to even hear about Linux, believe it's a viable OS, acquire and jump through the hoops and install it, then migrate apps and learning... is a miracle that the usage of Linux (in the desktop) is even counted in millions? Or does that just speak for itself?

            Anyway, end-point OS is becoming more and more irrelevant as the 'web increases (despite MS historically making IE shite on purpose). For me, it makes sense for developers to use the same platform that serves the Web.

            Personally, I couldn't give a shit about what the masses use. I don't want to use something that Grandma can use - I want to use something that a computer professional can use. Technical people work better with technical tools.

            So I'm enjoying my unified experience, power, flexibility, and vendor choice across my desktops, phablets, web+mail server, router, media centres+server and raspberry pi (and soon console).

            So put that in your pipe and smoke it!

      2. Wensleydale Cheese
        Happy

        Re: In Other News, Linux Is Still A Nonentity...

        "And almost everyone in that number chose to install Linux, either on a clean machine or dual-boot. "

        Not any more. I've got lots of Linux installations here but all apart from one of them are in virtual machines.

        Just imagine, no more hassles with GRUB or Windows overwriting your boot block :-)

    4. Daniel von Asmuth
      Windows

      Re: In Other News, Linux Is Still A Nonentity...

      If 1 % of all desktops and laptops run Linux, that's a dazzling number, even though the desktop market be declining. Apple? I've been told Jobs has ascended into cyberspace, let's wait till they find a new leader. Microsoft? I've been told they have a new leader. Let's wait and see where he will lead. Windows? When will it be retired in favor of Midori?

    5. Bladeforce

      Re: In Other News, Linux Is Still A Nonentity...

      I know it's just a shame Redmond is sat on a 90% dinosaur that cant innovate like the 1.76% of Linux does

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: In Other News, Linux Is Still A Nonentity...

      Ross K, grow up a bit mate.

  14. ThomH

    Just regression towards the mean?

    With no evidence other than personal bias to suggest a causative link, surely the correct assumption is the standard: success is part skill, part luck and hence extreme success implies extreme luck. Since luck is random, over time extreme luck will always decline. So even those who are still doing everything under their own control perfectly will see declining prospects.

    (though, obviously, I'd love it if the story were Windows 8 + migration away from this category of computing device while those that were buying the expensive ones continue to have the money to buy one of everything)

  15. John Savard

    Obvious

    There's an obvious way for Microsoft to arrest this decline. Unfortunately, it won't make them any money.

    Continue support for Windows XP indefinitely.

  16. W. Anderson

    It is not possible for NetmatketShare and/or StatCounter to have any credible or verifiable information on the real world marketshare of Linux, precisely since these two companies and all the Market research firms do not and cannot tract Linux replacements of Windows by individuals, business, organizations or governments. Many "foreign" government, particularly in Europe and South America have no OS deployment data available to US business. Nor have these two firms accounted for the millions (published reported) of entities using "Thin Clients" as Desktops that server Windows, Mac OS X and Linux services.

    Such 'realiy' should be clearly and unambiguously stated by both these two firms and others.

    In 2014 Marketshare of software - or brand hardware - use should not and in most cases does not represent the relative value of a product, in regard quality, robustness, flexibility, scalability, critical security capability or Return on Investment (ROI). Any one choosing a technology software product on the basis of popularity or marketshare is a fool

  17. Cirdan
    Trollface

    Gold badge trolls are made, not born.

    My dear fellow Commentards:

    Sorry I fed the troll earlier.

    I forgot that he_who_shall_not_be_named who posted above is the ANTI-EADON.

    I just want to know which journalist is playing him.

    Gold stars are granted, not earned.

    :-)

    Makes for a livelier forum, though.

    ...Cirdan...

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Gold badge trolls are made, not born.

      "Gold badge trolls are made, not born. "

      Bronze badge trolls are made, not born. - fixed that for you

      1. JDX Gold badge

        Re: Gold badge trolls are made, not born.

        Someone's a bit jealous.

  18. David Lawton

    I'm not surprised , 5 years ago I knew nobody with a mac (my self included). I was a strong Windows user. After Vista, and even 7 I just don't enjoy windows anymore. It's bloated, and I'm getting fed up of the dumbing down of the interface they keep doing with every version. Windows 2000 interface was great, but just look at the default control panel afterwards like in XP you had to select classic to get it right, in fact I had to go everywhere selecting classic, or turning off simple file sharing which actually made things harder. Metro was the final straw.

    Now I know only 1 person in my close friends who has a machine running Windows, we have all converted to mac and we're much happer, we love OS X it's just better and we're not installing endless updates everyday, or fighting a new malware every week.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. Hans 1

      Come on, in all fairness, I love OS X, but they have dumbed down the interface a lot as well ... try and access the root of the harddrive from the ui ? Need to create an alias ... Ok, nothing like Windows, I agree, but still, dumbing down it is ... Linux and FreeBSD are better at that.

  19. KayUK

    Perhaps missing the point?

    It's very interesting that the headline number is "now less than 90%", but let's stand back a bit.

    These are Web Access Statistics. The figures that really matter therefore can only be those related to "What are people using to access the web", and the numbers are very different. In fact, due to the changing way in which we access the net, Microsoft is now down to about 64%

    NETAPPLICATIONS gives:-

    64.50% Microsoft

    20.87% Apple (OSX + iOS)

    11.86% Linux (GNU/Linux + Android)

    2.77% Other

    STATCOUNTER gives:-

    63.95% Microsoft

    15.51% Apple (OSX + iOS)

    15.02% Linux (GNU/Linux + Android)

    5.50% Other

    1. Richard Plinston

      Re: Perhaps missing the point?

      > These are Web Access Statistics.

      They are rather limited web access statistics as 1) it measures only those sites that subscribe to the particular trackers 2) it measures hits not machines or users 3) it only measures those who do not avoid tracking (NoScript, Ghostery, many others).

      It is far more likely that someone who bought a machine in a shop, uses only the software provided, has JavaScript running, and keeps the home page already installed will be measured - and measured for all hits including ads and popups.

      Thus the statistics are heavily skewed to unsophisticated users, ie typical Widows users (and Mac).

      1. Tim99 Silver badge
        Meh

        Re: Perhaps missing the point?

        @Richard Plinston

        "...Thus the statistics are heavily skewed to unsophisticated users, ie typical Widows users (and Mac).

        Er, I run Ghostery, Privoxy, a customized hosts file, and a couple of other goodies. Obviously, I am an unsophisticated user as I run them on a Mac...

        1. Richard Plinston

          Re: Perhaps missing the point?

          >. "...Thus the statistics are heavily skewed to unsophisticated users, ie typical Widows users (and Mac).

          > Er, I run Ghostery, Privoxy, a customized hosts file, and a couple of other goodies. Obviously, I am an unsophisticated user as I run them on a Mac...

          As you are thus unlikely to feature in the statistics, and are not typical, then you do not fit in the category 'unsophisticated users'.

    2. Charlie Clark Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      Re: Perhaps missing the point?

      Have to scroll to page three to find someone who actually takes issue with the core claim? Wow, that is bad even for El Reg.

      The headline did its work as clickbait it would seem and nearly everyone was happy to jump in and have flame wars about OSes.

      The trend over the last few years is not between "desktop" OSes but the move to mobile browsing, which can only be a proxy for installed OSes. El Reg will know this from its own statistics and could have improved the article considerably by using them to give additional context. Sigh.

      As for all those remarks re. script/ad-blockers: it is relatively easy to see how much these are in used by carefully comparing server logs with script generated traffic. My understanding is that the proportion of users using them is still small, although large enough in some countries like Germany for some companies (United Internet) to try and take action against users. In any case it can be controlled for and reflected in the statistics.

      A greater problem with these statistics is how they are obtained and particularly which sites use them. Sites such as The Register don't, for example. Again, it would have made sense to compare El Reg's statistics with those of StatCounter and NetApplications.

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    BRING BACK XP - PLEEEEEZE

    BRING BACK XP - PLEEEEEZE

  21. Bladeforce

    Desktop share is trending

    down for sure but Windows as regards TOTAL OS share is running 25% and thats being kind. Redmond your dictatorial ways are long over, thankfully for us little guys and dolls

  22. KayUK

    Microsoft now down to 64%

    I keep hearing about this "90%" of Microsoft, but I note also that the latest figures from both NetApplications and from StatCounter show much the same figure.... 64%

    The rest is almost equally shared between Apple (OSX +iOS), and Linux (GNU/Linux and Android Linux)

    Also, can we keep in mind that these figures have nothing to do with Market Share - they are Usage Shares.

    Market Shares (percentage of devices currently being sold) for non-Microsoft kit must be very much more than these figures indicate. It's quite possible that Microsoft's Market Share of "internet accessing devices" is down to something like 20%

    The world is changing.

    1. JDX Gold badge

      Re: Microsoft now down to 64%

      Including all devices isn't the same thing at all though. PCs may be losing out in device market share but it's still relevant to analyse how the PC market breaks down, just as it is relevant to see how the mobile phone and tablet markets break down.

  23. DCFusor

    Linux will be under the radar

    Well, I live in an entire neighborhood of people who run linux. Maybe becuase I support them for almost nothing if they do. They think it's worth a glass of wine + steak if I fix their stuff, the need for which is relatively rare. Mostly it's just asking them "is there paper in the printer" types of issues.

    Note that I've set them up 100% so anytime they report what they are - they report that they are windows boxes running IE, or OSX. That way, all the brain-dead script kiddies send them viruses/malware that won't run on their box.

    Saves me a lot of work, and them a lot of trouble. I don't let them run wine. I do let them run windows, in virtual box, without a network connection, and refuse to support that for under $100/hour, 1 hour minimum, 1.000001 hours counts as two. Funny, support is important, it pretty much convinced them all. Tried microsoft support lately? "Steve" in india will gladly run you through a drop-down list that even he doesn't understand, after long delays, that likely won't fix your issue anyway. Or send you to their really expensive pay-for support, who will still take quite awhile to get you going. On your dime.

    No way the numbers reported are, or can be, accurate in any way. Linux lets you be anything to the world, and most savvy sysadmins long ago learned how to report they are something else, as a security measure.

    Not that I care, myself. I got quite wealthy writing code for and fixing the abortion that used to be windows - I should probably thank them for that. I no longer run it here, though, even though with 7, it's almost good. 8.x is as daft as Unity on ubuntu. How again is a touchscreen OS good on my supercomputer with 4 HD non-touch monitors?

    They don't get it - PC hardware isn't selling because everyone has one already, and it's good enough. Like color TV's sudden drop in sales - it's a replacement market now, not a growth one anymore. That doesn't mean everyone ditched them, just that there's no need to buy another yet. Especially if you've tuned it with efficient software, rather than succumbing to bloated stuff that requires upgrades. That game is *over*.

  24. NYC1994

    ONE MORE THING

    Actually, if ALL platforms (including mobile) are included in sales statistics then in 2000 Windows had an overall 96% market share. In 2013 Windows had a just a 36% market share. As I think Balmer has admitted in recent interviews, the failure to recognize early on the advent of mobile computing was the single greatest failing of his years as MS CEO. In today's tech world unless you have a really great product in a given category or one that can differentiate from the competition in a major way it is hard to play catch-up. I think MS will continue to dominate the desktop (and especially the enterprise) for a long time but it may be too late for the company to catch up with the mobile juggernaut of the past few years.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: ONE MORE THING

      The funny thing is, MS did get on board with mobile computing early on - but like every trend in computing, they did their best to tie it back to the Windows+Office monopoly. So even though Windows Mobile was a top mobile OS when the iPhone came out, that market share was ripe for the picking thanks to the compromises inherent in WM being designed to serve a platform other than the one on which it ran.

  25. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    How do you measure sucess?

    So the Linux desktop has increased market share 286 percent in 5 years with no maketing or backing of big business and is still growing.

    If MS had more competition on the desktop maybe they would make better products?

    In the server market where Linux provides strong competition MS has put a lot of resource into improving their Server software.

    More Linux on the desktop would improve Windows.

    Competition is good.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: How do you measure sucess?

      > So the Linux desktop has increased market share 286 percent in 5 years with no maketing or backing of big business and is still growing.

      Correct for the marketing, but incorrect as regards "backing of big business". Most of the investment in Linux comes from pretty big businesses from many different technological camps (ref.: kernel contribution stats).

      Its market share increases because computing is more and more pervasive and an OS of some description is another part of the machinery needed to deliver a computer-based product to the consumer (be it a phone, a car entertainment system, an ADSL modem, a weather modelling cluster, or whatever else).

  26. Scott 9

    Another Windows/MAC flame war, *again*

    Windows has been shooting themselves in the foot ever since they came out with activation for XP. 8.1 is actually a pretty nice operating system, but as with many other people I had install Classic Shell to make it usable, and the Charms Bar still comes up at inopportune times. However general speed, core parking on Intel processors, and network reliability are all much better.

    If anything XP was too successful, and they didn't parlay Windows 7's success by making 7.5 rather than 8. A Windows 7 that was cheaper and maybe even activation free would have been a killer. I'm surprised that the Office and gaming divisions are doing so well. Office is being hit in the groin by Google Apps and Open Office, and the Xbox pretty much requires a subscribed Gold account to do anything other than run single player games.

    It would have been better to see how Android/Linux splits up; every IT person I know runs or uses Linux, but that quickly goes away once you get away from jobs that require scripting and maintaining servers. Despite 20+ years it really hasn't made a dent in the mainstream. Android, the OSX without Apple, seems to be doing that.

    And lastly Apple......take all the energy from the PC/Mac flame wars and put it into a furnace and you could heat the world. I've tried Macs, on a Mini, desktop, and a laptop, and will not use one again. I want to choose the hardware I use, and play games, and use a lot of software that either isn't on a Mac or would require me to buy everything all over again to use it on a Mac. I also have found almost 100% Mac users are vocal fanboys who love to tout how great a Mac is but when it comes to anything really technical simply flounder. Stick with graphics and "creativity," amd quit trying to impress us with your misbegotten brilliance.

    1. JEDIDIAH
      Devil

      Trying to hard...

      This is just fanboys trying too hard to kid themselves. Apple lost the platform wars of the 80s. That's over and done with. They even formally abdicated to all of that by focusing on consumer electronics. Apple isn't even holding onto this delusion. Sure, Apple gained a little over the Jobs years but not much really. Not enough to really change things. The Mac remains an great demonstration of the idea that you can do everything right and have the better product and still fail in the marketplace.

  27. Thatvoiceinmyhead

    What are those dotted things?

    So, the 2nd graph was interesting but the dotted line was "everything else OS" on a desktop or tablet (laptops seem to be specifically not included in the headline)? Since Android wasn't listed can we basically assume that that's what this is then?

    And if the dotted line is in effect all those Android tabs out there, since it is higher than any of Linux, iOS and Vista, and almost as high as Win8 and MacOSX, why wasn't it given a legend?

    And why leave Android out of the survey anyway, when it's clearly so important in the tablet market? Or is it just that the StatCounter people are stupid and can't put graphs together correctly?

  28. Hillman_Hunter

    Not the story, Windows 8 still struggling "Other" kicking off big time

    Despite the monster success of iOS there really has not been a shift to OSX. OK a steady very slow leak but is hardly worth the ink to print the headline.

    Despite that consumers are forced to use it and on some pretty crap adware in my experience. However W8 is hardly growing! people don't like it, W7 was a great successes and people do( quickly abandoned by MS ) even in this environment Linux is going nowhere Apple is I bit better than flat. "Other" is the one worthy of the story. I presume this is Chrome and down to the inexpensive hardware. People just give it a go. given the rise and rise of the IOS pastiche Android, it seems that this is the real threat to MS not OSX

  29. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "Apple's OS X share more than doubles in past six years, Windows below 90% – first time since the 90s"

    This makes perfect sense! The whole Apple thing died years ago and only now are consumers buying macs. Yeah, too late to the party! Typical end user. 100 years behind the industry, thinking they're great. Why oh why must I be surrounded by these 'tards?

  30. irneb

    Other OSs

    What is in those Other OS's? For that matter where does Android fall (seeing as you list iOS but not Android)?

  31. Hans 1

    Re: This post has been deleted by a moderator

    LOL, guyz, take it easy when you comment.

    This years academy awards for operating system software:

    Productivity: nominated all - winner: GNU/Linux

    Malware Support: nominated Windows - winner: Windows

    Ease of use: nominated all - winner: Mac OS X

    Software: nominated all - winner: GNU/Linux

    Games: nominated Windows, OS X - winner: Windows

    Drivers: nominated Windows, GNU/Linux - winner: GNU/Linux

    TCO: nominated OS X, GNU/Linux - winner: GNU/Linux

    User interface esthetics: nominated OS X - winner: OS X

    User Interface ease-of-use: nominated OS X, GNU/Linux - winner: GNU/Linux

    Command line: nominated OS X, GNU/Linux - winner: GNU/Linux

    Now, if you are into overpriced software, I guess you could say Software: OS X or Software: Windows ...

    1. JDX Gold badge

      Re: This post has been deleted by a moderator

      Good attempt but saying Linux has the best UI makes it a bit too obvious. Also since most of the software written and work done on computers by people generally is done on Windows computers, clearly Linux can't win productivity either.

  32. Glen Turner 666

    All this shows is that the analysis company is behind the times. Let me count the ways.

    1) Tablets. Where are they?

    2) Phones. Where are they?

    3) Laptops are the choice of people who need to create content and people who need the cheapest computer possible (Chromebook). That explains the rise of MacOS as a proportion, as pure content consumers have moved to tablets. Also the market quantities are falling and this pushed back through percentages: simply put MacOS users are wealthier, and so more able to afford both a tablet and a laptop.

    4) Desktops and laptops are no longer serve the same audience. Gamers want desktops. So you really need to pull out retail desktops as a distinct figure.

    5) Sales figures undercount Linux on desktop and laptop. Web usage figures ignore the main revenue from Linux, which is from server and embedded use.

    6) The retail and business motivations for purchasing computers have never been so different. Lumping them together doesn't give insight.

    Insight is the point collecting data. But this has been presented so that it gives no insight. In fact it is misleading, you'd think that Microsoft with a 90% share of laptop+desktop computing was doing fine. In fact presenting it as percentages is poor: you get no idea of the huge shrinkage in sales.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like