[anniebrion]

Analysis Think Windows 8 isn't performing as well as Microsoft expected? Think again! The software giant says sales of its new OS are chugging along quite nicely, thank you very much, in much the same fashion as Windows 7 before it.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/01...ws_8_sales_up/

[flagpole]

sales of windows are a nit more anodyne than people like to think. A tiny percentage of people are even aware of what version of windows they are getting.

for the most part the sales of windows are entirely driven by the sales of new PCs.

[Helmut10]

The vast majority of users don't care, I don't. I use Application software for some specific purpose, like a word processor or a Web Browser, and so on, not an Operating system which is just there to install your software on.

What matters is the Software I use and the hardware works, that is it.

I don't care what geeks say about any OS.

[d'@ve]

Originally Posted by anniebrion

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/01...ws_8_sales_up/

"The 60 million licenses figure is impressive, but it does seem to indicate that overall sales have been slowing in the months since Windows 8's October 2012 launch. Microsoft's previous claim was 40 million licenses sold, but that was back in November.

What's more, as Microsoft's announcement explains, that 60 million figure "represents the cumulative sales of Windows 8 including both upgrades and sales to OEMs for new devices."

In other words, some of those Windows licenses are upgrades that are running on real-world machines, right now, but a great many of them aren't. In fact, the machines that many of those copies of Windows 8 will eventually run on haven't even been built yet.

Here at El Reg, we suspect that Microsoft's 60 million number also includes many licenses that have been sold to enterprise customers through Redmond's Volume Licensing program. Such customers often stockpile Windows licenses for use at some later date; so, again, a license sold by Microsoft doesn't necessarily mean a computer that's booting to Windows 8 today."

It's the usual large corporate spin. Massaged or misleading figures.

And sales bear little relation to overall user satisfaction after it's bought - though many of these licences clearly haven't even been bought or brought into use by consumers yet... if they ever will! We are none the wiser now than we were before Microsoft spoke.

[RichmondBlue]

Well, I've got no axe to grind, I'm still using XP. But I've been thinking of buying a new desktop, and was looking around at all-in-one computers. It appears impossible to avoid Windows 8, despite the distinctly luke-warm response from consumers. It seems to me that we are being dragged kicking and screaming into buying a new OS that very few people actually like or wanted.
I've seen very few enthusiastic reviews of Win8 from ordinary consumers, most say they are just muddling along and wishing they could go back to 7, XP, or even Vista.
If it's so different, and so user-unfriendly, it does make me wonder if I should finally take the leap to Apple and get an iMac. I wonder if other people are thinking the same ?

[IvanIV]

^^^ If the price and having to find OSX equivalents for your programmes doesn't stop you, by all means. Or you could install Windowson it MS gets their money from new computers sold, upgrades are a welcomed bonus. If OEMs start to complain then it gets serious for MS, too.

[John259]

Originally Posted by RichmondBlue

it does make me wonder if I should finally take the leap to Apple and get an iMac. I wonder if other people are thinking the same ?

Some people are of course but I don't know of any statistics to say how many have actually made the change. Some form of Linux is another possible option.

In addition, a fair number of people are saying that Win8 is just about tolerable for them provided one of the user interface utilities such as Classic Shell or Start8 is used - unless they run into a hardware or software incompatibility issue.

[and101]

Originally Posted by RichmondBlue

Well, I've got no axe to grind, I'm still using XP. But I've been thinking of buying a new desktop, and was looking around at all-in-one computers. It appears impossible to avoid Windows 8, despite the distinctly luke-warm response from consumers. It seems to me that we are being dragged kicking and screaming into buying a new OS that very few people actually like or wanted.
I've seen very few enthusiastic reviews of Win8 from ordinary consumers, most say they are just muddling along and wishing they could go back to 7, XP, or even Vista.
If it's so different, and so user-unfriendly, it does make me wonder if I should finally take the leap to Apple and get an iMac. I wonder if other people are thinking the same ?

The main problem with windows 8 is that it is different to windows 7 and people hate change. Windows 8 is getting the same luke-warm reception that Windows XP got when that was released. I can remember lots of people complaining that XP was a terrible OS with a fisherprice interface and had tons of compatibility problems. Now the same people are complaining about Windows 8 while claiming that XP was the best OS ever released.

[Stig]

Originally Posted by and101

The main problem with windows 8 is that it is different to windows 7 and people hate change. Windows 8 is getting the same luke-warm reception that Windows XP got when that was released. I can remember lots of people complaining that XP was a terrible OS with a fisherprice interface and had tons of compatibility problems. Now the same people are complaining about Windows 8 while claiming that XP was the best OS ever released.

The difference is that XP had a 'classic' setting which allowed the Start menu to look like Windows 95/2000. I know of a famous London museum which was still using the 'classic' Start menu on XP up until last year!

Windows 8 forces you to use the new Start screen unless you use third party software to bypass it.

[John259]

It seems that for most people Windows 8 without one of the utilities takes a fair bit of time to master and this isn't helped by the lack of clues. It's my opinion that not many people are prepared to make that effort, lacking various combinations of time, desire, knowledge and/or confidence. I'm also of the view that the effort shouldn't be needed - either the user interface should have been left largely unchanged, or the everyday operations made so obvious that hardly any learning period was required.

[soulboy77]

Originally Posted by and101

...I can remember lots of people complaining that XP was a terrible OS with a fisherprice interface and had tons of compatibility problems. Now the same people are complaining about Windows 8 while claiming that XP was the best OS ever released.

Well a number of O/S had various issues when they were first released and only became decent stable products after service packs were applied.

Microsoft are going to shift licences because PC manufacturers don't have much choice but to use Windows 8 on new machines. But with each new version there is less compelling reasons to upgrade.

[s2k]

Originally Posted by Stig

The difference is that XP had a 'classic' setting which allowed the Start menu to look like Windows 95/2000.

Same with Windows 95 when that came out. There was a huge UI change but the user could opt for the old Program Manager if they really wanted.

Since this is the first OS to include Metro (or whatever it is called these days) it would have made logical sense to have a transition rather than push people off the deep end and hope they sort themselves out. The cynic in me feels that the reason for this is because the Metro App store/platform would be almost guaranteed to fail otherwise.

[The Rat]

Originally Posted by s2k

The cynic in me feels that the reason for this is because the Metro App store/platform would be almost guaranteed to fail otherwise.

Windows 8 is driven by Microsoft's obsession with Apple's App Store and the iPad and, I guess wisely from a business perspective, they want part of the action. They have to shove Modern/Metro/whatever in your face because frankly most people wouldn't give a shit about it otherwise.

Btw, on the sales, 60 million sales != 60 million active users. It would be interesting to know how many of these sales are actually in use.

Dave

[John259]

Originally Posted by The Rat

It would be interesting to know how many of these sales are actually in use.

gs.statcounter.com gives percentage usage figures for operating systems (and BTW also for browsers) based on the number of hits to the roughly 3 million servers that they monitor. So far Windows 8 has too low a percentage figure to be shown separately.

Several computer manfacturers including Acer and Asus are publically saying that Windows 8 has been at least in part the cause of depressed sales in the period leading up to Christmas 2012.

[Quackers]

Do not believe these figures. They say that Microsoft have sold us over 1000 Windows 8 licences, but we do not use Windows 8 they are all downgraded to Windows 7. Anyone who gets or renews their volume licencing agreements will be listed as a Windows 8 sale for every licence covered by it.

Better way to look at how wells it doing is to look at things like OS Market share stats.

[cnbcwatcher]

Originally Posted by Stig

The difference is that XP had a 'classic' setting which allowed the Start menu to look like Windows 95/2000. I know of a famous London museum which was still using the 'classic' Start menu on XP up until last year!

Windows 8 forces you to use the new Start screen unless you use third party software to bypass it.

I used to use the classic Start menu when I was using Windows XP. I hated the new style one. I think the dreaded Vista and Windows 7 removed the classic option though? I was talking to a friend yesterday who was using Windows 8 and I told her to install Classic Shell to be able to get the Start menu back.

[chivers]

Originally Posted by soulboy77

Well a number of O/S had various issues when they were first released and only became decent stable products after service packs were applied.

Microsoft are going to shift licences because PC manufacturers don't have much choice but to use Windows 8 on new machines. But with each new version there is less compelling reasons to upgrade.

The main problem as I see it is that when a new OS comes out microsoft insist that the OEM manufacturers include it by default. If the consumer is in the market for a new machine and wants to transfer his old o/s he is not allowed to. thus his programs and software may not run on the new system or cost too much make them work, then there is the retraining aspect, for large corporate companies all of this negates against change.Microsoft also uses new adopters as guinea pigs !!! I could just about stomach 8 if it did not have the stupid interface and all the associated baggage that it includes, but it is not worth buying in preference to 7 for the hassle and the sheer bloody unfriendlieness and non intuitiveness of it all. My perfect machine would a high specced modern machine with an updated and tweaked XP aint gonna happen i know but if micsoft went down that route it would please many many people. Many people only left XP because the machines died of old age and would like to replace like for like. I would like the OEM's to grow a pair and say to microsoft this is rubbish its not selling people want this (whatever this is) please provide it instead of rolling over as they do at present

[d'@ve]

Originally Posted by Quackers

Do not believe these figures. They say that Microsoft have sold us over 1000 Windows 8 licences, but we do not use Windows 8 they are all downgraded to Windows 7. Anyone who gets or renews their volume licencing agreements will be listed as a Windows 8 sale for every licence covered by it.

Better way to look at how wells it doing is to look at things like OS Market share stats.

Yes, and those using Metro need to be separated out from those who are using a third party 'classic' start menu add-on (if that's even possible).

The Microsoft figures are massaged and/or misleading and are therefore, meaningless.

[John259]

Originally Posted by d'@ve

Yes, and those using Metro

Is anyone using Metro?

[anniebrion]

Originally Posted by John259

Is anyone using Metro?

Yes, I'm using it and cannot see why people complain about it so much, most of my programs are desktop apps so I don't see MUI that much but when I'm in the MUI I love it

http://wallpaper.abcde.co.uk/

[IvanIV]

Originally Posted by anniebrion

Yes, I'm using it and cannot see why people complain about it so much, most of my programs are desktop apps so I don't see MUI that much but when I'm in the MUI I love it

Herd behaviour.

[anniebrion]

Originally Posted by IvanIV

Herd behaviour.

I've heard about that

[d'@ve]

Originally Posted by IvanIV

Herd behaviour.

Originally Posted by anniebrion

I've heard about that

I think you'll find that I was one of the first to complain about the unfortunate absence of an option to use the classic Start Menu method. I had W8 many weeks before its general release, and I tried Metro for quite a while before looking for alternatives (add-ons).

My views are unchanged: whether you like Metro or not, you (and everyone) should have had an officially supported choice. For clarity, choice means that if you like Metro you can use it happily, and if not, you don't need to. I still think Microsoft will in time bring out their own version of Classic Shell etc. via service pack or separate download.

But, I hope the add-on companies are doing very well out of it, they deserve to.

[d'@ve]

Classic Shell monthly downloads in 2012 (Jan to Dec):

2012-01 = 49,288 --> W8 consumer preview
2012-02 = 39,518
2012-03 = 42,051
2012-04 = 82,797
2012-05 = 41,379
2012-06 = 54,642 --> W8 public release preview
2012-07 = 99,720
2012-08 = 186,961 --> W8 RTM
2012-09 = 105,521
2012-10 = 252,876 --> W8 general release
2012-11 = 441,834
2012-12 = 703,411

and 229,769 for Jan 1st to 7th (rate of 1.0 million for this month).

http://sourceforge.net/projects/clas...+to+2013-01-07

Interesting, eh?

[IvanIV]

So W8 is selling well then