Posted on 02/14/2014 10:53:20 AM PST by ShadowAce
Microsoft claims it has now sold more than 200 million Windows 8 licenses, in the first update to public sales claims it has offered since last May.
Speaking at the Goldman Sachs Technology and Internet Conference in San Francisco on Thursday, Microsoft executive VP of marketing Tami Reller described the sales growth as "pretty stunning," although she added that Redmond has more work yet to do.
When Reller last spoke on Windows 8 sales, she said that Microsoft had sold 100 million licenses in the product's first six months of availability, which she said was on par with the sales figures for Windows 7.
But that was nine months ago, and the fact that only another 100 million licenses have moved since then indicates that sales of Windows 8 have indeed slowed, as many analysts have suspected.
Not that Microsoft's earlier sales claim meant there were 100 million people running Windows 8 on their PCs. A good chunk of those licenses were sold to hardware OEMs for use on devices that hadn't even been built yet, let alone shipped.
Back-of-napkin estimates suggest that the actual number of Windows 8 devices in use is about 40 per cent lower than the number of licenses Microsoft claims to have sold.
Reller made no comparison to Windows 7 sales in her Thursday comments, either, and with good reason. Microsoft managed to sell 240 million licenses for that OS in its first year – 20 per cent more than the number of Windows 8 licenses that have shipped at the 16-month mark.
Much of the blame for Windows 8's slower growth can be placed on the downturn in the PC market. And yet Windows 8 was designed to work on more types of devices than Windows 7 was – most notably tablets, which are reportedly selling like hotcakes.
In the past, Microsoft has tried to argue that if Windows 8 tablets weren't moving as fast as their Android and iOS cousins, it was the hardware makers' own fault. Industry insiders told The Reg that the software giant scolded OEMs for not building enough high-end tablets and Ultrabooks to show off Windows 8's features.
Redmond now seems to have reconsidered that stance, however. Reller told the audience at the Goldman Sachs conference that "right sizing" Windows so that it can run on devices with more modest specs is one of Microsoft's top objectives.
Another is getting more software written for Windows 8, she said.
"Bringing developers onto the platform, getting apps into the store, it couldn't possibly be a higher priority," Reller explained. "The number one priority of our developer team is to really get those apps populated."
Even given those efforts, however, it will likely be a long time before Windows 8's market share surpasses that of earlier versions. According to current figures from Net Applications, Windows 7 still commands more than 47 per cent of the desktop OS market, compared to Windows 8's roughly 11 per cent.
And nearly a third of all PCs are reportedly still running Windows XP, even though Microsoft plans to end support for that version in April. If those customers have held out this long, convincing them to upgrade to Windows 8 – and not Android, iOS, OS X, Linux, or even Windows 7 – will be a tall order. ®
My beloved XP desktop is in the shop for a much-needed exorcism. (Damn viruses!) I’m forced to use my laptop with Vista which originally I despised. Now I’m getting some warm fuzzies about Vista after using DH’s system with Windows 8. So many features simply do not “work” on it; so frustrating!
I just ordered a brand new computer and chose 8.1 on purpose. I did indeed have a choice to stay with 7.
You’re just a registry hack or two away from having it.
You might try compatibility mode in windows 7. I’ve gotten some win 98 programs to run by having windows 7 run in in a win 98 special compatibility environment. You try to install the software and it will say that it is imcompatible...but it will ask you if you want windows to try differing compatibility modes or you can specify win 98 compatibility. It might work for you.
I’ve got a Windows 8 computer. I loaded Classic Shell and did some research on the internet to find out how to automatically log on without typing in my password every time I start my home computer. Windows 8, with modifications, is bearable.
So...why should I need to do that crap? Windows 7 already works fine for me, without modifications. In what sense did MS not take a good interface and make it worse?
As for slow ass Windows 7: many of us don’t do games. For surfing the Internet, typing reports or reviewing documents, 7 is more than fast enough.
Would it really have been that hard for MS to figure out than a lot of folks were HAPPY with XP & 7, and to at least give them a choice on initial startup on which interface they wanted? They could even have a section in the start menu - and getting rid of that was REALLY stupid - that allowed those who wanted no start button to choose THAT as an option.
You don't. Learn the interface. That's your alternative.
Windows 7 already works fine for me, without modifications.
Then keep using it, no one's stopping you or forcing you to change.
In what sense did MS not take a good interface and make it worse?
No one's arguing that point.
As for slow ass Windows 7: many of us don’t do games. For surfing the Internet, typing reports or reviewing documents, 7 is more than fast enough.
Then keep using it, no one's forcing you to change, Windows 7 is still fully supported by MS. I simply pointed out that Windows 8 is MUCH faster and MUCH more efficient in its use of resources than Windows 7. I've benchmarked both, as have other online reputable websites which have confirmed my own findings. For me and how I use my computer, that speed and efficient use of resources is important. Not just for gaming, also for Virtualization, home automation, and some of the amateur radio programs I run to control my equipment as well as other tasks I use my computer for.
Unlike others on here who've never looked at it or tried Windows 8 for themselves who sit on here and whine all day that their FIFTEEN YEAR OLD OS is going unsupported, the rest of the world has moved on to Windows 7 or Windows 8. (Some have moved on to Ubuntu or Linux Mint too, fine OS' in their own right which I also use.) Every time I read about someone complaining about Windows 8's UI as being the reason they won't upgrade I have to laugh. They're either woefully ignorant of the options that are out there to either modify Windows 8 quickly and easily to make it look like Windows 7 or even XP! or they're simply unwilling to change under any circumstance.
Windows XP has become the Model-T of Operating Systems. It's fifteen years old (or older, for those of us that ran the Beta..) and requires constant patching because of its security holes. How long must Microsoft keep patching a 15 year old OS? That's like forcing Ford, GM, etc.. to warranty their drive trains for 15 years and perform all repairs free of charge. Simply ridiculous.
Would it really have been that hard for MS to figure out than a lot of folks were HAPPY with XP & 7, and to at least give them a choice on initial startup on which interface they wanted? They could even have a section in the start menu - and getting rid of that was REALLY stupid - that allowed those who wanted no start button to choose THAT as an option.
Not a point I think alot of folks are arguing. I was among the first on FR to post about MS making a huge mistake mixing and matching UI metaphors and eliminating the Start Button from the Desktop. Microsoft however thinks "One interface across all devices" is a key to their ongoing success. Personally I think that's a stupid direction -- trying to make a desktop look/act like a tablet. If I'm on my desktop I'm doing WORK. I don't want to take my hands off my keyboard to touch a computer screen to perform an action. That's just silly, and it makes a mess of my computer screen.
Alternatively, if I'm on my tablet (iOS, Droid or MS) I want the interface to be touch centric without having to use an onscreen or separate/bluetooth keyboard as input. Since NONE of the tablets (iOS, Droid or MS) eliminate the need to type input (try sending email on one without using the onscreen keyboard....) my tablets are limited to consuming content or doing workflow based approvals for my job. Fine for viewing and pressing an "approve" button, not fine for composing emails beyond a sentence or two, tops.
In closing, I think there's a reason Apple kept its desktop and tablet OS' separate - they knew the limitations of the two different OS' and the use cases for both. Microsoft clearly hasn't learned that lesson.
I suspect they'll figure it out in Windows 9.
One last comment specific to the above: I know a fair number of folks who moved to Ubuntu or Linux Mint (more "Mint" than Ubuntu because of the similarity to the XP interface.)
They installed Linux Mint along with Libre Office and are able to easily work and communicate with others who use the MS Office Suite and MS Office document formats.
Linux Mint installs easily, I'd say easier than Windows XP. It's quite fast, efficient in resources and a good FREE alternative to Windows XP.
My mother and father in law had Windows XP on their computer. I changed them over to Linux Mint and installed Remote Desktop on it so I could support them as they live 350 miles away.
I've not had a single complaint or question from them since moving them to Linux Mint. They're both in their mid 70's. I spent less than 30 minutes when they were here showing them how to start up, shut down and do the basic tasks like you've outlined above. They took to it quite easily and again, not a single complaint or question since.
I figure if my mid 70 year old in-laws can do it, ANYONE can. Keep in mind, their first experience with computers was when they moved away some 15 years ago in their early 60's.
IMO there's just no excuse for people to get on here and whine about a fifteen year old OS finally being sunset and having to change - even just a little. I point to my in-laws as to why there's no excuse. If they can do it ... and they did quite easily ... anyone can.
8.1 plus Classic Shell (FOSS) gives you an interface that is familiar but allows you to move back and forth to Metro. Once you have the ability to quickly navigate back to something you understand, trying Metro is not so intimidating. I got my SO an new laptop for Christmas on which I installed Classic Shell. After just a little instruction, she seems happy and has yet to call me and tell me her computer is possessed. So, in short, I am no MS fanboy (Linux for me!), but from what I have seen 8.1 plus Classic Shell is not that bad.
“Then keep using it, no one’s stopping you or forcing you to change.”
Hmmmm...there are not a huge number of cheap computers for sale with Windows 7.
I’ve been using computers since the days of punch cards. Why shouldn’t a major company give customers the option of whatever interface they like best - which, I’ll admit, is NOT punchcards?
“I’ve not had a single complaint or question from them since moving them to Linux Mint. “
I might try it, but it won’t change the ‘sales’ for MS since MS sales are based on sales of new computers. There just hasn’t been a big rush of people wanting to upgrade from 7 to 8, or from XP to 8.
It reminds me of razor blades. Gillette has been pushing more and more blades/cartridge, at greater and greater expense, to justify buying their patented ‘system’ - although a Gillette Atra with cartridges that cost under 20 cents each gives a better shave. But Gillette has an advertising budget, and the truth does not...
I've been building my own computers for years now. (Since @ 1988.) You can typically build a much higher quality computer for much less than buying one "off the shelf."
It takes a little knowledge and reading component specifications to make sure the parts you buy are compatible, from there putting together a modern computer is pretty darn simple. Always helps if you have a friend who can help you through your first build as I did. After that, once you know how to spec out your system and put it together it's a breeze.
I built the computer I'm using right now from components I selected myself. If I told you what it was and what it cost me to build it myself you'd likely be surprised. Systems that are similar to mine sell for several hundreds of dollars more than I paid to build it myself.
Between building the computer (putting the parts together) and installing the OS took me about 90 minutes. I used to be able to do it much faster however old age, arthritis and failing eyesight (need cheaters!) slows one down a bit.
BTW: I won't argue the "uptake" on Windows 8 compared to Windows XP or Windows 7. Yep, Microsoft is heavily relying on bundling the OS with New PC's to drive their numbers up. That's part of covering up their mistake, changing their Desktop OS to look like an XBox. You'll get no argument from me there!
Best Regards
USC
Thanks. I may give your suggestion a try!
I bought a new HP Laptop for my wife, and it had a Windows 8 license with downgrade(their words lol) rights to have it pre-installed with Win7 Professional, so technically I “purchased” a Windows 8 license, and it will never EVER run on that Laptop. Had it not been for the option of having it come with Win7, I wouldn’t have bought it.
Have you tried Start8?
I guess it’s only human nature but it always seems that people whine about the user interface when arguably what really matters is what’s under the hood - kernel performance, kernel stability, driver support, filesystem improvements and all the rest.
My pet peeve is people whining about the start button or lack thereof when to me, anyways, that completely misses the point.
1. You can always find a patch or a utility that puts whatever button you need wherever you want it.
2. Learning a new interface isn’t *that* big a deal. Anyone that’s ever rented a car has had to figure out how to turn the wipers on and off, how to open the hood, the gas cap and all the rest. Is it a pain sometimes? Yeah I guess to a point. It’s a new interface, it may take a day or so to get used to and then it’s a non issue. And unlike a rental car that you may rent for a day or two or three, an OS you’ll probably have for much longer than that. So after a day or two or three of learning how to launch your programs or find a file, it’s all good after that.
And I’m not speaking as a MS defender - far from it - just callin’ ‘em as I sees ‘em.
I think most people aren’t all that aware that an OS is *much* more than just a start button and a splash screen LOL.
There are all kinds of programs to bring back the Windows start button and the desktop. If these programs did not exist....Only then would I say that Windows 8 sucks
I like Windows 7 and Windows 8. XP is too dated to use
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.