back to article Windows 7's grip on the enterprise desktop is loosening

Microsoft last week updated its Windows 10 usage data, claiming 270 million devices now run its newest operating system. We've updated our numbers, too, namely the three sources we use to assess desktop operating system market share. And on our numbers, if Windows 10 is on 270 million devices Windows 7 is on about 750 million …

Silver badge

is this bit a leftover from earlier draft

"Remember, also, that smartphones are selling at a rate of a billion a year, most on Android"

And how does that affect the enterprise desktop?

You shouldn't include a fact unless you are going to do something with it to inform the reader how it is related to the subject.

16
4

Re: is this bit a leftover from earlier draft

I'm guessing that the correlation between the two is that due to the lack of WinPhone sales, users aren't clamouring for a universal "look and feel" which may drive a potential uptake for Win10 on enterpise systems.

17
0
Silver badge

Re: is this bit a leftover from earlier draft

And how does that affect the enterprise desktop?

It doesn't. But it affects the total market size, the enterprise size isn't quoted.

In any case, MS is really worried about BYOD with Android and IOS eventually making inroads into the enterprise market. Hence, the focus on cloud and MS apps for the dominant mobile platforms.

You shouldn't include a fact unless you are going to do something with it to inform the reader how it is related to the subject.

None of these regular articles on stats bear much scrutiny. For example, the variation in Win 10 market share between NetMarketShare and StatCounter is greater than the margin of error.

14
0

Re: is this bit a leftover from earlier draft

The paragraph continues

" iPads are still selling decently. Some PCs just won't ever be replaced."

While it fails to mention Android tablets it does indicate the relevance of the link; a lot of consumers are not replacing Windows PCs and are opting instead for a non-Windows tablet or smartphone. My Mother is one of them. They are suitable for email and web-browsing but not much use for significant data/text entry. Simple use is what most non-enterprise users want.

20
0

Re: is this bit a leftover from earlier draft

Brother abandoned his laptop for a Samsung tablet, wifes parents couldn't give away theirs when they started using iPads exclusively. Niece needs a pc for degree work but uses her phone for everything else.

The death of the pc in consumer land is further along than many of us want to believe, an optional extra not necessity. Microsoft didn't shit on their own product without reason, the market changed, it's the implementation they got wrong.

25
0

Re: is this bit a leftover from earlier draft

For some a iThingy or Fandroid will work in the consumer/private use field. For others - not so much.

If you are into photography with a DSLR/DSLM, into drawing on/with the computer or into some serious gaming the ARM CPU and attached hardware won't do. That is (and will be for the near future) the domain of full sized CPU and often Windows/CS Software (i.e GIMP can replace PS Elements - if your time is cheap)

8
5
Silver badge

Re: is this bit a leftover from earlier draft

I agree.

The home PC/Laptop/Mac is really for SoHo use and only had a role in pure domestic use when there was no other way to do email/internet/social medja. People don't seem to write letters much these days. :-( But the Android phone has given users all these functions and with added games at an affordable price.

In the office, PCs are much more capable than they even need to be with software that already does far more than most people want- and machines last for years.

So the refresh cycle is much longer than once it was.

20
0
Silver badge

Re: is this bit a leftover from earlier draft

"For some a iThingy or Fandroid will work in the consumer/private use field. For others - not so much."

Hence the article's statement that some PCs won't be replaced.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: is this bit a leftover from earlier draft

I suppose sometimes w10 boots up on some of my machines, especially the ones where i forgot to switch PXE boot on. Then the imaging software takes care of that anomaly.

1
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: is this bit a leftover from earlier draft

We have a pc in the house,it gets switched on by me for Android development... There it. It's Chromebook, Android tablets (my pixel C and keryboiard is amazingly good) and android phones.

There PS4 handles gaming and TV streaming. No need for PC outside my single use case. Why anyone else would want a malware prone 2000s windows device is beyond me..

2
2
Silver badge

Re: is this bit a leftover from earlier draft

You use Android and you call Windows malware prone?

Most Android devices are not kept up to date on security updates... a lot never get updated at all during their entire service life. Top tier makers like Samsung will usually push a few updates while the device is still in warranty, then you're on your own, and even Google's Nexus (where the updates were one of the selling points) get abandoned pretty quick once they're no longer the current generation.

I have a 7" Android tablet, but it sees little use compared to my PC. Why would I want to mess with a tiny screen device with the clumsy touch interface and even clumsier on-screen keyboard when I can use a real machine with a 25 inch monitor, real mouse, and mechanical-key keyboard, terabytes of local storage, not to mention more CPU power than my 8 year old laptop has (unlike nearly all smart phones)? It would be like driving around town on a riding lawnmower when I have a Lexus available.

I don't see very much value in mobile devices for my own use (other than doing it at work when I really should be working and not playing). If I'm out and about, I'd rather do whatever it is I am out doing than mess with a phone. If I am out with friends, I'd rather concentrate on that and let the glowing screens wait until I have time where I'm not doing anything else. And if that is the case, why would I stay out and use a phone for whatever when I can return home and do the same on my PC?

If I'm home, why bother with underpowered, clumsy things like phones and tablets when a PC with far superior ergonomics is available? I can use my PC for hours with relatively little discomfort, with the keyboard, mouse, and display all set up for maximum comfort, with a well-chosen chair and desk. The immobility is a strength if I don't have to be using it when I am out-- it means I can set everything up to be just right.

As for a console gaming system... it's a PC at its core anyway. Why would I buy one of those when my actual PC is superior in every way?

My tablet mainly sees use in situations when there is unavoidable waiting. It's a poor substitute for my actual PC, but it's a whole lot more portable. Fortunately, I am not in a job where I am subjected to long periods of waiting around (at airports or on planes, etc), so this time is minimized.

Browsing the web on the tiny 7 inch screen is frustrating and annoying for me. It's a small tablet, but still a little bit bigger than the biggest phones. I don't know how people can view them as anything but "it works in a pinch because I happen to have it on me, but it really sucks" devices.

1
0
Silver badge

If they'd made Windows 10...

...more like Windows 7 (no slurping, no child-like flat graphics from the bad old days of limited colour pallet, no Metro at all anywhere), it's share would be far higher.

Win 10 is gaining share partly by ripping Win 7 from the grasping, clawing hands (through forced upgrades) of frustrated users who don't want to lose Win 7. Frustrated users are less likely to give MS money in the future than happy users. C'mon MS, what does it matter what license we buy? Stop cocking about and sell what people actually want, rather than forcibly give them something they don't want.

If MS say that Win 10 is on 270 million devices, that sounds a bit like the total PC sales count for the year Win X has been out. Does that mean that PC sales have really bombed, or have most people managed to resist the forced upgrade?

44
9
Silver badge

Re: If they'd made Windows 10...

If the majority of commentards here (sorry Windows 10 Fans) are anything to go by then they are really working hard to avoid having anything to do with Windows 10.

This will, in time come to bite MS really badly. If the IT Bods hate it then there will be less real effort going into doing their business upgraded (a few IMHO frankly silly companies excepted that is).

Then the average punter who uses a computer at work will see and use something different they may well take those experiences home and make the switch there as well.

As Linux/BSD/Linux based systems are basically free then there won't be much capital cost in moving away from W10. Indeed, there may well be some capital expenditure avoided simply because device makers can't be half arsed into making W10 compatible drivers for their bits of kit. Yet many will work OOTB with FOSS Software.

{posted from a Windows 10 free Environment}

44
12
Silver badge

Re: If they'd made Windows 10...

Last month we spent a pleasant time changing all the computers for a client over to Open Suse and the company hasn't missed a beat.

The reason for the change. The MD had his computer, that had been running Win7, forcibly changed to win 10. I can't see them changing back no matter what microsoft does in the future.

37
1

Re: If they'd made Windows 10...

Let me see. My private/BYOD "Notebook" is a Lenovo Helix (A-series). If I put a Linux on it I will loose:

+ Use of the WACOM hardware (Linux drivers are "early beta" IF they exist for the choosen Distri)

+ Use of OneNote and Journal with their local storage / store in company Sharepoint capabilities (It's Windows so it's allowed in the company network/domain, Evernotes "cloud only" approach does not work for my usage)

+ Use of DPP, Lightroom and PS Elements (With an external USB-3 SSD)

+ Use of EyeFi Cards and Selphy Photoprinter

+ Use of MiraCast

+ Use of about 20 programs for my hobby that do not exist in non-Windows versions

+ Use of Outlook/Exchange (It's Windows so it's allowed in the company network/domain)

16
8

Re: If they'd made Windows 10...

Thing is I don't know any IT bods who do hate it, most just see it as another OS to be deployed and managed. There are two types who have reservations about it:

1. Anti-MS bods, but it wouldn't matter what OS MS came out with they'd find an excuse to bash it.

2. infosec bods, who are more worried about the slurping, cloud elements than anything else.

You aren't going to have this mad dash to linux, it's not going to happen, not now and not in 10 years. If it ever does happen it will be incredibly slow due to how embedded MS are, get the processes and tools in place to allow the shift then it might happen - but until then there's no chance.

Heck 99% of IT staff I've known over the past 15 years haven't touched Unix or linux in the past 5+ years.

17
27

Re: If they'd made Windows 10...

Group 3) is not really a "hater" but the "We have just recently migrated to Win7" group is strong in company IT. And why not, after all to quote Scotty: "A good engineer is always a bit conservative. At least on paper"

Our staff here does Windows (Client and Server), SOLARIS and (for a few "cheap" customers) Linux (Red Hat) and they still do not hate Win10. It's just that "We went W7 in 2013 so why change again now". W8, W8.1 and W10 are tested and supported by our products (and our external IT support) but except a few QS and BYOD boxes currently not in "general deployment".

17
0
Silver badge
Flame

Re: 270m an achievement?

Not when it's "free" and forced down people's throats.

23
4

Re: If they'd made Windows 10...

Could you tell us more about this anecdote (the MD's computer being forcibly upgraded to Windows 10)?

3
4
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: If they'd made Windows 10...

Like many folks, I recently had an experience with the "Windows X virus." My wife complained that her PC didn't boot right and had no Internet at all. I checked it, and found that Windows X had downloaded (no wonder my Internet connection had been so slow earlier) and tried, but failed, to install.

A quick rollback, installation of GWX Control Panel and some heavy-handed deleting of everything Windows X related solved all her problems. The next fix for her will be Linux Mint.

21
3
Silver badge

Re: If they'd made Windows 10...

'Let me see. My private/BYOD "Notebook" is a Lenovo Helix (A-series). If I put a Linux on it I will loose:

+ Use of the WACOM hardware (Linux drivers are "early beta" IF they exist for the choosen Distri)'

Wacom tablet works just fine for me on Debian Wheezy/LTS.

Try again.

12
1
Silver badge

Re: If they'd made Windows 10...

"2. infosec bods, who are more worried about the slurping, cloud elements than anything else."

And for those IT types who don't have those concerns - just keep Legal away from reading the T&Cs.

13
0

Re: If they'd made Windows 10...

My daughter had ro reboot her Win 7 enterprise laptop because it was trying to force her to install Windows 10. I assume the installation application (which she hadn't started) wouldn't let her exit.

3
0

Re: If they'd made Windows 10...

Define "runs fine" and "Wacom". External tablet or penabled? Pressure support or "as a mouse" etc.

On the german page I find references to external units but not to the internal one on a Helix (Or a Surface/Pro 1 resp. 2, or...)

3
2
Silver badge

Re: If they'd made Windows 10...

Guess you didn't realize that UNIX and Linux have pretty much taken over the servers... Even Azure is reported 25% to 50% Linux now.

If they haven't seen or used Linux, those IT people will get laid off.

7
0

Re: If they'd made Windows 10...

"You aren't going to have this mad dash to linux, it's not going to happen, not now and not in 10 years. "

How have your prognostications from ten years ago fared?

0
0

"So even if every PC sold this year runs Windows 10 – which won't happen, because lots will be Macs..."

You make that sound like a large percentage, or even most, will be Macs. Which is complete nonsense. Macs still make up only a small % of the number of PCs sold. Even if everybody wanted a Mac, most people can't afford one.

24
6
Silver badge

About 25 million Macs per year is not a small number. If you consider that Macs last much longer than PCs, then the percentage of Macs on the desktop is in the region of 15% to 20% of the total.

6
21

Saddo!

Is your mac over 5 years old?

8
3

I work in supporting small business and domestic IT. I have yet to see a single Mac in any serious usage business wise.

Three of my customers decided to buy them for work even after I told them I didn't support them (pressure to buy them from their iPad using family). But all of them called me back within a year to 18 months to tell me they had gone back to Windows for work use.

No serious Mac support out there you see. What happens, Mac Store arrives and takes away 60% of the Mac support guys bread and butter work. Then Apple make the damn things harder and harder to take apart and repair and its not worth it financially. They give up. So if you are a Mac user the only support you can get is iTunes issues or if you've dropped it, from a 'Genius'.

26
7

Re: Is your mac over 5 years old?

Mine are all well over that.

3
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Saddo!

My other half uses a 2009 13in Macbook (dual core CPU) running El Capitan. Upgraded to an SSD/4Gb RAM a couple of years ago. Runs fine.

That's over 5 years old.

6
2
Anonymous Coward

Re: Saddo!

Quote: "If you consider that Macs last much longer than PCs"

Hmm, the % of XP users out there would seem to indicate 'PCs' last a long long time, it's part of the reason why MS are in a mess, as no one wants to update their OSs'.

25
0

Re: Saddo!

Macs lasting longer than PCs is generally a myth. Usally perpetuated by those that want to help justify the £1400 outlay to the wife and family over the £600 box the kids wanted to play BF4 on. The biggest killer of any computer is usually human stupidity than component fails. And then again the components whether Mac or PC are still all made by FoxConn.

It's only the case and OS that's different at the the end of the day.

I remember the folks I used to give Mac gear jobs to (before they went under) had plenty of people queuing round the block with faulty Apple gear.

20
3

Re: Saddo!

I still do not see the link. Yes, a good hardware like an Optiplex-series DELL lasts a LONG time (I have a pre core-i box here running SOLARIS, that box was a XP initially) but that same old hardware often runs Win10 just as well (my core i5 tower came with Win7 and is now Win10. And yes, I bought W8 for it as well)

7
1

Re: Saddo!

3 of mine are more than 5 years old

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Saddo!

>My other half uses a 2009 13in Macbook (dual core CPU)

and I've got a 2009 iMac. It's actually running snow leopard but I understand it is capable of the latest OSX.

Mac's tend to be the consumer item of choice if budget allows.

I've gone opensuse because I'm an infosec bod, I despise the slurping by all of the big three and I like to run my own services. I'll have a local file server over gigabit copper, not onedrive over soggy string, thanks.

10
4

Mac presence

With a claim like that, I'm guessing yoiu're based in the US? In the UK (and Europe as a whole, I think) Apple have a very small installed base compared to Windows; I don't think I've seen one in a business that's not in the creative sector(and even THAT is due to inertia - with the same software available for Windows it really is a case of user attitude rather than necessity)

OSX just doesn't play nicely with the software you want to use in business. If there was an attempt to offer a substantially better AD implementation then maybe it would stand a chance, but Apple just aren't interested in the business sector - which is why they haven't mad a proper server in years (a Mac Mini with attached storage is NOT a server)

And Macs DO NOT last longer, either; I'd say in my own company we have slightly more hardware failures on the Macs than we do PCs; but we have 6-7 times more PCs! Add to that the need for creative teams to always be on very reent releases of software, and the replacement cycle is also much shorter

15
3
Silver badge
Thumb Down

Re: Saddo!

PCs and laptops that are not Macs last depending on what was bought and what for. Some are 1/4 price of Apple product.

My Laptop is 14 years old. Proves nothing.

For day to day work I use a workstation with 2 off 1600 x 1200 screens running Linux Mint with Mate desktop.

5
0
Silver badge

Macs might last longer than _Windows_ PC's

I am a Penguin, so my knowledge of Windows is thin and Macs even thinner. I keep seeing Windows PCs replaced because of software issues - the required software only runs on new versions of the OS, the new version of the OS will not work with old hardware. The hardware was fine. A quick Linux install, and ancient machines are useful. Resistance to Windows 10 may well push up the service life of Windows boxes.

From a Penguin's point of view, a desktop does not have a single age. The case might well be a relic from the nineties. There was a time for a Motherboard+CPU+RAM upgrades for speed. Later, a similar upgrade for power reduction or silence. Floppy disks barely got used because of network cables, and were retired in working order because of USB flash. Pre-SATA DVD players were retired when legacy PATA disappeared. After about a decade, the laser in a DVD player becomes too dim to play reliably. Keyboards and mice have a life time proportion to the cleanliness of the user. Disks got regular upgrades depending on bravery and the cost of restoring from backups, but SSDs are big and reliable these days. Properly specced power supplies last for ages (white box shippers liked to fit something with under 1W to spare so it would fry when you add a second hard disk). Monitors lasted until extra desk space was required, and I have not had a reason to refresh them since.

I am not sure how to compare the life time of a Penguin flavoured desktop PC to a Mac. Five years ago, I would have said replace the CPU/Motherboard/memory/SSD every five years, mostly to cut power consumption, and expect the rest to last a decade. The comparison has become irrelevant anyway. My final desktop was working fine when it was retired over two years ago because it's work could be done by £90/10W fist full of ARM (approximately equal to a Pi3 + SATA + GB ethernet + memory bandwidth). By the time that dies, a Raspbery Pi 6 will blend, and if I need something bigger, I will take a closer look at this.

12
1
Silver badge

"About 25 million Macs per year is not a small number."

I love how we regularly hear this argument from Apple fans or Linux guys ("75 million installs over 20 years is not a small number...") in literally the same thread where they're telling us that 270 million Win 10 installs in 6 months IS a small number (or, for that matter, the remaining 275m+ PC sales per year which are on Windows, too).

6
6
Silver badge

The stats for market share are based on OS reported in user agent strings for web visitors, not unit sales.

If anything, the stats underestimate the number of PCs; I doubt Macs are seeing much use in manufacturing control or other such tasks. There are a great many still on Windows XP. Those devices are not out there browsing the web (and being counted), but they do exist.

As for lasting "much longer," I'll have to ask for your source on that. It's true that you can buy cheap in PCs, which is not true of Apple, but it doesn't mean that is the bulk of the market.

Right now, I have an 8 year old Asus laptop right here, currently running Win 7. To my left is a Compaq/HP laptop, 11 years old, running perfectly in its limited role, even after all this time. It was retired from standard duty because of obsolescence, even in this era of "Moore's law is ending".

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the reported numbers for Macs are just as trivial as they seem.

5
0
Silver badge

I have about 100 optiplex 760s they are core 2 duo with 4gb,3ghz and 120gb ssds. They are about 6 years old and i have NO reason to upgrade them. Spares PSUs aplenty.

I have 10 optiplex 330s that are 7 years old. Even older still are the optiplex 280s P4s 1gb Ram (4 of them running weather stations) they have debian on them and were purchased in 2006

Why buy new if you have spares? You can buy a pallet of 30 core2duos are 50£ each and an SSD for 30. That will be faster than a non ssd new machine costing 3 times as much and you have spares.

2
0

Re: Macs might last longer than _Windows_ PC's

"I am a Penguin, so my knowledge of Windows is thin and Macs even thinner. I keep seeing Windows PCs replaced because of software issues - the required software only runs on new versions of the OS, the new version of the OS will not work with old hardware. "

Yeah your knowledge is a little out of date. Maybe stick to your linux install on that Athlon XP 2600+ PC with 1GB of ram?

Windows has been getting better and better with old kit since Windows 7. Hence why people are not buying new machines. Windows (any version from 2009 onwards) should work just fine on any hardware since around Vista days. If you cant find a driver then Vista onwards drivers will work fine too. VMs will work fine for old software too in most cases.

2
5

Re: Saddo!

Early 2008 iMac 24.

0
0

Re: Saddo!

So what's your point?

I have a Dell XPS I bought in 2008, recently upgraded with SSD + 8GB ram and it's still running Win 7 fine.

Macs don't last any better than Wintel machines of similar spec.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Macs might last longer than _Windows_ PC's

..Windows has been getting better and better with old kit since Windows 7..

Sorry, but if this was the case, then why did my work fork out £silly_amounts for new hardware to run Win7, as it failed in many interesting and horrible ways on the old hardware?

Having hardware which runs Win7 in a not too painful manner, why are they now talking about £more_upgrades for the future intended deployment of Win10? (I've been told they've been testing for months now).

Work asides, lets talk about home machines...I'm having to turn down offers of perfectly usable systems (I have no free space left for all these boxes - I badly need a storage facility/workshop somewhere) thanks to people upgrading their hardware after finding that Win10 runs like a pig stuck in molasses on their existing Win7 boxes?

You forget that a lot of systems out there are the bare minimum specs required to run these OSes.

1
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Macs might last longer than _Windows_ PC's

It could be an asset write-off. My current laptop is probably worth a bit on the second hand market, but because of its age and the cost of renewing an extended warranty, it makes more sense to purchase a new laptop and have the investment protected for 5 years with no business interruption, than run this laptop into the ground and wait for it to expire at a very inconvenient moment before replacing it. Many moons ago, I had a Toshiba Satellite Pro 490xcdt laptop I bought off an employer when it was being retired for a Windows XP migration. It was over ten years old by the time I sold it on, and still worked just as well as it did when I took delivery of it as a new machine. However, when you have to look after 5000 laptops in a business you can't operate on the basis that because one lasted a decade, so will all the others.

1
0

Re: Macs might last longer than _Windows_ PC's

Indeed corporate IT buying has never been based in simple logic. I remember questioning why we paid £200 for 32MB of ram with 4 weeks wait when Crucial sold the same stuff for £75 with next day delivery.

I got told to 'shut up!"

Otherwise you sweat the assets for 5 years and then sell them out the back to a guy that takes them away. I then buy them off him for £60 a throw. Thanks very much the circle of life continues.

Often easier and cheaper to buy new kit every few years than sanitise and check 2000+ 5 year old laptops and PCs, re-spec and rebuild them. Plus all covered by support contracts etc. etc.

You seen the state of company issued laptops after just one year let alone 5+?

0
0
Childcatcher

Re: Saddo!

> Is your mac over 5 years old?

Yes... It's used daily for development running multiple VMs, has loads of music, etc. So why no upgrade...?

Partly because the current Macs are not upgradable and full of proprietary SSDs and the memory's not upgradable.

Partly because the performance of a 5 year old MacBook Pro with discs replaced with a 2TB SSD, is not far off of a current MBP.

Partly because there's no need to update as it works fine.

Partly because you can't get 17" MBPs.

Partly because there's no need to splaff £2500 on a new MBP with only marginal benefits. To be fair, the old machine would still fetch well over £1000 on eBay.

etc, etc, etc.

0
0

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018