| [WIN8] Windows 8 Adoption at Standstill Windows 8 Adoption at Standstill; Microsoft Slashes OEM Bundle Price to $30 from $120
quote:
Four months after rollout, Microsoft has achieved an anemic 2.67% market share for Windows 8. Growth does not even keep up with natural attrition. quote:
In the month of February, according to Net Applications, Windows 8 gained 0.4% of the desktop market, moving from 2.26 to 2.67%. In comparison, Windows 7 had a market share of over 9% after four months of public availability. A growth rate of 0.4% is absolutely horrendous, and — if we assume that PCs are replaced every five years — actually below the natural attrition/replacement rate. If growth of 0.4% wasn’t bad enough, it’s also worth pointing out that it’s down from 0.5% in January — yes, Windows 8 adoption is slowing down. Windows 7, after a small dip last month, actually gained market share in February.
I'm surprised - especially after the deals they gave to early adopters. |
|
|
|
GemPremium
join:2005-09-10
kudos:2
1 edit | Windows 8 and Office both in a single $30 bundle? Where do we buy it? |
|
 AlcoholPremium
join:2003-05-26
Climax, MI
kudos:3
 ·Comcast
| reply to goalieskates
Computers are lasting a long time. There is no reason for people that have windows 7 PCs to buy another computer. Atleast not for the next few years.
I don't think OEMs are selling anything non windows 8, so it's just that people aren't buying computers. Maybe it's cause their computers are lasting longer or they're just using tablets.
If you check the OEM sales, i believe only Lenovo is doing well and everyone else is sliding. I don't think it's a windows 8 problem.
There is no reason for windows 7 owners to [pay to] upgrade to windows 8. Everyone i know who bought a windows 8 pc is never in the metro part. Ever.
--
I found the key to success but somebody changed the lock. |
|
Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable
| said by Alcohol:Computers are lasting a long time. There is no reason for people that have windows 7 PCs to buy another computer. Atleast not for the next few years. Yea, but go back in time a bit and you'll see that people used to upgrade their OS when a new one came out, assuming their PC could handle it.
Back in the day, I'd completed same-PC upgrades from 95 OSR2 to 98 SE (skipped first 98 since 95 SR2 was working great), Windows 2000 to XP and Windows Vista to 7...
... but Windows 7 to 8? That's a downgrade on my PC. |
|
 NhbassUpside Down JeepPremium
join:2001-01-15
Nashua, NH | reply to goalieskates
Most large OEM's have no choice but to sell 8 because of licensing restrictions. My company builds systems, custom and otherwise that are only Win 7. We'll sell you 8 if you really want it. Then we'll charge you to take it back off and reload it with 7. I run 8 and hate it. Thanks Start8! Now it runs like it should. I've used 8 on a tablet and think it's pretty good. On a standard desktop or laptop though, no thanks.
--
|
|
 RacerbobPremium
join:2001-06-24
Webster, NY | reply to goalieskates
After installing 8 on a couple computers I am getting ready to revert back to 7. Well I already have on one computer. Thinking seriously about setting 7 back up on my laptop. No major reason why except to say that I am missing Windows 7. I am quite certain that deep down inside the bowels (can I say that here ? LOL) of the Microsoft company that they are rethinking this whole Windows 8 deal. |
|
AlcoholPremium
join:2003-05-26
Climax, MI
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Comcast
| reply to urbanriot
said by urbanriot:said by Alcohol:Computers are lasting a long time. There is no reason for people that have windows 7 PCs to buy another computer. Atleast not for the next few years. Yea, but go back in time a bit and you'll see that people used to upgrade their OS when a new one came out, assuming their PC could handle it. Back in the day, I'd completed same-PC upgrades from 95 OSR2 to 98 SE (skipped first 98 since 95 SR2 was working great), Windows 2000 to XP and Windows Vista to 7... ... but Windows 7 to 8? That's a downgrade on my PC. Yes because those fixed a lot of issues. Windows 8 doesnt fix anything that's broken in windows 7. Windows 7 is pretty perfect.
--
I found the key to success but somebody changed the lock. |
|
 KramerPremium,Mod
join:2000-08-03
Richmond, VA
kudos:2
 ·GoDaddy Hosting
Host:
Microsoft Help
Satellite Radio
Wireless Security
1 edit | reply to goalieskates
Microsoft has two markets it must play in. First and foremost is the business market. Windows 7 is still being loaded and sold by OEMs to businesses and I doubt MS would do anything to change that in the next year or so. The consumer market has gradually been eaten away by competition over the years to the point where Microsoft's share is a disturbing 20%. »www.extremetech.com/computing/14···-8-years The rise of the tablet has meant the fall of Microsoft's share of the pie. Windows 8 is all about the tablet, almost to the point of irrational panic with complete disregard for the business market that continues to buy a lot of Microsoft's stuff. The business market is what Microsoft has left and the Windows 8 adoption rate isn't a serious problem over the short term for the company, because they have much bigger problems. In the business world Microsoft's biggest competition is the cloud. I think it maybe time for a shakeup of the company, to the point of breaking it up into autonomous divisions. The government seriously considered breaking it up years ago and I find it ironic that Microsoft averted what would have probably been the best thing for it.
Edit: By the way, can anyone here name one truly innovative product that Microsoft has released in the last ten years, that has captured the awe of the general public? Other then a game controller, I can't think of one. |
|
| reply to goalieskates
Should some form of OpenOffice ever gain a big corporate following in the US, it will be the end of Microsoft as we know it.
|
|
Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable
1 edit | reply to Alcohol
said by Alcohol:Yes because those fixed a lot of issues. Windows 8 doesnt fix anything that's broken in windows 7. Windows 7 is pretty perfect. I wouldn't go so far to say that it's perfect as there's plenty I'd like to see improved from Windows 7, as in an evolution of an operating system like all operating systems before; unfortunately they didn't make any improvements upon Windows 7, rather they sidestepped improvements for WTF.
Maybe in Windows 9 they'll give us a little button in a corner we can click on that will produce many little metro tiles and you can still see what's on your screen while you navigate this menu. |
|
 OctaveanPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-31
New York, NY
kudos:1 | reply to goalieskates
As others have said, Windows 7 was fairly mature and people are identifying with it in much the way they identified with 32bit XP. The business sector often doesn't jump on new OSes so there is nothing new there.
Some time ago I had an injury to my right hand which spurred greater use of my left hand for a period of time. Even though my right hand has healed I still use my left hand now for things i had not before. Apparently there are neurological benefits to this.
Anyway, switching things up and doing things differently isn't something I run screaming from so its no small wonder that the radical changes introduced in the Windows 8 UI didn't phase me. I got used to Windows 8 fairly quickly and switch between unmodifide Windows 8, Windows 7, OS X, iOS, Android, WebOS and so on,....
I do understand that many wouldn't like / accept Windows 8 or anything radically different though.
Ill say this though, once the promotional pricing was dropped and free Media Center keys expired I wasn't much interested in buying any more Windows 8 Pro licenses,.....
Such a change made a hard sell even harder,... |
|
| Everyone I know of that bought a windows 8 machine ended up taking it back to the store.
I sold them a windows 7 machine instead 
Even with classic shell there are still too many issues , people are lost as soon as the desktop disappears. |
|
Mele20Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI
kudos:4 | I bought a new machine in November with Win 8 Pro. I wanted Win 7 Pro but could not get it with the video card I wanted.
I hated Metro. I still dislike Metro and don't think I will ever like it for a desktop. I used Win 8 for two months before I installed Start8 and finally completely disabled UAC in the registry. UAC is worse on Win 8 than on Win 7 or Vista. IMO, the worst thing about Win 8 is that it refuses to understand what an Admin account is...that problem is worse than the Metro crap.
I also badgered Dell to send me USB reinstallation media for Win 8 Pro and Windows 7 Pro if I decided to downgrade. But with Start8, Win 8 has a better GUI than Win 7 with its fat, bloated, sloooooow look. I ignore Metro and can't use any Metro apps (not that I would want to anyway) because I disabled the UAC driver in the registry. I use Metro now only if I need to get to something like Advanced Start choices.
I also disabled a lot of garbage that Intel and Dell (seems to think I bought a laptop not a desktop) put on this machine and now it is fast and I reclaimed 10% RAM. I was shocked to see that Win 8 needs a MINIMUM of 16GB RAM if you plan to run just ONE virtual machine. But disabling the junk improves it. I thought I was getting plenty of RAM when I bought 16GB but Dell was recommending 24GB and I should have heeded their recommendation.
Dell has released a new Ultrasharp 24" monitor that is my dream monitor. Why would I want a touch screen monitor when (if I could find the money) I could have a fabulous Ultrasharp? How Microsoft could think everyone would want touchscreen monitors for desktops is beyond me. Dell's new Ultrasharp is to drool over and Dell must be thinking folks don't want touch screen monitors.
At any rate, I didn't return this machine nor have I downgraded to Win 7 Pro.
--
When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson |
|
bkjohnsonPremium
join:2002-05-22
Birmingham, AL Reviews:
·Charter
| reply to goalieskates
I replaced a desktop in July of last year. The machine that I bought came with Windows 7 and also provision to upgrade to windows 8 for $15 if I registered with Microsoft, which registration I did. In December of last year, I replaced my laptop with one that came with Windows 8. Based on my experience with the Win 8 laptop, I have decided to leave the desktop as Win 7. I use the machines mostly for work related things, and most of the tiles are not useful to me. I really can't picture a change to Win 8 on the machines in our office, which are doing very well with windows 7. |
|
 digitalfuturSees More Than ShownPremium
join:2000-07-15
BurlingtonON
kudos:2 | reply to goalieskates
Apples and oranges comparison. Windows 7 came out with 5 years of pent-up demand from Windows XP users who didn't buy Vista, which itself was released 5 years after its predecessor OS, Windows XP. Neither is true with the timing of the Windows 8 release.
Let's see where Windows 8 (a transitional OS release) or its successor is at the end of 2014, 10 months after all support ends for XP. Microsoft thinks long term when it comes to their operating systems.
--
Logic requires one to deal with decisions that one's ego will not permit.
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing - Edmund Burke. |
|
| reply to goalieskates
The only reason I even got 8 was because it was $39.99. So I upgraded my four machines. I did, however, keep Windows 7 (and even Windows Vista) on them as well.
I also installed/bought StartIsBack to get the Windows 7 start menu back. It pretty much blocks Metro unless I specifically go to it in the Charms menu. Boots straight to desktop. It's really nice. So now it's like I have Windows 7, but any time I want I can go into "Windows 8 Mode" in a matter of seconds, then back to "Windows 7 Mode" just as fast. No confusion. It's basically Windows 8 the way it should be. Oh, and there are no extra processes running, either. It's all using code already built-in to Windows 8. |
|
| reply to goalieskates
Because of W8, and laptop companies that removed Express and firewire ports.....
I will keep our upgraded W7-64 laptop until it no longer works.
These companies brought this situation on themselves.... and they will have to live with the consequences!
The hardware MFG's (SSD, Ram, Parts Resellers) however, are benefiting from this....
I'm presently voting with my wallet, and for the foreseeable future, W8 and new laptop is not even in consideration..
--
Looking for 1939 Indian Motocycle |
|
| reply to goalieskates
Re: [WIN8] Windows 8 Adoption at Standstill FWIW, our Lenovo rep for my company WON'T sell us any computer with Win8 on it. Not that I'd consider Win8, but I thought it was funny that every config I requested she spec'd Win7 Pro by default and didn't even leave an option for Win8.
Businesses USED to upgrade Office suites & OSs rather regularly back in the 90s and early 2000s. Traditionally, each new OS was an improvement. 3.11 made 3.0 usable, Win95 was a nice jump ahead. 98 was rather good, but still had the DOS/Windows overlay thing going on. NT->2000->XP were all nice upgrades. ME, Vista, not so much.
I've always wondered what the people in charge of OS development actually think. Who the hell thought a talking paperclip was a good idea? Who thought ribbon menus and removing keyboard shortcuts for things was a good idea? Training wheels are nice to learn with but eventually everyone (at least my age) learned to ride a bike without them and would never consider going back. I still have plenty of users running Office 2003 because it's not worth the time & trouble to teach them Office 2010. (Some of these users are pretty much untrainable at this age in their lives. We've decided to leave them alone on the legacy stuff as long as we possibly can.)
I think MS has completely lost focus here. First & foremost, focus on the business customer. We want no-nonsense & reliability. This also means getting rid of/or at least giving us more control over the autoformat crap in Office. Or at least give us a Reveal Codes like WordPerfect has had from the DOS days. Next, we want performance. Clean up your damn code. Win7 still contains code written back in 1988. Sadly, that's probably some of the better code in the product. But still...I remember back in the assembly days when people tried to find every way possible to optimize their code. Yes, some of this was due to limited storage on the hardware, but there was also a personal pride issue in how small you could get your programs.
Also, adjust your pricing accordingly. This isn't 1995 anymore.
My office's back-end is a mixture of *nix machines (BSD & linux). Why? Reliability #1, pricing of software + hardware required to run it #2. Our firewall runs on an Atom, e-mail server is a single-core Xeon, main file server is on a dual-core Xeon. Collaboration server is a dual-core Xeon. The only problems we've had have been hard drive failures and the occasional power supply blowing out. Nothing server-class hardware can't handle while staying online. I haven't checked uptimes in awhile but most of these systems were at >1,000+ days of uptime. Almost all of the equipment was bought used (let someone else get the bugs out of it). None of it is even close enough to being able to run Exchange 2013 or SBS 2011 or Server+Sharepoint, but all of this hardware outperforms those systems on new hardware. Why? I want value for money. My company wants value for money. Microsoft's not delivering it anymore. I had a lot of opposition originally when I proposed NOT replacing a dying Win2k3 Server with another Microsoft product, but now people can't imagine going back. I can't think of the last time I had to take down the e-mail server to work on it. This was NOT the case with Exchange.
And what about the home users? They basically want what the business user wants -- stability & reliability; throw in a puppy with a bow tied around its neck and there you go. Just create Basic & Advanced versions of menus, like Control Panel became in XP. That's it. No need to simplify it more. New users may get lost, but they get lost with anything. Just go to an Apple store and see how many people go up to the Genius Bar asking basic questions about their iPhone or Mac. Then count how many times their staff artfully tell the person they can't do that, or they'll need a 3rd party product for that. |
|
| reply to Mele20
Minimum of 16gig of ram to run a single virtual machine? Man i cannot believe the lies people say just because of their aversion to Windows 8. |
|
