backtop


Print 72 comment(s) - last by noirsoft.. on Mar 29 at 11:41 PM

Microsoft says that first month sales of Vista doubled those of XP

Microsoft is touting early sales figures for Windows Vista as testament to the operating system's new features and security enhancements. According to Microsoft, the sale of Windows Vista licenses more than doubled those of Windows XP during its first month of availability.

Windows XP managed to rack up 17 million licenses within its first two months of availability while Windows Vista hit 20 million within the first month. The numbers include licenses acquired by PC OEMs, retail copies sold in stores and upgrades ordered through the Windows Vista Express Upgrade Program.

"We are encouraged to see such a positive consumer response to Windows Vista right out of the gate," said Windows Business Group VP Bill Veghte. "While it’s very early in the product lifecycle, we are setting a foundation for Windows Vista to become the fastest-adopted version of Windows ever. Working with our partners, we are helping our customers leverage new tools and programs to accelerate the transition and provide a great user experience."

According to Michael Silver of Gartner Research, however, the fact that Windows Vista sales have doubled Windows XP sales shouldn’t come as much of a surprise. According to Silver, 52 million PCs were sold in 2002 – the first full year of Windows XP availability. Over 92 million PCs are expected to be sold in 2007.

Last month Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer was less optimistic about initial Vista sales citing increased piracy around the world. Ballmer noted that analysts were "overly aggressive" with their Vista sales forecasts.

Shortly after Ballmer's comments, Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates was more upbeat and stated that Vista had been "incredibly well received." Gates continued, "People who sell PCs have seen a very nice lift in their sales. People have come in and wanted to buy Vista."





Comments     Threshold


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

Vista's not revolutionary, but it's definitely nice
By Bonrock on 3/27/2007 12:59:09 PM , Rating: 4
I've been running Vista on three computers in my household since the day it was released, with few problems. Overall, I'm quite pleased with the upgrade. It's not revolutionary, but then again, Windows XP wasn't bad enough to require a revolutionary upgrade. Instead, Vista has a few big improvements (like better security, Aero Glass, and the inclusion of Windows Media Center) and a whole ton of small improvements that collectively result in a better user experience.

And you know what? That's fine with me. To all the people out there bagging on Vista (and I know there are a lot of them): Please give it a fair chance before you knock it.




By Mudvillager on 3/27/2007 1:19:27 PM , Rating: 2
+ a lot more stable and full dual-core utilization.

I haven't got a single crash / instability issue since I installed Ultimate x64 about two months ago.


By Nekrik on 3/27/2007 2:08:28 PM , Rating: 3
Same here, not a single crash since the final release. At work I've had all five flavors running for a while on a variety of machines, unfortunately all machines from the same vendor, but still a pretty wide range of proc, memory, and configurations.


By athlonotaku on 3/27/2007 2:18:01 PM , Rating: 2
The only problem I've had with Vista is my sound drivers for my X-Fi card.

Which can be argued that its not Vista's problem and more Creative's problem.

Other than that I find the new features really beneficial for the PC's typical end user.


By TomZ on 3/27/2007 2:59:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
full dual-core utilization.

Compared to what? Are you saying the "utilization" is any different than XP?


By BMFPitt on 3/27/2007 4:42:17 PM , Rating: 2
"Implementation" might have been a better term. I'm pretty sure that XP can't tell the difference between physical and virtual processors, but Vista can (but I'm not sure of that.)


By hergieburbur on 3/27/2007 5:38:21 PM , Rating: 3
Actually, it can. Otherwise, you wouldn't be able to use a Dual-Core CPU on XP Home (1CPU), or Quad-Core CPU on XP pro (1-2 CPU), since that would be a violation of the license agreement.

Vista however, does do a better job of managing the way resources are distributed to the various cores, and I think thats what he meant.


By Psychless on 3/27/2007 9:30:32 PM , Rating: 2
While I can not give an experience of Vista I can give one of xp. I've had XP for five years now and I have experienced but one crash. That was because my power supply was not providing enough power to my video card and totally unrelated to the software. Unless Microsoft made Vista less stable than XP could only be better.


By semo on 3/28/2007 1:29:20 AM , Rating: 2
i can't remember the last time i had a crash in xp but that's and i'm sure i won't have problems in vista. that's only because i've been using firefox and openoffice lately and you don't expect that to bsod your pc.

so saying "vista is stable" without specifying what your using it for is as informative as pr speak.


By Etern205 on 3/28/2007 7:59:41 AM , Rating: 1
Windows XP is stable after Service Pack2 came out.
How long did users have to wait for SP2?
About 3 years or so.

Windows Vista is stable right from the start
even the RC version are stable enough
to be the finalized product.

STUPID MORON!
You deserve a Windows Vista Starter Edition shoved up your
ignorant a$$!


By semo on 3/28/2007 9:09:11 AM , Rating: 2
spend a few minutes rereading my post and you'll see i did not badmouth vista in any way. how could, i'm not using it so i don't know.

of course it's going to be stable for some in the beginning but what about professionals and cad/cam users with pro graphics cards.

how about maya 5 or multisim 8? i use those apps sometimes. has anyone tried running day of the tentacle or grim fandango on vista? most say vista is "stable", some say the opposite and almost never give any other details. those sort of comments don't tell me or anyone anything useful or new.

finally, i haven't had any big problems before sp2 that i can remember of. only that one virus that kept restarting windows, often before you got the chance to download the fix.


By Westmassguy on 3/27/2007 5:08:05 PM , Rating: 2
I have vista on all three machines in my house, and the only problems I've had are driver related.
I like the eye candy, and since most of it runs in hardware now, I see no performance hit.
My only complaint is driver support (or lack there of) from vendors like Nvidia, Lexmark, Logitech to name a few.


By Westmassguy on 3/27/2007 5:10:11 PM , Rating: 2
Those same machines also ran XP with the same hardware.


By ScythedBlade on 3/27/2007 7:38:52 PM , Rating: 3
Troll!

.... resource hog? Open up a program. It doesn't cause a huge memory dent as if you opened up in XP ... Superfetch basically preloads programs ... its not a resource hog ... its just a better utilization of wasted memory. Besides, whats the use of not using RAM you have?

It sure isn't faster to have 1 GB of unused ram .... just makes it easier to open new programs to take up that 1 GB of unused ram ... but heck, why not load them in the ram, and open the program, which will not do anything to the ram that's already used since its alrady using it.


By leexgx on 3/29/2007 10:44:49 PM , Rating: 2
Troll your self

vista is resource uses and is about 5-10% slower then XP is quite true it requires 2-3 times the ram of XP (XP will run quite happy on 512mb or 256mb games 1gb-1.5gb ram but norm 2x1gb ram used)

vista needs 1gb ram to run smoth should be used norm or 2-3gb for gameing or you mite run into Disk pageing with some games that use more then 1gb of ram

i not found an way to Force Vista not to use the page file untill its needed yet as i can do that on XP

i going to Dual XP as for everything els work/gameing DX9

Vista as DX10 gameing only as gameing performace suffers or not stable on Vista but alot of that is due to nvidia at this time but i guess we cant sue nvidia as there last line in there agreement says we can provide you crap drivers and it ant are problem

i got an little bord of to many things not working right or Not been optimised at the time and other things like search still trying to work out how to use it (god know how norm users going to work out how to do an full search)

i probly Only use vista for DX10 games i probly should of not even payed for vista just load on up and stop the clock (ATI need to bring there New Video card out)

Superfetch is an good idea works well i agree on that

i been useing it for an month or so now and i find it good and annoying at the same time (i could make an list but i could rave on about its good points and bad points)


By user111 on 3/27/2007 7:59:28 PM , Rating: 2
I think UAC is a wonderful thing to have happen to Vista. It's true that it's annoying at first, but there is no reason why it shouldn't be..

ISV/programmers in general need to start thinking about writing safer applications. If you writing a program to say calculate square root of pi, there's no reason this program needs to run with elevated privileges. I would say at least 50% of all apps are under this category. If everyone were to follow MS recommended practices for this sort of situation, I'm sure a lot of those annoying UAC prompts will go away and your apps will be much much safer..


By Nekrik on 3/27/2007 8:31:41 PM , Rating: 3
and a lot of the same recommended practices were in place for XP but no one listened. The admin account was chosen as the default since a newly installed machine usually need to be configured. The idea was that the user would then switch to a limited user account after it was configured but they didn't do so. On the third party developer side very few apps ran correctly under user accounts when the 'Run as Admin' functionality was used, this is fault of the third party company not testing/developing correctly.


By bikinistud on 3/27/2007 10:08:24 PM , Rating: 4
I will admit that Vista is also very nice to look at/use on a daily basis but some things about it still baffle me. UAC is annoying, not because it is trying to help (which I no-doubt think it is) but that it tries to protect you from opening microsoft's own code. If you want to open device manager you are asked basically "Are you sure you want to open this?" and I can understand why, people don't normally need to be here. But don't ask me again! I wish it was smart enough to know that your big enough to read the prompt once and that you don't need to read it again.

My two cents, and I'm not dogging Vista as a whole, but this is something that needs to be addressed.


By noirsoft on 3/29/2007 11:31:29 PM , Rating: 2
It's not there to prevent YOU from opening Device Manager per se, it's there to warn you if a third-party piece of code tried to open it programmatically. Since Device Manager has the ability to change some low-level system settings (like which drivers are loaded) it makes sense that UAC is activated.

Now, there definitely is an argument that UAC should not be activated on a _read_ attempt from some types of system data, only on _write_ attempts, but I'm not enough of a systems-level guy to know how feasable that would be to implement.


By eman 7613 on 3/27/2007 11:39:29 PM , Rating: 2
personally i don't like it. They installed it on our school laptops (512mbs of ram) and now they load applications and such slowly, and the whole using a flash drive as ram thing doesn't seem to be making an appreciable difference.
Taking out the mediacenter(don't use it) areo(i liked my custom xp look and now its gone :( ), its same old xp just slower and less cooperative. Doom3 used to play on them just fine if you didnt turn on AA, and now it dies on it, and AP Computer science teacher is under flack b/c he cant get java and stuff to run right on vista so classes are confusing. Just a bunch of trouble realy.


"This is about the Internet.  Everything on the Internet is encrypted. This is not a BlackBerry-only issue. If they can't deal with the Internet, they should shut it off." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis
Related Articles













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