backtop


Print 44 comment(s) - last by GTVic.. on Aug 17 at 12:56 PM


Operating System Chart for July 2011  (Source: TechSpot)
This is the first time XP has been below 50% mark

Microsoft is by far the most popular operating system maker for computers with its Windows family. It may have been years now since XP was the newest version of Windows, but many people are still running XP on their computers.

Techspot reports that the numbers are in for the global market share for computer operating systems for July 2011. According to the numbers Windows is still the runaway leader in the OS market with 87.66% of the entire market. Mac OS X has the second spot with 5.59% of the OS market, Linux has 0.98%, and other OS's are at 5.77% of the market.

Within that 87.66% of the market that Windows holds, there are three different versions of the OS in common use including Windows 7, Windows Vista, and Windows XP. For the first time ever the percentage of Windows XP users have fallen below 50% of the entire Windows market share. As of July, the share for XP was 49.94%. Windows Vista was 9.24% of the Windows market share, and Windows 7 had 27.87% of the share. Older versions of Windows were 0.61% of the market.

Windows 7 is growing very quickly, which is what Microsoft wanted after the lackluster adoption of Vista. The mediocre Vista adoption is the reason XP still held so much of the market. There are so many users of Windows XP that while mainstream support for the OS ended in 2009, Microsoft will continue to offer Extended Support through 2014.

About a year ago, there were still 74% of the business computers in use that were running Windows XP. Enterprise customers were the ones holding onto the XP machines during the poor economy and the new numbers don’t indicate what percentage of business machines are still running XP.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Windows marketshare or overall marketshare?
By MrTeal on 8/2/2011 1:09:24 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Within that 87.66% of the market that Windows holds, there are three different versions of the OS in common use including Windows 7, Windows Vista, and Windows XP. For the first time ever the percentage of Windows XP users have fallen below 50% of the entire Windows market share. As of July, the share for XP was 49.94%. Windows Vista was 9.24% of the Windows market share, and Windows 7 had 27.87% of the share. Older versions of Windows were 0.61% of the market.

Looking at the chart and following the link, it appears that Windows XP fell below 50% share of the overall market, not just 50% of the Windows part. If you add up the numbers for WinXP, Vista, 7 and Windows Old, you get 87.66%, the same number as the Windows market share.




RE: Windows marketshare or overall marketshare?
By quiksilvr on 8/2/2011 1:44:55 PM , Rating: 1
Huzzah! Now all we need to do is go to all Vista owners, shake them very very had and tell them to get Windows 7 already.


RE: Windows marketshare or overall marketshare?
By kleinma on 8/2/2011 1:48:35 PM , Rating: 5
Crazy there are still more people using Vista than all the Macs out there. Vista actually wasn't too bad if you were lucky to not have any major driver headaches and if you didn't need to run any pretty old legacy apps. I actually liked Vista over XP, but Win7 is a highly polished Vista, and is the best Windows version to date. Getting very curious about Windows 8 and how that will pan out.


By MindParadox on 8/2/2011 2:00:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Crazy there are still more people using Vista than all the Macs out there. Vista actually wasn't too bad if you were lucky to not have any major driver headaches and if you didn't need to run any pretty old legacy apps. I actually liked Vista over XP, but Win7 is a highly polished Vista, and is the best Windows version to date.


Actually, funny enough, you run into almost none of the problems people complained about with vista if you went with the 64 bit version, whereas the 32 bit version had EVERY problem :P

7 is very similar, my 64 bit 7 Pro system has very few problems of any kind, but my wifes 32 bit pro system crashes regularly and has all kinds of other problems with random and odd things, like hibernation and rebooting.


By therealnickdanger on 8/2/2011 2:11:24 PM , Rating: 2
I guess I never thought of that. I went 64-bit from day one with Vista and 7. That's very odd though, considering that most drivers I had to load were the old 32-bit drivers anyway... Microsoft magic, perhaps? Oh wait, only Apple can use magic™.


RE: Windows marketshare or overall marketshare?
By Flunk on 8/2/2011 2:17:17 PM , Rating: 2
You can't use 32bit drivers on 64bit Windows.


By PrezWeezy on 8/2/2011 3:37:15 PM , Rating: 3
You actually cannot install a 32bit driver on a 64bit machine. It won't work. There are several other possible explainations, but it wasn't a 32bit driver.


By Cypherdude1 on 8/3/2011 5:54:16 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Yes you can. It worked for my Audigy4 Pro before they made 64-bit drivers. I also have an old HP DesignJet that works off of ye olde 32-bit drivers as well.
I have an old Hercules GTXP 7.1 sound card. The one with the blue external box. Hercules never wrote 64 bit drivers but they did write 32 bit Vista drivers. Do you think it would work on my 64 bit Windows 7 Pro system? Damn Hercules, I spent $130 on that card+box and they never even had the decency to write Vista/7 64 bit drivers.


By GTVic on 8/17/2011 12:56:08 PM , Rating: 2
Not true, the Sentinel USB security key driver is the same package for 32-bit or 64-bit. It all depends on the driver and the hardware.

However, there are some hardware devices that cannot be used in a 64-bit environment, a driver just can't be written.


By Flunk on 8/2/2011 2:16:30 PM , Rating: 2
That's funny because I had the 64bit version of Vista installed on my desktop and the 32bit version on my notebook without any problems on either. Perhaps it's just the computer you were using.


By dgingeri on 8/2/2011 2:20:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Actually, funny enough, you run into almost none of the problems people complained about with vista if you went with the 64 bit version, whereas the 32 bit version had EVERY problem :P

7 is very similar, my 64 bit 7 Pro system has very few problems of any kind, but my wifes 32 bit pro system crashes regularly and has all kinds of other problems with random and odd things, like hibernation and rebooting.


I've seen the same thing. We had 4 32-bit Vista machines at my old company, and they gave all sorts of problems, but the 4 64-bit machines didn't have any problems, on the exact same hardware. (We had 4 of each for testing and support purposes.) I haven't dealt with 32-bit Windows 7 at all, though, so I can't comment on that. I hope I never have to. I went with 64-bit Vista a year after it came out and haven't looked back.


RE: Windows marketshare or overall marketshare?
By Smilin on 8/2/2011 5:19:42 PM , Rating: 5
Your experience isn't a fluke.

There really wasn't anything wrong with Vista. It's just that it introduced new driver models so XP drivers wouldn't work. In the past you could limp along with W2k or even NT4.0 drivers. Not so with the switch to Vista.

XP had been out for so long that OEMs didn't even have people on staff to write drivers anymore.

The only thing wrong with Vista was it caused massive ecosystem shock. Since the drivers are compatible a second shock wasn't necessary for Win 7.

The reason you didn't see as many problems for x64 is that they were drivers written from scratch for Vista rather than ported from an x86 version of XP (or some user trying to cram an actual XP driver on).

As for running 32bit drivers on x64 (mentioned in replies to this): Something is missing from that picture. Drivers run in Kernel space where there is no WoW or other such Thunking. I don't see how it's possible. There is more to that story I think.


RE: Windows marketshare or overall marketshare?
By cbf on 8/2/2011 10:22:52 PM , Rating: 2
That person was probably really using a universal kernel driver with specific files for the device. I.e. most printers don't really need special kernel drivers nowadays, so his HP Deskjet "driver" is likely just some user ring configuration, but it's really using 64-bit unidrv.dll. Probably something similar is happening for the sound card, although I'm less familiar with how that might work.


By Smilin on 8/3/2011 9:24:45 AM , Rating: 2
Printer drivers are indeed an exception. In NT 4.0 they were considered "version 3" drivers. In W2k you could use either v3 or v4 print drivers. In XP and beyond you could only use v4 drivers.

v3 runs in kernel mode like any other driver (and a failing print driver can bugcheck a box ... often terminal servers running HP's non mutli-user aware drivers)

v4 printer drivers are user-mode. So yes they can get Thunked from 32 to 64 just fine.

Things have come a long way. You guys even remember the last time you had a bugcheck?


By bryanW1995 on 8/3/2011 11:34:28 AM , Rating: 2
I disagree, I had vista 64 on my office computer and vista 32 on a laptop, and I had no problems with either of them.


By therealnickdanger on 8/2/2011 2:01:42 PM , Rating: 2
I'm one of those that didn't have any issues with Vista and most applications I use worked faster than XP on the same machine. Even my ASIO applications were fortunate enough to still operate smoothly with proper drivers. But like you said, 7 is the one to get.

8 will be interesting. For the regular desktop user (no touchscreens or touch devices) I'm very curious what incentives he will have to upgrade? Big shiny buttons don't necessarily equate with "better" IMO.


By Shadowmaster625 on 8/2/2011 3:09:23 PM , Rating: 2
windows 7 has all the same bugs that anger me about xp.

Not being able to find computers on networks. It is actually worse now.

Windows that refuse to restore.

Long (1-3 second) delays where the computer hangs for no reason with cpu usage at 0% and no swap file activity.

Buggy media center that is way too slow and bulky.

Same littel bugs in windows explorer.

Only movie maker is better lol.


RE: Windows marketshare or overall marketshare?
By Mitch101 on 8/2/2011 4:16:30 PM , Rating: 5
I suspect a pebcak issue or your 486SX PC with crossover cable need upgrading.

PEBCAK - Problem Exists Between Chair And Keyboard


By Souka on 8/2/2011 4:50:05 PM , Rating: 2
I think it's a UKIE (U-kee) problem. User Keyboard Interface Error


By retrospooty on 8/3/2011 11:20:40 PM , Rating: 2
I prefer luser interface error.


By Smilin on 8/2/2011 5:30:41 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Not being able to find computers on networks. It is actually worse now.

It's actually better. Network discovery is much improved. For new devices having discovery flipped off can make the map incorrect. For old devices the same problems as before existed: You're using a domain-souped-up-with-masters version of NT Lanman network mapping from Windows 3.11. That old sh1t is all netbios and broadcast based for the most part. Let go man. Use a UNC path and for Gawd sakes stop mapping network drives (you didn't mention it but I *know* you are :P )

quote:
Long (1-3 second) delays where the computer hangs for no reason with cpu usage at 0% and no swap file activity.

Use perfmon, see if you get actual blanks in the graphs (will look like someone took a vertical eraser to the drawing). Next use procexp from sysinternals. See if somehing is burying the CPU in interrupts or DPCs. The symptoms you describe sound like a driver issue, not OS.

Good luck with whatever else you're hating on.


By Tiborticus on 8/3/2011 2:25:11 AM , Rating: 2
Shadowmaster, the problems you describe with W7 sound more like hardware problems. Hardware originally designed around Win XP is not going to do well with Win7. It sounds to me like you have hardware compatability and driver issues. If you're using older incompatible hardware - good luck in getting W7 to operate smoothly. I've got 5 computers running various W7 editions and never experienced any of the issues you describe. The only issue I've encountered is with Win Explorer where sometimes the navigation pane scrolls to where I don't want it.


RE: Windows marketshare or overall marketshare?
By Natch on 8/2/2011 2:36:28 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, I have a 4+ year old notebook, and a 2+ year old system I built, both running Vista Basic, and I've never had any problems with either one of them.

My future build (tentatively planned for the end of the year.....I give myself the best Christmas presents! LOL) will, however, be a Windows 7 64-bit OS.


By AssBall on 8/2/2011 2:57:55 PM , Rating: 1
I've had no real problems for the 4 years I have been running Vista 64. It has been great. I'll get 7 (or 8?) when build a new system, of course though. Then the GF can use my Vista key and finally upgrade from XP.


By MrPerez on 8/2/2011 6:33:02 PM , Rating: 2
Funny how Vista users outnumber Mac users lol and its a dead OS


By inperfectdarkness on 8/3/2011 7:50:19 AM , Rating: 2
not by my math.

by my math, vista + 7 = 37% market share. xp has 49%. therefore xp still has > 50% windows market share.

it's only below 50% on total marketshare.


By GTVic on 8/17/2011 12:39:04 PM , Rating: 2
"the new numbers don’t indicate what percentage of business machines are still running XP."

This is a meaningless report without that information.


Works for me
By Dorkyman on 8/2/2011 1:56:15 PM , Rating: 2
As a videographer I rely on my desktop system to make money. It has been running XPpro for perhaps 7 years, and the thing is pretty much bulletproof.

I see no need to switch from XP until there is an application I need that requires a change. That's probably the same attitude of most businesses out there. Cute transparent window borders are completely irrelevant to me; rock-solid stability is what matters, and XP has it.




RE: Works for me
By RjBass on 8/2/2011 2:05:52 PM , Rating: 2
How about switching when extended support is gone? With no new security updates and bug fixes, XP will become obsolete within a matter of months. Expect that to start happening in just 3 1/2 years. Of course I think XP is obsolete now, but that's just me.


RE: Works for me
By JediJeb on 8/2/2011 7:03:35 PM , Rating: 2
If everything you have is working and you are not out surfing the internet in places you shouldn't be, I don't think updates and support matter. I finally upgraded from 2k to XP about 3 years ago only because my drive crashed, and on either of those I never had to call support at all. If you are like the former poster and are using it mostly to handle your photography needs and not some major companies sensitive data then I doubt the end of support is going to make a difference. The biggest reason I see most people like that upgrading is when they need to upgrade hardware and they can no longer get drivers for XP.

Then there are those like us where I work where we have $100k+ pieces of equipment attached to XP computers and the interfaces and software are no longer made and most not compatible with Vista or Win7 and we are going to be out of luck once those computers die. It is hard on the budget when you have to replace a perfectly good and working piece of equipment that costs that much because a $500 computer dies. We had to bite the bullet and replace one such piece of equipment because it is nearly impossible now days to find a computer with a working ISA slot, because the only interface card for it was never converted to PCI. That was also our last Win3.11 machine we which died last year.

Office environments can upgrade at the whims of MS when they change things without too much fuss, laboratories like mine and many manufacturing facilities get hit hard by the frequent changes in software and hardware.


RE: Works for me
By kleinma on 8/2/2011 2:27:51 PM , Rating: 2
I would at least have an XP exit strategy. (IE figuring out what programs you use will and will not work on Win7, if upgrades will need to be purchased, etc.)

When you do upgrade to Win7 (or Win8) get the pro version so you can run XPMode (free XP SP3 virtual machine) for any apps that will not run on 64 bits or just have issues running on a modern OS. I am sure the virtual machine won't run video editing apps great, but chances are you are using programs that will work fine on the newer OS.


RE: Works for me
By PrezWeezy on 8/2/2011 3:35:43 PM , Rating: 3
Things like far better security, bitlocker, direct access, brance cache, there are a host of other non "transparent windows" type features in Vista and 7. XP was great when it came out, but in today's world it is old by technology standards. The security issues alone should be enough to switch for most businesses. Yes it's prettier, but don't be fooled into thinking that's all they changed. And for the record, Vista and 7 are far more solid than XP.


RE: Works for me
By Makaveli on 8/3/2011 9:46:49 AM , Rating: 1
"rock-solid stability is what matters, and XP has it."

I was with you until you said that, now I know you have no clue what you are talking about.

XP and stability LMFAO.


Umm isn't that wrong...
By Connoisseur on 8/2/2011 1:11:43 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
For the first time ever the percentage of Windows XP users have fallen below 50% of the entire Windows market share


According to the math, this statement is completely wrong. If you look at the pie chart Windows XP has a 49.94% share of the ENTIRE OS MARKET. Of the Windows based OS only market, it still commands a >50% market share. So either the statement or the pie chart needs to be revised...




RE: Umm isn't that wrong...
By Mitch101 on 8/2/2011 4:13:22 PM , Rating: 2
MAC %5.59
Other has more market share.

Wasnt Apple claiming 10+% market share recently?


RE: Umm isn't that wrong...
By misuspita on 8/2/2011 4:27:20 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe US only, global surely not.


How does it?
By Souka on 8/2/2011 4:52:43 PM , Rating: 2
How does this pie chart account for Server 2003? 2008?

I can only assume Server2003 is included in the XP segment, and Server2008 is in the Win7.




RE: How does it?
By borismkv on 8/2/2011 5:16:10 PM , Rating: 2
It doesn't. It's looking at Workstation/Laptop OSes only. 2003/2008 are Server OSes.


RE: How does it?
By UnauthorisedAccess on 8/2/2011 10:20:23 PM , Rating: 2
I've used 2008 R2 on desktops before, as I had spare Server licenses but no Windows 7 ones, though I'm sure that accounts for 0.0001% of desktops out there.

Not recommended either, unless you have a specific need - transcoding, development, pen testing etc


RE: How does it?
By ajfink on 8/3/2011 8:22:35 AM , Rating: 2
I also have Server 2008 on a box here. I got it for free when Microsoft was giving licenses away to students. I kind of feel a very young old now.


But among Steam users...
By mechBgon on 8/3/2011 1:19:23 AM , Rating: 2
...WinXP is breathing its last gasps. http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/ and expand OS Version . Bye-bye, Win2000-with-fog-lights.




By ShaolinSoccer on 8/3/2011 3:22:14 AM , Rating: 2
I'll be using it until MS stops supporting it in 2014. And even after that, I can still use it for those "mess around" moments or playing old games. Just won't be doing stuff like ordering things with my credit card.


By The Raven on 8/3/2011 12:16:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Three months ago, even the National Security Agency (NSA) began advising users to upgrade from Windows XP to either Windows Vista or Windows 7. Furthermore, the organization says that when possible, choosing a 64-bit version of Windows is recommended.

Why does the NSA care about this? This must've been some "creating jobs" move by the politicians in DC.

I continue to safely use XP. I will decide to switch when I d@mn well feel like it. And when I do I will go to Linux or some other FOSS solution (knowing that there may be tradeoffs) because this top down mandate (from MS or the gov't) of what does the job for me is BS.




“We do believe we have a moral responsibility to keep porn off the iPhone.” -- Steve Jobs














botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki