Sign in / up

back to article No, Windows 10 hasn’t beaten Windows 7’s market share. Not for sure, anyway

Web analytics outfit StatCounter last week trumpeted news that Windows 10’s market share overtook Windows 7’s for the first time in January 2018. But other ratings services didn’t find the same result. StatCounter’s assessment of Windows version market share for January 2018 suggested that Windows 10 scored 42.78 per cent of …

COMMENTS

Post your comment
House rules Send corrections
Add to 'My topics' unstar *

Page:

  1. gypsythief

    And they were so close...

    I get to use Windows 10 Enterprise LTSB at work, and you know what? It's great. It's fast, it's stable, it has (virtually) no slurp, it has 10 years support; y'know, like Windows versions always did.

    There are no unmanageable [cr]apps to deal with, no frantic 6 month upgrade treadmill, just quite, peaceful computing. So, it gets slapped on everything that comes with any other version of Windows 10, and Just Works.

    I think that if Microsoft had made the standard Windows 10 like they made the LTSB version, they would have had a much more compelling product, that would have done a lot better. As it is, the stats speak for themselves.

    35 9 Reply
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: And they were so close...

      But.... (there is always at least one isn't there)

      Your company is paying for the [insert description here] of using 'Enterprise LTSB' where as at the moment the rest if us mere mortals (well most of us anyway) got it imposed on us for free. We are the real beta testers of this [insert appropriate description here] OS not you guys.

      I'm sure that a lot of the rest of us would like to get this stability instead we are treated to their whims and when we see a reboot happening we just pray that our system has not been borked by some stupidity on their part.

      One rule for those that Pay and one for those who don't.

      My company is too cheapskate to want to pay for the LTSB so we are getting the 'bog standard corporate edition' plus all manner of controls that even stop us from turning off the camera (I kid you not). As a result most of my team will only use the corporate laptop for emails and filling in timesheets. The rest of the time we'll go back to a Win7 VM on our Macbooks. All of us have taped over the camera's and microphones on our company kit for obvious reasons. Thankfully, it won't be a problem for us much longer as our jobs are going to an indian outsourcer on April 3rd.

      51 3 Reply
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: And they were so close...

        "My company is too cheapskate to want to pay for the LTSB so we are getting the 'bog standard corporate edition'"

        They are the exact same product license (and cost). And LTSB isn't for standard use - it's for embedded devices, etc. so that's far more likely to be the reason they are not using that option.

        2 2 Reply
    2. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: And they were so close...

      "I get to use Windows 10 Enterprise LTSB at work"

      You know that's only meant for kiosks and medical devices, etc? And specifically NOT for anything that runs MS Office? And doesn't support Office Pro Plus at all? And leaves you stuck with IE instead of Edge? Sounds like someone didn't bother to do their research properly.

      "It's fast, it's stable"

      But not as fast and stable (or as secure) as the more regularly updated builds like CBB.

      "it has (virtually) no slurp"

      Just like CBB and other enterprise builds.

      "it has 10 years support"

      And only gets feature updates every few years. And requires a full rebuild each time instead of in place updates like CBB.

      15 12 Reply
      1. Adrian 4
        Reply Icon

        Re: And they were so close...

        "You know that's only meant for kiosks and medical devices, etc? And specifically NOT for anything that runs MS Office?"

        You know that's an advantage in a significant fraction of installations, right ?

        We're not all stuck with running the consumer dross.

        11 3 Reply
        1. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: And they were so close...

          "You know that's an advantage in a significant fraction of installations, right ?"

          A fraction being less than a whole 1% in this case presumably.

          1 1 Reply
      2. johnnyblaze
        Reply Icon

        Re: And they were so close...

        That's exactly why we *are* looking at running the LTSB on the standard desktop. No Edge, Cortana, App Store, data slurping etc by DEFAULT. We don't want feature updates - just security ones. We want a stable, reliable platform to run Win32 apps, just like Win7 does. I don't care you have to do a complete rebuild to update - that's fine with me.

        If MS had actually asked enterprises what they wanted - they'd have said Win7 v2, not 8 or 10. Win10 (Pro) is a nightmare to manage as things just keep changing all the time. Who needs feature updates in the workplace? People do the same jobs day in day out. It's all just crap. Win10 is a clusterf*ck, but we don't have a choice.

        33 1 Reply
        1. bombastic bob Silver badge
          Reply Icon
          Unhappy

          Re: And they were so close...

          "If MS had actually asked enterprises what they wanted"

          If MS had actually asked *EVERYONE* what they wanted (that's not a 4-incher, aka someone who sees the world through a 4 inch screen) we'd have had Win 7 v2. WIndows 7 was the _LAST_ time Micro-shaft listened to customers and responded appropriately.

          But Micro-shaft is currently in self-shoot-in-foot mode, and won't listen to customers any more. Expect more of same, subscription level, and [from what I heard 3rd hand] ABANDONMENT of the WIN32 API by 2022.

          "Developers Developers Developers Developers" - whatever happened to THAT?

          12 2 Reply
          1. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: And they were so close...

            Microsoft Corp. has the luck that Apple Corp. has the same kind of idiot at its helm.

            1 0 Reply
        2. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: And they were so close...

          "That's exactly why we *are* looking at running the LTSB on the standard desktop. No Edge, Cortana, App Store, data slurping etc by DEFAULT."

          You get only IE instead of Edge - significantly less secure. And data slurping is the exact same. App store and Cortana can easily be turned off if you don't want them.

          "We don't want feature updates - just security ones"

          But you DON'T get the security feature updates with the LTSB. Which have been quite significant so far.

          "I don't care you have to do a complete rebuild to update - that's fine with me."

          But is pointless effort and cost - and it causes support issues - for instance no option to run Office Pro Plus - which is a common requirement in most enterprises that are not fully O365. And you have to use an insecure spyware by design browser like Chrome if you want anything to actually work. And you cant make sites that require IE automatically select it like you can in Edge. The list of problems with such an inappropriate build choice is significant...

          0 10 Reply
          1. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: And they were so close...

            " And you have to use an insecure spyware by design browser like Chrome if you want anything to actually work. "

            Chrome is far more secure than Edge let alone IE, plus the slurp can be disabled via GPO.

            3 0 Reply
          2. Sandtitz Silver badge
            Reply Icon
            Facepalm

            Re: And they were so close... @AC

            "You get only IE instead of Edge - significantly less secure."

            How is it less secure? According to CVE Details, IE had "only" 79 vulns last year, whereas Edge has 202 vulns and for comparison Chrome had 153 vulns.

            In any case, lack of Edge doesn't mean IE only since there are several other browsers available, Chrome and Firefox come to mind. IE can be locked down pretty well through GPOs.

            "And data slurping is the exact same"

            Wrong. The telemetry shit can be tuned down (but not off) as in the normal Enterprise versions.

            "But you DON'T get the security feature updates with the LTSB."

            "Security feature updates"? LTSB versions, release every now and then, will all get 10 years of security updates from the release dates. For example, the 1607 LTSB version ("anniversary update") will get security updates for about 8,5 years as of now, but whatever fancy things MS has concocted in later versions won't be backported to it.

            for instance no option to run Office Pro Plus - which is a common requirement in most enterprises that are not fully O365."

            The recent Reg article referred to the MS article which specifically states that the upcoming Office 2019 will run on LTSC 2018 version. Office 2016 Professional Plus has feature parity with 365 Proplus.

            "And you cant make sites that require IE automatically select it like you can in Edge. The list of problems with such an inappropriate build choice is significant..."

            Many choices have pros and cons. Lack of Edge is either a pro or con for some.

            4 2 Reply
          3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge
            Reply Icon

            Re: And they were so close...

            "And you cant make sites that require IE automatically select it like you can in Edge."

            Are you seriously suggesting that even considering using sites that require IE shouldn't be a sacking offence?

            7 0 Reply
          4. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: And they were so close...

            Why would I WANT Office.latest? What, exactly, that I care about is Office.latest doing for me that Office 2010 or even 2003 doesn't do? Why do I WANT the latest "features" that Microsoft is forcing into Windows 10? What's the benefit and value to me?

            XBOX GAMES HALF OFF, BUY THE XBOX SUPERPASS, ONLY TWO VIRGIN SOULS!

            I know why the NSA want me on this bullshit consumer Windows 10 splurping fucktocracy of a treadmill, but I don't understand what benefit it is to me. More to the point, I don't see how any of the so-called benefits are worth giving up full control of my operating system, privacy or sanity?

            CLICK HERE TO HATE SKYPE MORE NOW

            7 2 Reply
      3. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Reply Icon
        Devil

        Re: And they were so close...

        "And only gets feature updates every few years"

        that's a BAD thing? I have "opt'ed out" of "feature updates" for quite some time... by sticking with 7 (and before that, XP).

        12 2 Reply
        1. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: And they were so close...

          Oh. If those idiots at Microshaft just made a bloody Aero-capable Windows 7-theme for Windows 10 (and a classic grey one) and just kept the classic control panel complete (until the new settings thingy was FULLY operational) then they'd win the hearts of millions.... instantly!

          Especially since there's a theme-engine build into win10.

          But now we're stuck with a UI where some people can't distinguish the buttons from window-decorations. Can the idiot who designed this fugly crap please follow some classes in ergonomics! PLEASE!

          7 0 Reply
          1. JohnFen
            Reply Icon

            Re: And they were so close...

            "then they'd win the hearts of millions.... instantly!"

            I doubt it -- they probably already have the vast majority of hearts they can win. But I think that they might make people hate using Windows a little bit less.

            3 0 Reply
    3. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: And they were so close...

      >>I get to use Windows 10 Enterprise LTSB at work

      And you will have to rebuild them all to the 2018 version of the LTSB to for instance be able to use Office 2019. No in place updates for you!

      10 3 Reply
      1. OldCrow
        Reply Icon

        Re: And they were so close...

        Well now. Seeing as the alternative, the current state of things, is that Windows 10 "Bog Standard" regularly loses sound playback and/or recording ability, as a result of a "background" driver update. Regularly, yet unpredictably...

        I, for one, would much prefer a yearly full installation of the latest build, if it keeps the sound going when we have a 200+ person audience.

        20 0 Reply
        1. bombastic bob Silver badge
          Reply Icon
          Flame

          Re: And they were so close...

          "Windows 10 'Bog Standard' regularly loses sound playback and/or recording ability, as a result of a 'background' driver update"

          This makes it NOT a candidate for doing things with media production software like Cakewalk (also making a compelling case for getting a Mac for that kind of stuff).

          /me points out that while doing music-production-related things on XP or 7, I would always make sure that windows update was tuned off. Of course _NOW_ it's ALWAYS off, but that's for different reasons...

          5 1 Reply
          1. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: And they were so close...

            >>Windows 10 'Bog Standard' regularly loses sound playback and/or recording ability, as a result of a 'background' driver update

            I have never seen such an issue and I have worked on many dozens of different hardware types with Windows 10. Probably you have faulty hardware. Or an outdated driver.

            3 8 Reply
      2. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        "No in place updates for you!"

        Really, who trust in-place updates? You still have all the crud accumulated here and there. If the file system has been upgraded, you would need to re-format the disk anyway. And if you align moving to a new releases with upgrading to new hardware as well, or even replacing the disk(s) with new ones, a fresh install from scratch is not only a non-issue, is also welcome.

        7 6 Reply
        1. WolfFan Silver badge
          Reply Icon

          Re: "No in place updates for you!"

          If the file system has been upgraded, you would need to re-format the disk anyway.

          Not necessarily. Apple has form in changing the file system from under users without having to do a reformat. Back when they moved from HFS to HFS+, no format was required. They are currently moving from HFS+ to APFS, and again no format is required. MS can move from FAT to NTFS without formatting. I have no idea whether it's possible to go from NTFS to ReFS without a format. If I were running things at MS, I'd certainly try to get that done without a format if it were at all possible. Then again, if I were running things at MS there would be a lot of things done is radically different ways.

          11 3 Reply
          1. Richard Plinston
            Reply Icon

            Re: "No in place updates for you!"

            > MS can move from FAT to NTFS without formatting

            There is a conversion process which rewrites the drive to NTFS without needing to reformat. This is a one-way process, it cannot be reverted and it cannot be done on a partition that is in use. A 'format' will write the sectors and interblock gaps onto a bare disk, the conversion will move stuff around on the existing sectors to get the new layout.

            > I have no idea whether it's possible to go from NTFS to ReFS without a format.

            There seems to be no conversion process to get ReFS, it needs a reformat.

            1 1 Reply
        2. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: "No in place updates for you!"

          "Really, who trust in-place updates? You still have all the crud accumulated here and there."

          No you don't - all previous crud is nicely moved to a "Windows.old" folder.

          "If the file system has been upgraded, you would need to re-format the disk anyway"

          Not with Windows you don't - it updates on the fly.

          0 7 Reply
          1. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Anonymous Coward

            "all previous crud is nicely moved to a "Windows.old" "

            No. The Windows directory only. Whatever you have in the registry, program files, and users folder will be still the same.

            If the on-disk structure of the file system changes, it won't be upgraded. In the past, NTFS had several version, and the only way to get the new version was to reformat. Feel free to check, if you don't believe me. Magic changes don't exist in IT.

            0 0 Reply
          2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge
            Reply Icon

            Re: "No in place updates for you!"

            "Not with Windows you don't - it updates on the fly."

            You wrote that as if it were a good thing. A lot of users seem to disagree.

            6 0 Reply
    4. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      Unhappy

      Re: And they were so close...

      " they would have had a much more compelling product"

      it's a fair bet that Micro-shaft *NEVER* wanted to give you the features you highlighted in your post, even for the "you paid through the nose for it" Enterprise aka 'executive' aka 'First class seating' version.

      In other words, paying extra to NOT be tracked/advertised-to/force-upgraded

      OK so the Enterprise LTSB version has lipstick on the OINKY end, then. And maybe a string of pearls to go with it. But it's still A PIG. Oink. And it has the 2D FLATSO interface, and "The Metro"-ness, and UWP-ness. Right?

      7 3 Reply
    5. JohnFen
      Reply Icon

      Re: And they were so close...

      "it has (virtually) no slurp"

      Whenever you see the word "virtually", remember that it means "not really".

      9 0 Reply
      1. quxinot
        Reply Icon

        Re: And they were so close...

        "Whenever you see the word "virtually", remember that it means "not really"."

        Thank you.

        When that statement can be written as "none -- verifiably" then we'll start talking about making the UI and update process something usable.

        1 0 Reply
  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Doesn't statistics also prove that the average person has one testicle?

    36 0 Reply
    1. James 51
      Reply Icon
      Boffin

      And 2.4 kids.

      12 0 Reply
      1. James O'Shea
        Reply Icon

        "And 2.4 kids."

        You keep goats in the house?!

        14 0 Reply
      2. Naselus
        Reply Icon

        "And 2.4 kids."

        It's quite hard to add up how many you have without removing them from the freezer and trying to put them back together, tbh.

        14 0 Reply
      3. Martin an gof Silver badge
        Reply Icon

        And 2.4 kids

        Actually, it's somewhere around 1.8 per woman these days.

        Yup, I was surprised too :-)

        M.

        3 0 Reply
        1. katrinab Silver badge
          Reply Icon

          The average woman will give birth to 1.8 children at some point. Some have not yet done so, so the average number of children women actually have is less than that.

          1 1 Reply
          1. MyffyW Silver badge
            Reply Icon

            It is the one statistic that is universal - 50% of men and women are below average.

            5 0 Reply
            1. Roj Blake Silver badge
              Reply Icon

              Re: 50% of men and women are below average.

              Not always. Less than 1% of people have a below average number of legs.

              8 0 Reply
              1. MJI Silver badge
                Reply Icon

                Re: 50% of men and women are below average. Legs

                I can tell you never watch "The Last Leg"

                2 0 Reply
            2. Richard Plinston
              Reply Icon

              Re: 50% of men and women are below average.

              You are confusing 'median' and 'average'.

              Example: 9 men have an IQ of 99, one has an IQ of 109. The average is 100. 90% are below average.

              7 0 Reply
    2. James O'Shea
      Reply Icon
      Coat

      lies, damn lies, and...

      "Doesn't statistics also prove that the average person has one testicle?"

      Slightly less than one, actually. And slightly more than one chesticle.

      [looks up, sees that SWMBO has a sharp implement in her hands, runs away really fast]

      12 0 Reply
  3. Christian Berger

    One should add to the graph...

    ... that it shows the fractions of "Desktop Windows users which do not have an ad-blocker". Their service is based on access logs of ad servers, so they are heavily biased towards novice users who do not know how to operate an ad- or javascript-blocker.

    40 0 Reply
    1. Naselus
      Reply Icon

      Re: One should add to the graph...

      Also known as "heavily biased toward about 98% of the actual market". Adblock is very popular, and still probably only has about 5-10% potential market penetration. Most users are not tech savvy and don't really mind looking at the internet through a blur of massed advertizing.

      I was on an adblock-free PC the other day and actually didn't recognize one of the websites I regularly visit.

      8 1 Reply
      1. Teiwaz
        Reply Icon

        Re: One should add to the graph...

        Most users are not tech savvy and don't really mind know there is an alternative to looking at the internet through a blur of massed advertizing.

        Fixed that for you.

        13 1 Reply
        1. Naselus
          Reply Icon

          Re: One should add to the graph...

          "Fixed that for you."

          No, I think my way was better. Try it. Inform one of them that they don't have to look at the web through a mess of ads, and tell them about Adblocker.

          But don't install it for them. Let them install it themselves. They won't; if it actually involves looking for and installing something themselves then they decide that they 'don't mind the ads'.

          8 1 Reply
          1. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: One should add to the graph...

            "They won't; if it actually involves looking for and installing something themselves then they decide that they 'don't mind the ads' 'think computer is too hard'."

            FTFTFY

            3 0 Reply
      2. Trevor_Pott Gold badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: One should add to the graph...

        I should point out that ad block penetration has surpassed 30% already.

        2 0 Reply
  4. MJI Silver badge

    I helped 7

    Just migrated to it this weekend, still have to sort printer scanner and my MSDOS stuff.

    7 2 Reply
  5. FF22

    StatCounter = irrelevant, amateurish

    StatCounter

    1. doesn't count unique users - let alone installations -, but page views

    2. their statistics are not representative.

    Because of that, their numbers are practically irrelevant and non-indicative, when it comes to market share of operating systems, browsers, etc. The fact they don't even know that, makes just it obvious how amateurish they are and operate.

    15 4 Reply
    1. Christian Berger
      Reply Icon

      Re: StatCounter = irrelevant, amateurish

      Yes, the best example was that weird >50% share of Windows on the Internet which everybody knew was obviously fake.

      Back in about 2014 or so I did conduct some research of my own on a camping holiday. Of about 100 laptop I've seen, about 80 were running Linux (usually Thinkpads), 18 or were Macs (usually with stickers on them indicating they were paid by the employer, and about 2 ran Windows.

      8 16 Reply

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

Forgotten password ?

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like