backtop


Print 43 comment(s) - last by Adonlude.. on Jul 2 at 1:12 PM

Windows 8's biggest gain was less than a percent

Microsoft's Windows 8 operating system, which has been out since October, hasn’t exactly been incredibly popular and has been pointed to as one of the reasons that the overall PC market is on the decline.

Now that we are finished with the first half of 2013, Windows 8 has continued to steadily grow its market share as Windows XP and Windows Vista have been on the decline. According to new data from Net Applications, Windows 8 has now passed the 5% adoption mark and is now more widely used than Windows Vista.


During June, Windows 8 gained 0.83% increasing from 4.27% to 5.10%. At the same time, Windows 7 usage fell by 0.48% declining from 48.5% to 44.37% of the market. The paltry gain for June was Windows 8's biggest gain for 2013.

Net Applications’ data was captured from 160 million unique visitors each month and clean from the monitoring of about 40,000 websites for clients.
 
Microsoft is hoping for a further uptick in adoption when the final version of Windows 8.1 airs later this year.

Sources: The Next Web, Net Applications



Comments     Threshold


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

By zero2dash on 7/1/2013 9:42:17 AM , Rating: 3
XP works in the business world still. Not all machines have >1GB of RAM and a dual core or greater. XP works. It has better legacy driver support. That's why.

Should everyone upgrade to 7? Sure, in a perfect world. But the issue is, not everything works on 7.

One of my friends has a workstation with router (of the machinist type, not the network traffic type) software that doesn't work in anything but Windows 95. The software also has a PCI card/hardware key verification with no drivers outside of....you guessed it, Win95. Despite my best efforts to do a P2V conversion for her, it didn't work out. So she still has this aging dinosaur machine because she has no choice.


By dgingerich on 7/1/2013 11:23:59 AM , Rating: 2
So many IT managers think this, but they are SO wrong.

1. XP has far worse security. It gets hit with so many pieces of malware that it now has more than 10 times as many issues reported as Windows 7 in IT. Having fewer malware problems means being able to cut back on support personnel Moving to Windows 7 cuts IT costs.

2. XP is far less stable than Windows 7. It crashes, on average, more than 4 times as often as Windows 7 due to program and driver crashes, simply because of how it is designed. Less crashes means more productivity for your employees.

3. Windows XP is nearing end of support. It's less than a year from the point where XP will no longer get updates. If an IT manager hasn't already instituted a plan to migrate to Windows 7, he's late, and the company will suffer for it. Plain and simple.

Any manager that chooses to stick with Windows XP at this point isn't going to be an IT manager for much longer. If a company hasn't invested in their infrastructure enough to move to Windows 7 at this point, they aren't going to stay in business much longer. A Windows 7 migration pays for itself within a couple years, no matter how big a company is.

Making a conscious choice to spend more money on support and losing more money on productivity, as well as making your company more vulnerable to hackers, is a really, really bad business decision.


By BRB29 on 7/1/2013 11:35:22 AM , Rating: 4
For older OS, there is not as many malware flying around to infect it.

Since the computer is part of a network and owned by the organization, it can be locked down with their own software. It is significantly harder to infect then.

All their legacy software will work the way it's supposed to. Switching to new OS may cause many problems and maybe even buying new software because of it.

You're thinking from an individual computer. IT managers based their figures on an entire network of the organization. There's a huge difference in cost and function. IT department must make sure it works and secured. The latest and greatest is not always the best way.


By kmmatney on 7/1/2013 12:01:05 PM , Rating: 2
From my own personal experience (programmer and system builder for a small company), I haven't found Windows 7 or 8 to be any more stable than Windows XP. They've all been very stable, to be honest. We build machines for the Fab semiconductor industry, which run 24/7, and need stability, and XP has been good. We are just now transitioning to Windows 7, but I still see plenty of Fab systems running on Windows NT, 2000 or ancient versions of Linux.

I'm sure many other industries (medical for example) are the same, and it takes a lot of time and manpower to qualify a new OS. We have many customers with "copy-exact" policies, and getting a new OS takes 6-12 months of testing, and lots of red tape going through many levels of management. It's a real hassle.


By zero2dash on 7/1/2013 12:07:45 PM , Rating: 2
You're still missing the big picture.

Code has to be updated to work post-XP in some cases. Drivers need to be updated - and in a lot of cases, that's not done because the manufacturer has released newer hardware and they refuse to support the legacy hardware. All of this is further gummed up trying to move from x86 to x64 architecture because let's face it, who uses Windows 7 32-bit? The company I work for HAS TO because our POS software (Celerant) is trash, but now that we're going to merge with another company (and have to dump Celerant because it barely supports a company our size, and we're growing post-merger by nearly 600%) we're going to hopefully start buying 64-bit machines once we find out if they're supported.

IT managers will still keep their jobs on XP; tweakers and geeks like us run on the bleeding edge, that's about it. Most home users don't really care because their computer works. Most business users care even less because their computer works and they don't want to try to convince accounting to spend tens of thousands of dollars on new software licenses, new equipment, and paying the development staff 80 hour work weeks to try to make the software work on another OS.


By Ammohunt on 7/1/2013 2:09:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
One of my friends has a workstation with router (of the machinist type, not the network traffic type) software that doesn't work in anything but Windows 95.


This really is not a problem if its not connected to a network. The only concern would be eventually hardware failure. So device pass through to the VM for the PCI dongle didn't work?


“So far we have not seen a single Android device that does not infringe on our patents." -- Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki