Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Windows 8 and Windows 8.1 Pass 10% Market Share, Windows XP Falls Below 30%

samzenpus posted about 10 months ago | from the looking-at-the-numbers dept.

Microsoft 470

An anonymous reader writes "With the release of Windows 8.1 to the world in October, Microsoft ended 2013 with two full months of availability for its latest operating system version. While Windows 8.1 is certainly growing quickly and eating into Windows 8s share, the duo has only now been able to pass 10 percent market share, while Windows 7 seems to be plowing forward unaffected. The latest market share data from Net Applications shows that Windows 8 and Windows 8.1 made steady progression in December 2013, gaining a combined 1.19 percentage points (from 9.30 percent to 10.49 percent). More specifically, Windows 8 gained 0.23 percentage points (from 6.66 percent to 6.89 percent), while Windows 8.1 jumped 0.96 percentage points (from 2.64 percent to 3.60 percent)."

cancel ×

470 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

It doesn't matter (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45854839)

Windows 8 is still a piece of shit, and most people got it because their device came preinstalled with it... they didn't choose it.

Re:It doesn't matter (1, Troll)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 10 months ago | (#45854861)

That's why they fixed most of the issues in Windows 8.1. You should try it.

Re:It doesn't matter (5, Informative)

RDW (41497) | about 10 months ago | (#45854891)

Classic Shell fixes most of the issues in Windows 8.x. The Windows 8.1 update doesn't really fix anything.

Re:It doesn't matter (4, Insightful)

Luckyo (1726890) | about 10 months ago | (#45855045)

Sadly classic shell doesn't fix all the problems.

And 8.1 is indeed a faux fix, just designed to give apologists some more talking points. Actual fixes are nonexistent.

Re:It doesn't matter (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855139)

Actual fixes are nonexistent.

Installing Windows 7 (or Linux) is a fix.

Re:It doesn't matter (1)

johnsnails (1715452) | about 10 months ago | (#45855205)

wholeheartedly agree...
I was surprised i couldn't notice any differences when I eventually managed to work out how to install w8.1 and log in BLAH BLAH BLAH.

Re:It doesn't matter (5, Interesting)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 10 months ago | (#45855211)

Tried going the W7 route on a few systems. Driver issues suck. No USB or Ethernet or WIFI out of the box after downgrading to W7. Instead of using another machine to get the drivers I just popped in a Debian LiveCD and used Firefox on the WIFI to D/L the W7 drivers into the windows partition. Turns out inept windows developers can't even compile a USB and Ethernet driver properly. It all works fine on Linux out of the box, no special BS to do to get things working, but now I wait for the moronic devs for the windows drivers who didn't test the W7 drivers on their support site to get around to fixing it.

The thing works in W8. I've made my own drivers for my custom hardware projects. You literally just have to re-compile the damn thing for the right OS. If I had the windows driver source code I could do it myself. The team they outsource to create the Linux drivers was far less retarding than the Windows morons -- which supposedly has a larger market share... Really though? Each MFG has a different windows driver? Why? They all use a common set of chipsets, so one driver meets many separate devices -- typical windows inefficiency. Linux avoids this somewhat since they write drivers for the hardware, not the vendor. So either it's intentional ineptitude to drive W8 adoption, or just bat-shit insanity. I'd say screw dual booting this bastard, and just use Linux, running Windows in a damn VM like I always do (if needed) -- But the machine isn't for me. Had similar problems thrice now on different hardware vendor lines. If I didn't know better I'd think it wasn't a conspiracy.

Re:It doesn't matter (4, Interesting)

Jody Bruchon (3404363) | about 10 months ago | (#45855359)

In my experience, most manufacturer support site drivers are literally nothing more than the original driver from the device's primary chip maker, but sometimes they've shipped with different INF files. Fortunately, aside from having a massive driver collection, I wrote software that automatically generates a drivers folder for me (in Linux) from the computer's own hardware information. It's scary how my driver folder maker is more accurate than Windows: turns out if it selected something for a piece of hardware, even if Windows won't auto-install that driver and thinks it's not correct, you can force it and things always work anyway!

Re:It doesn't matter (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855361)

Sure. We are to believe that Tim Landers, a well-known Linux zealot and Slashdot troll, had driver problems with Windows 7. The bullshit meter would peg hard enough to snap the needle on this one, folks.

Re:It doesn't matter (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855369)

Yeah, I think you're just lying. Linux is NOT better with drivers than even (gasp!) awful Windows 7.

Why you weren't modded out of existence as a troll is a testament to the strength of the reality distortion field of the /. crowd.

Re:It doesn't matter (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855145)

I think the problem is you. I like Windows 8 just fine, as well as the Start Screen. I no longer have to manually customize my Start Menu, deleting and moving shortcuts into custom folders was a pain. I haven't run across a single piece of software that doesn't work. All my games from Quake 3 to Dead Space 3 run great. Even my aging copy of JASC Animation Shop 3 installed and runs just as well as it always did. Then again, I also had no major problems with Windows Vista or Windows ME, both of which gave me fewer glitches and issues than previous versions of Windows. Again, to reiterate, I think the problem is that you are being anal, complaining about changes you don't understand and haven't adapted to as easily as others.

Re:It doesn't matter (3, Interesting)

gonz (13914) | about 10 months ago | (#45855271)

The head of the Windows division got fired shortly after Win8 shipped, and the whole company seems to be treading water while the board hunts for a new CEO.

It's unrealistic to expect any changes to the Windows 8 vision until that shakes out. But when it does, you can bet the Surface/metro thing will get ripped apart, and Julie Larson-Green will be replaced by someone who isn't just keeping a seat warm. Whether that's for better or worse really depends on who the CEO is.

Re:It doesn't matter (5, Insightful)

Stormwatch (703920) | about 10 months ago | (#45854907)

Did they kill the retarded Start screen yet? No? Then it's not fixed.

Re:It doesn't matter (-1, Troll)

sosume (680416) | about 10 months ago | (#45854929)

My new Ubuntu refuses to run my old MkLinux binaries, therefore it's a piece of shit. Also, I won't touch it with a ten-foot pole until they remove that unity crap and restore my classic gnome shell. Because that's how the whole world must think about it. Now get off my lawn.

Re:It doesn't matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855143)

Install some 32-bit libraries and your MkLinux stuff will run just fine.

If you don't like Unity - and who does? - then replace Unity ... or your distro. That's the beauty of Linux.

Re:It doesn't matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855253)

I like Unity!

Re:It doesn't matter (1)

hawkinspeter (831501) | about 10 months ago | (#45855213)

If you don't like Unity (I didn't), then I recommend switching to XFCE instead.

Re:It doesn't matter (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45854983)

Did they kill the retarded Start screen yet? No? Then it's not fixed.

And a small rectangle that is supposed to be a menu in the lower left corner is not retarded? Seriously, the start screen may not be perfect but the old way of doing it was not better.

Re:It doesn't matter (5, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | about 10 months ago | (#45855047)

I agree that the Start menu sucked*, but the Start screen sucks even more... you can hardly blame people for not wanting to use something that sucks more. More than just the Start Screen, the whole schizophrenic Metro thing is a PITA. True, you can take steps to actively avoid Metro, but that's another thing that sucks more than Windows 7. Personally, I put up with it for a year until I had a hard drive flake out. At that point, I realized how much less useful Windows 8 Backup was than Windows 7 Backup (no image???), and since I was reinstalling anyway I just loaded 7 on.

* The Start Menu was a stupid holdover from the Program Manager in Windows 3, which itself sucked. The idea that every installed application needs to be installed again in another place is just plain dumb. IMHO, Macs had a better solution in the early 90s, so it seems odd that they went the way they did. Smart people work at MS, so I assume it had to do with compatibility or performance on the limited machines of the time.

Re:It doesn't matter (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855111)

Sorry, I don't see how it sucks more. I say it sucks less. Easier and faster to organize and move shortcuts around. Easy to just show the shortcuts you want and hide everything else behind the "all apps" button. Rather than scrunching everything down to one corner of the screen, the whole screen is used, and it quickly transitions in and out. The only people I can see not liking it are faggots who simply bitch about change.

Re:It doesn't matter (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45854923)

See the previous two comments... Microsoft didn't 'fix' anything - Classic Shell fixes it.

Would you buy a user interface from this man?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAO2wk27Vmk

"Derp, derp, derp"...

Would you buy a shirt from this man?

Re:It doesn't matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855155)

Would you buy a shirt from this man?

Not his shirt, no. He sweats like some kind of Kwyjibo.

Re:It doesn't matter (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45854939)

I still see a lack of a proper Start Menu instead of a jarring state change to a completely different UI, invisible and non-discoverable magical mouse movements based on a magical handful of pixels dotted around the screen, horizontal scrolling instead of scalable content or vertical scrolling (you know, that thing every mouse has a wheel for, unlike the other type), three different versions of Internet Explorer, control panels where most of the options have been hidden or completely removed, and a lack of any coherent thought at all ("It's for servers! It's for tablets! It's a desert topping AND a floor wax!").

Of course the most horrifying part of it is that Microsoft intended Windows 8 & Windows 8.1 to look and act that way.

Re:It doesn't matter (5, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 10 months ago | (#45854977)

My mother got a new laptop just before Christmas that came preloaded with Windows 8. Over Christmas, she installed the 8.1 upgrade. The amount of swearing did appear to decrease very slightly, but it still did things like pop up the People app for no obvious reason (e.g. when she was in the middle of filling in a password in a field in a web page) with no obvious way of closing it, or send her to the home screen without making it obvious how she got back to the doing-stuff screen. The only way I found to get from one of the randomly popping up Metro apps back to whatever she was doing was hit alt-F4. Hardly the most discoverable UI I've seen...

Re:It doesn't matter (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855217)

Sorry. There's no nice way to put this. You are a fucking idiot. To get back to the desktop, move your mouse to the top left of the screen and click on the desktop box at the top or go back to the start screen by clicking on the start screen box at the bottom or pressing the Windows key on the keyboard. The same top-left menu also lets you close any Metro app you like from any location. It took me about 2 minutes to figure this out while playing with Windows 8 for the first time.

Re:It doesn't matter (5, Insightful)

Cenan (1892902) | about 10 months ago | (#45854985)

What are those "most of the issues" you speak of?

Is it the completely, un-mouse friendly interface to reach your settings, or anything at all actually?

The completely retarded replacement of the start button with a shortcut to the equally retarded start screen?

The utter lack of feedback from the UI? Is it working now!? maybe I missed the button - the scheduler knows, but why the fuck should it tell me, I'm just the user right?

Or could it be that you're referring to the fact that I have to run a shell command to setup which programs start with Windows?

Or that it feels like some smug 20-something year old asshole, fresh out of college, employed the entirety of his book learnedness to shit all over 30 years of UI design practices.

The Windows 8 UI is entirely un-userfriendly, couple that with the fact that a good portion of the install base came pre installed and therefore without a fucking manual to ease to transition. Have YOU tried this 8.1 piece of shit? Because I have and I am not impressed.

Re:It doesn't matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855301)

Is it the completely, un-mouse friendly interface to reach your settings, or anything at all actually?

Pretty easy to reach the control panel, which you would rarely visit once your machine is set how you like. Move your mouse to the upper right side of the screen, click "Settings". From there you can go to the old familiar Control Panel window or use the net Metro interface. Or, just start typing "Control Panel" from the Start Screen for an instant search. Not hard.

The completely retarded replacement of the start button with a shortcut to the equally retarded start screen?

The Start button was removed, which I admit seemed like a bad choice, but the new Start Screen is a vast improvement. Idiots never bothered to customize their Start Menu by deleting unnecessary icons and grouping all their shortcuts into custom folders. The new Start Screen makes customization easer, and I think works much better. I don't miss the old Start Menu one bit.

The utter lack of feedback from the UI? Is it working now!? maybe I missed the button - the scheduler knows, but why the fuck should it tell me, I'm just the user right?

Not sure what you're going on about here. Old age? I'm 37, by the way.

Or could it be that you're referring to the fact that I have to run a shell command to setup which programs start with Windows?

Now this is utter bullshit. I assume you're referring to MSconfig.exe, which is still availible by searching from the Start Screen. But with Windows 8, Start Up programs are now managed from the Task Manager, which has undergone massive improvements.

Or that it feels like some smug 20-something year old asshole, fresh out of college, employed the entirety of his book learnedness to shit all over 30 years of UI design practices.

The Windows 8 UI is entirely un-userfriendly, couple that with the fact that a good portion of the install base came pre installed and therefore without a fucking manual to ease to transition. Have YOU tried this 8.1 piece of shit? Because I have and I am not impressed.

The design changes, as with all changes over the years, were backed by studies Microsoft conducted to see how people were using computers and what improvements could be made. For example, the ability to pin applications to the Task Bar and move them around was conceived by actually observing users who not only kept programs open when they weren't using them, but often closed one program and then reopened it later for the sole purpose of having them ordered how they wanted on the Task Bar.

I've had no problem with Windows 8. I think it's great. I know others who also share my high opinion of the new OS. However, since the dawn of home computing, there have always been assholes like you who simply can't cope with new ways of doing things. I envy Microsoft. They have a lot more patience and tolerance than me. I'd just strait up tell you to go fuck yourself and read a book rather than trying to use a computer.

Re:It doesn't matter (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45854989)

Tried. Still useless. The start menu substitutes helps but it is still one of the worst user interface experiences I can remember that I've had ever. It means that my next laptop will have to be a mac. No business in the world use Windows 8, they all use win7 or XP. No sane person would choose windows 8(.x) for a laptop or desktop machine unless forced.

Touch interfaces were tested (sort of) with light pens in the late fifties and early sixties. They are ergonomically bad as you have to keep your arm lifted to use the interface which gives muscular problems, therefore other pointing devices were invented. The problems are the same on laptops with touch screens. Overlapping windows have been known since at least the seventies but NOW forty years later Microsoft choose to go back at least to the seventies with their full screen application start menu. It would be okay to have the phone interface available to run phone/pad apps but to have it as default in its current state is plainly retarded.

Pads/phones and laptops are different things with different use cases. MS tries to change this but Windows 8 is a very clear failure and counter example to the merger.

Re:It doesn't matter (5, Interesting)

rapiddescent (572442) | about 10 months ago | (#45855065)

That's why they fixed most of the issues in Windows 8.1. You should try it.

Would love to try it, but after Dell updates and Windows Update had a fist fight on the new christmas present laptop for mum-in-law it meant that neither update system could complete all the updates thus leaving the OS in a position that it would not offer 8.1 in the store. Coupled with no obvious way to back out of the problem (no install DVD, and install-creator fucked up 3 times) - I gave up and she got Linux. It's not all Microsoft's fault - Dell's tools simply didn't work, however, there shouldn't be competing methods that you can't obviously switch off for doing things like this.

The funny thing is she doesn't even know she has Linux. She used to use Thunderbird, Firefox and libreoffice on Windows XP and so it just looks the same for her.

Re:It doesn't matter (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855163)

A little late for you maybe, now you can create a bootable DVD/ usb flashdrive for Win8/ 8.1

http://www.howtogeek.com/178487/how-to-download-windows-8.x-and-create-a-bootable-dvd-usb-legally/

Re:It doesn't matter (1)

Transfinite (1684592) | about 10 months ago | (#45855307)

Bullshit! Changes in context, jumping from Desktop to Metro when searching for example, etc. No Nothing if fixed.

Re: It doesn't matter (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45854957)

There is no market share because there is no markets in pc-os. There is a monopoly or dictatorship, everybody has to pay MS.

Re:It doesn't matter (1)

Mashiki (184564) | about 10 months ago | (#45855053)

Windows 8 is still a piece of shit, and most people got it because their device came preinstalled with it... they didn't choose it.

Since the vast majority of complaints come down to "the UI sucks" I agree in that so far. The only real complaint I have about it, is the changes to the audio subsystem and drivers. Which breaks a couple of pieces of software(gamemaker pro), which is rather old. But easy to get around if you disable the audio device first, then re-enable it. And any software like that, but in terms of performance for games, it works fine with no slowdowns, in fact it works better in some cases. Where some games wouldn't work at all, or were crashtastic like Dungeon Keeper 2 and Fallout, without some serious screwing around.

Outside of that, Win8/8.1 is perfectly fine, in fact I'd say it's more stable than Win7 with better handling of drivers that misbehave and cause system instability. I'm sure someone will run along any time now and try whining about "but...secure boot" yeah, well I guess that's why I triple boot with 8, Debian and SteamOS and don't have any problems with them playing nice.

Windows XP still at 28.98% (1)

mseeger (40923) | about 10 months ago | (#45854857)

With Windows XP still at 28.98% you can only weep and cry. This means that nearly one third of all PC users are running disastrously old systems.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (4, Insightful)

a_n_d_e_r_s (136412) | about 10 months ago | (#45854863)

As long as the old junk is better then the new junk. They continue to use it.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (0)

mseeger (40923) | about 10 months ago | (#45854879)

Windows 7 is way better than XP and even 8 (with a bit of tweaking) can be used properly.

There is no excuse for running XP as there is no excuse for housing people in ramshackle houses prone to collaps any minute.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (2, Insightful)

dbIII (701233) | about 10 months ago | (#45854903)

There's still applications that won't run on win7 and the new MS Office still runs on XP. Add in some GUI changes that people have to get used to (unless someone like me or you puts it in "classic mode" for them) and those things combined are enough of a barrier for some people not to bother.
So plenty of reasons until that killer app comes along that won't work on XP.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (4, Insightful)

Pentium100 (1240090) | about 10 months ago | (#45854917)

Windows 7 is better than XP, but not by a lot. That is, it is not worth the pain to reinstall Windows on the same PC (like it was upgrading from 98 and especially ME to XP).

Of course, when I built a new PC a couple of months ago I installed Windows 7 on it (8 just looks awful, even with ClassicShell).

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (4, Informative)

nojayuk (567177) | about 10 months ago | (#45854991)

XP has a number of limitations that Win7 and Win8 supercede -- nearly all XP installs still running are the 32-bit version with a 4GB limit on RAM and a 2TB limit for disk volumes, and as far as I know XP doesn't support TRIM for SSDs. It also limits out at DX9, important for gamers and there are probably other limitations due to its age and end-of-support status.

I'm OK with Win8, I run it exclusively in desktop mode where it presents a look and feel similar to Win7. I pinned my most used programs on the taskbar so I don't need to invoke the start menu very often. I have Vistart installed as a shell replacement but I could work without it if I had to. The upgrade to 8.1 on my main machine went OK apart from the very large download (3 GB plus) needed to make it happen but I was satisfied with the original OS release (I still have it on another desktop which is waiting for a replacement motherboard).

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (2)

Pentium100 (1240090) | about 10 months ago | (#45855059)

I agree that XP has a number of limitations. Actually, Bioshock Infinite was my main reason to build a new PC with Windows 7 (and two 6core CPUs). Having 32GB RAM is also nice. I use a 15kRPM HDD and not a SSD (as I did in my XP PC), so I do not care about TRIM.

However, for a lot of uses, XP is still good enough. For example, reading/writing MS Word documents, browsing the web works just as well on XP as it does on 7. If it wasn't for the games, I think I would have continues to use my XP PC for a couple of years. Now I had to build a new PC without waiting for the new CPUs to come out and this may bite me in the future (I do not want to reinstall Windows (no matter which version), so now I am stuck with this PC until 7 becomes the new XP or maybe even longer if the newer versions of Windows are crap). Maybe it is possible to just move the system hard drive to a new PC, but I would have to somehow try that without actually building the new PC (if I build it and it turns out I can't move my installation, then what?).

Actually, I continue to use XP on my Viliv N5 and my laptop, because both devices do not have a lot of memory so XP works better there and I am not planning on playing DX10/11 games on those devices.

7 (the 64bit version anyway) also has a very annoying security feature - the requirement that all drivers have to be signed. I had to spend some time to make my TV input card work and may have similar problems in the future. At least I could turn off this "feature" in older (and 32bit) versions of Windows.

ClasicShell (= normal Start menu) makes Windows 8 usable. However, to me the theme just looks bad with the borderless windows. I prefer the XP look (with a custom red color scheme) as that's what I used for the past 10 years or the 9x/2k look (what I am using on my new Windows7 PC). Windows 8 no longer has that, I guess it would make it look more like a PC and less like a tablet.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (1)

nojayuk (567177) | about 10 months ago | (#45855255)

A couple of years back I was contracted to help carry out a hardware upgrade cycle in a hospital, desktops with XP on them in the main with a few laptops here and there. Only a few machines were being heavily used to do imaging work and the like and we looked at upgrading those particular machines to XP 64-bit and giving them lots more memory (8GB or 16GB, a lot at that time) plus fitting them with SSDs but in the end the bosses just bought new hardware with Win7 preinstalled. Saved us a lot of grief...

The "limited usage" niche that makes XP hard to kill in the real world is why Chromebooks are getting marketshare, granny browsing the Web and Skype, thin clients basically. I do OCR and image processing on this desktop and I appreciate the extra RAM space, the SSD support and the other things that XP can't offer me. I could have gone with Win7 or even Vista but they go out of support in a few years time as XP is in April this year and I still expect to be using this Win8 setup then or at least something like it.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (1)

damnbunni (1215350) | about 10 months ago | (#45855327)

I run unsigned drivers on my Win7 Ultimate/64 bit install. You just have to enable installing unsigned drivers. There are a half-dozen ways to do it, with varying levels of permanence and hackery required.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (1)

msobkow (48369) | about 10 months ago | (#45855309)

All of which is hardware that doesn't exist on an old XP box unless you try to add it.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (2)

Gadget_Guy (627405) | about 10 months ago | (#45855373)

XP has a number of limitations that Win7 and Win8 supercede -- nearly all XP installs still running are the 32-bit version with a 4GB limit on RAM and a 2TB limit for disk volumes, and as far as I know XP doesn't support TRIM for SSDs. It also limits out at DX9, important for gamers and there are probably other limitations due to its age and end-of-support status.

You could turn that around by saying that XP just didn't need more than 4GB of RAM and 2TB hard disk space. And as for DX9, according to Steam's Hardware & Software Survey [steampowered.com] , XP use is at 6.35% so it appears that gamers have already figured out that they need to upgrade.

Obviously the people using XP now are still satisfied with the OS. It is a vicious circle that you need to upgrade to use more hardware (RAM/HD), when it is only because that you have upgraded your software that you need to access more hardware.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | about 10 months ago | (#45855063)

Honestly, it's arguable which one is better. Main advantages of 7 are DX11 and properly functional 64-bit OS.

XP on the other hand is significantly faster and comes with much lower hardware requirements both for OS itself and software that it runs. It also comes with functional tree-style start menu, without having to hack it in with classic shell.

7 has a much better indexing service/search though. XP's indexing it pretty dated and it shows.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (1)

ifiwereasculptor (1870574) | about 10 months ago | (#45855345)

Interestingly, in my experience, XP is only significantly faster (and has a smaller memory footprint) until you install SP2. Then it's about the same as 7.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45854965)

Windows XP is currently on my daughters netbook. It may well run Windows 7 or 8. However a quick check on Amazon and it costs £50-100 quid to update it, plus a chunk of my time. And I don't know for sure it will work.

To me that seams a good reason to run Windows XP. It is behind a firewall, runs AV software that is set to auto-update and the login my daughter uses can not install anything.

Why should I upgrade? What does Windows 7 or 8 give me in this case?

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (1)

FlyHelicopters (1540845) | about 10 months ago | (#45855193)

Why should I upgrade? What does Windows 7 or 8 give me in this case?

Security updates past April 2014.

The firewall and AV software are nice, and they help, but you should not have that netbook online after April of this year.

Frankly, for the cost of upgrading, given the age of that thing, buying a new one probably makes more sense.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855317)

Throw away perfectly working hardware and pay £300+ quid. Yeah that sounds like fun.

> netbook online after April of this year

Why? How do you think evil software will get on this device?

No external access to the machine (the router does not route that way), so the what are the attack vectors? I can think of virus on offline media (a none issue), deliberately downloaded software and drive-by-downloads. Given my daughters current use of the device I don't consider any a major issue.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (4, Insightful)

symbolset (646467) | about 10 months ago | (#45855083)

And then comes the obvious suggestion: "punish them for trying to make you buy their new crap by buying their older crap instead. That will teach them." It is painful to watch you guys work. You know that, don't you?

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855199)

Get out of your cave. In the real world people are trying to save enough money to put food on the table. Upgrading to a new computer that functionally does little more than what they ask of their XP box now is a low priority.

Re: Windows XP still at 28.98% (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855325)

How about cost of a new pc when the current one works fine? Legacy applications? Cost of retrofitting 500 PCs with M$ licensing schemes? Linux is the only viable replacement for XP on our existing hardware.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45854895)

As long as the old junk is better then the new junk. They continue to use it.

The PC market has always been like this. One reason is the long cycles, and skip cycles, in business use. The other is that people are used to what they have. Many have forgotten it now, but XP was mostly very badly received on geek sites like Slashdot - it was called a toy, fisher-price UI, trying to be two things at once, badly, (replacing both Win9 and Win2K), etc, and people loudly proclaimed they would stay with the much better Win2K. Now XP is the OS we stick with..

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (3, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | about 10 months ago | (#45855201)

XP was mostly very badly received on geek sites like Slashdot

XP's greatest sin at the time was bloating up Windows 2000 without adding any significant features to compensate. Cheap memory and several service packs fixed most of those complaints. Vista had similar birthing problems, but in the end we got Windows 7, which is pretty good.

The thing about Windows 8 is that performance is not a complaint you typically hear. In fact, it seems faster than 7. No amount of hardware improvements will fix Windows 8's deficiencies, so we are left with service packs for hope. For the next few years, it's a non-issue as companies will run Windows 7.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (5, Funny)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 10 months ago | (#45854865)

...and 10.49% of all PC users are running disastrously new systems.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855131)

If I had mod points, you would have 'em!

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (2)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 10 months ago | (#45854875)

It's at least more or less OK as long as it is updated and patched. Happened to run across an XP machine a couple of weeks ago... which had not yet had SP1 installed yet. The weird thing was that it was actually in a quite good shape. I guess it was just too old for the vulnerabilities are exploited nowadays.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (1, Troll)

Luckyo (1726890) | about 10 months ago | (#45855071)

Nope. Pretty much any XP machine, even with full updates will be rooted within seconds of going onto public ip open to the internet. I've seen it happen. It's silly.

But you can secure a vanilla XP, or any XP machine regardless of its update status with some fairly rudimentary actions to the point where OS updates won't matter in a significant way for machine's security.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (2)

edelbrp (62429) | about 10 months ago | (#45854877)

Oh the pain people have for those who won't upgrade. Give me a break. As long as it works, why not let it function? Is it because of the security boogy-man? NSA? What's the rub?

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (1)

MrL0G1C (867445) | about 10 months ago | (#45855167)

Botnets, sooner or later these computers with their unpatched software will end up spamming and DDOSing as part of large botnets.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (5, Insightful)

symbolset (646467) | about 10 months ago | (#45854927)

I knew I was going to see this here. Disastrous12 year old software. For the record system builders were stilled allowed to install XP on new netbooks up until October 22, 2010 [zdnet.com] , and new machines were still being cleared from inventory Christmas 2011. So it is still pretty new to a few people. Up until three years ago it was still new software. That is not very old for a desktop installation.

But that doesn't play into your "not Microsoft's fault stupid people won't update their software every decade" theme you have to have going on here, does it? Now it's a matter of people getting jacked out of what they paid for sooner than a reasonable expectation, on hardware that won't even run the upgrade. Completely screws up your flow. Now it's not their fault. Sorry for ruining your party.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (3, Interesting)

recoiledsnake (879048) | about 10 months ago | (#45855225)

Now it's a matter of people getting jacked out of what they paid for sooner than a reasonable expectation, on hardware that won't even run the upgrade. Completely screws up your flow. Now it's not their fault. Sorry for ruining your party.

It's certainly their fault. MS publishes the EOL dates for OSes and has been extending XP's EOL from many many years even though they didn't have to. People expecting updates till the end of time is not Microsoft's fault, everyone likes free stuff. The EOL dates are here. http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/default.aspx?LN=en-us&x=15&y=15&c2=14019 [microsoft.com] If you buy Windows 7 or 8 expecting support till 2050, it's certainly your fault if MS fails to meet your expectation.

Not to mention, a huge chunk of XP users are using pirated installs, especially in places like China. Which other company supports OSes for so long? Buy an Apple computer for 4 times the price in 2001 and it would've gone out of support in a few years. How many years does an Android phone get supported with updates? 2?

Not to mention that XP users are holding back web and application development. It's time to move on.

Re: Windows XP still at 28.98% (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855387)

The end users I have to support don't even know what a file extension is (thanks to Microsoft hiding them) and you expect them to know what EOL means and expect them to search out the info on a new machine? Get out of the basement and take a look at the real world users.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45854947)

With Windows XP still at 28.98% you can only weep and cry. This means that nearly one third of all PC users are running disastrously old systems.

Why would anyone except yourself and Microsoft weep and cry? XP is not "disastrously" old. It works and does exactly what it is supposed to do. There is no point upgrading from XP just to get some rearranged menus and new bugs.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855153)

Windows 6.x has been hugely improved over XP. Security is way better, responsiveness is better, you get a desktop compositor and even the system requirements are low. Things are arranged better and the user experience is more solid.

Of course, if you now have an XP installation which suits your needs just fine, you might not want to fix what works. But I think the upgrade provides good value to anyone. Classic Shell allows you to select any kind of Start Menu you want and it integrates well to the system.

Re:Windows XP still at 28.98% (1)

Sesostris III (730910) | about 10 months ago | (#45855223)

I run Windows XP under VirtualBox (host system - LMDE XFCE). Why? For those few times when I need to use IE (for sites that don't work with Firefox or Chrome), or I need to use Office (for documents I cannot amend with LibreOffice, i.e. Office macros).

As I have an old retail license for XP, it fits the bill. It still works - rather like the 25+ year old fountain pen I used when at university. And it's legitimate. OK when XP goes out of support I may have to fork out 100+ GBP for Windows 8.1 (you can't get a retail license for Windows 7 any more) - but I'll object to doing so.

Unfortunately I can't (yet) ditch Windows completely. The sites that need IE or the Office documents with macros are usually sites or documents linked to the company I work for.

Sigh (1)

a_n_d_e_r_s (136412) | about 10 months ago | (#45854859)

when did this site become the new site for Microsoft uninteresting press releases about their so-called successes ?

Re:Sigh (4, Funny)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 10 months ago | (#45854873)

when did this site become the new site for Microsoft uninteresting press releases about their so-called successes ?

Since this isn't a MS press release, I'm guessing "when" is "somewhere in the future".

You have been found out! [slashdot.org]

Re:Sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45854953)

What are you talking about? Unthinkingly regurgitating corporate press-releases is what tech journalism *is*.

Re:Sigh (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 10 months ago | (#45855181)

when did this site become the new site for Microsoft uninteresting press releases about their so-called successes ?

An anonymous reader submitted the article, it got voted up in the submissions page and samzenpus liked to publish it. There's no more magic to it.

What kind of article would you like to see [slashdot.org] ?

Re:Sigh (1)

hawkinspeter (831501) | about 10 months ago | (#45855335)

I'd like an article to deal with real-life problems, like the ones we face every day. And also, involving far-out situations involving robots and magic powers. It could be a realistic, down-to-earth article... that's completely off-the-wall and swarming with magic robots.

Also, you should win things by reading it.

Glass have water (5, Insightful)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | about 10 months ago | (#45854887)

put it another way: WinXP is still roughly three times as popular as Win8, and even Unity is probably more popular than WIn8 but no meaningful is data available.

Re:Glass have water (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45854911)

Linux in total is less than 20% of Windows 8/8.1.

I have no clue how you get to your Win8 to Unity comparison.

Re:Glass have water (4, Funny)

flonker (526111) | about 10 months ago | (#45854915)

But hey, at least Win8 beat Congress! [gallup.com]

Re:Glass have water (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45854919)

It's not really a case of popularity, it's a case of necessity. Do you upgrade your car to the current years version every year?

System admins would probably install Windows 7 or 8 on new systems. Sometimes, however, the new version of a piece of software offers so little extra to a subset of users that it simply isn't worth upgrading, even if you'd choose the newer version when starting from scratch.

What these numbers basically mean is that Windows XP is still good enough for a large percentage of users even though Windows 7 is generally a more attractive project.

I certainly don't upgrade my VW Golf every year because of the slightly better mileage or air con and i wouldn't argue that old golfs are more popular than new ones, they are just good enough that there is no need to change.

Re:Glass have water (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45854969)

You may change your tune once cars become connected to the internet, and exploits make it into the wild that can make a car accellerate and/or lock up the steering seemingly at random.

Manufacturer: "Yes, we have developed a fix. But sorry, your model of car is no longer supported or under warranty, so the fix hasn't been made available for your vehicle. The agreement you signed when purchasing the vehicle absolves us of any responsibility or liability in this circumstance. Have a nice day."

Re:Glass have water (2)

Luckyo (1726890) | about 10 months ago | (#45855075)

That's okay. There's a plethora of properly secured XP machines that will continue working just fine after microsoft stops updating. There are ones that run now without any updates even. Unless microsoft breaks these machines in some way with the last update of course.

Re:Glass have water (1)

Antique Geekmeister (740220) | about 10 months ago | (#45855333)

Then they are not, and will not be, "properly secured". I've encountered far, far, far too many environments that run absolutely critical business and engineering software on old XP systems without support, with no active virus protection, and rely on "we trust the people we work with" to protect their internal network from worms, trojans, and viruses infesting the rest of the hosts on their network. I'm only very, very rarely allowed to help clean up such messes, but these hosts are almost _inevitably_ infested when I review them. And too often, there's not even disk space or capacity left to _install_ anti-virus software or robust backup tools.

When I can, I do my best to get disk images of such systems and get them into virtualization so that backup can be done from a disk image layer. But such concerns are often considered "off-task", and the critical risks are left in place. Such environments are almost inevitably a sign that this environment is going to fail catastrophically in the next 2 years, and we'll have to spend time doing "Cover Your Ass" work to show that we did, indeed, do everything possible to protect the environment. But the partner or client has _elected_ not to fix the problem.

The people who are most unhappy about the situation, but manage to get work done anyway, are often good candidates to help find new work elsewhere. That has to be done very, very, very discreetly, ideally with the cooperation of their managers.

Re:Glass have water (1)

KingOfBLASH (620432) | about 10 months ago | (#45855173)

The difference is that whereas windows costs a few hundred dollars and Microsoft is giving away free upgrades, a car costs tens of thousands of dollars and upgrades cost money.

If Windows suddenly had the equivalent of an oil change / tune up for a couple bucks a pop every few months, Microsoft would be more likely to continue to support Windows XP. Hell, it might even still be supporting Win95

Re:Glass have water (1)

hawkinspeter (831501) | about 10 months ago | (#45855393)

Free upgrades from Microsoft? News to me. Care to point me in the direction that I can get a free upgrade from XP?

Re:Glass have water (1)

DarkOx (621550) | about 10 months ago | (#45855275)

Exactly correct. What this shows is its really been hardware improvements that have driven OS upgrades on Windows PCs. With Windows 3.0 and Windows 3.95 (Windows 95), being exceptions; that people really did rush out to buy in a shrink wrapped box; No client Windows release has offered an improvement compelling enough for home PC users to bother upgrading.

Its almost the same story for business users but lots of desktops did get upgraded to XP, from Win 2k Workstation or Windows 9x; with relative haste.

On the server side OS upgrades have usually offered enough value to make it worth while, at least for core infrastructure machines; although I don't see what is terribly compelling about migrating Server 2008 to Server 2012.

Re:Glass have water (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45854999)

For ordinary consumers it is almost impossible to buy e.g. a new laptop with Win7. So the numbers are forced. But those consumers that were affected by Win 8.x probably won't buy windows again.

Server 2003 until July 2015 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855007)

Windows XP is dead to me. I am going to enjoy 18 more months of Server 2003.

2014 predictions (0, Offtopic)

bazorg (911295) | about 10 months ago | (#45855041)

here goes:

1) /.rs will moan about Windows 8 Start Screen even with the majority of sold laptops carrying a touch screen
2) /.rs will dismiss Windows RT as being worse than all Windows and mobile OSs put together
3) Apple releases a 12" iPad (iOS, not OS X), buyers will get keyboards for it and everyone will say it is the best PC ever.

Vista still ahead of 8.1! (2)

bobthesungeek76036 (2697689) | about 10 months ago | (#45855087)

If you look at the Dec 2013 data Vista has 3.61% share and WinDoze 8.1 has 3.60%. What's more amazing is that Vista's share went up between Nov 2013 and Dec 2013. Gotta love it!!!

Re:Vista still ahead of 8.1! (2)

akozakie (633875) | about 10 months ago | (#45855285)

Not amazing. The number of users is probably dropping as well, just a tiny bit slower than the entire desktop market, giving the appearance of an increase. Many people simply migrate away from desktops.

My guess is that anyone with the slightest tendency to migrate threw out Vista either immediately or as soon as 7 was released, meaning that the ones who still have it are most likely to keep their system as is as long as possible. So, expect this ~3.6% result to stay remarkably stable compared to the others, or even grow if the desktop market shrinks faster.

I sort of get what they were trying to do (2)

gelfling (6534) | about 10 months ago | (#45855097)

I have a house full of laptops including a Lenovo Yoga with Win8. I sort of get what they were going for - a machine that's more 'live' in response to a very limited suite of core functions that people use tablets for. The problem is that all the underlying apps don't see the world that way - they work the old way. So you have to re learn a new way to access your old apps which still work more or less the same old way - except where they don't. Or where they for no reason left off basic apps like a DVD player. Or the security suite doesn't really start all the time and you have to jump through enormous hoops to get it running.

I guess from a human factors standpoint they were going for making the machine more transparent to the function. The problem is that they only got part-way. It's analogous to using a GPS but having to tell it the name of the street you're on after every turn. Or alternatively, it's like owning a driverless car which works sort of ok until it doesn't and then you discover that you have to replace the ignition key to open the door - once you're already inside if something goes wrong.

If they were going for a user experience that made the computer invisible then they really failed. In some ways they made it worse because just as many things need user attention as before but it's harder to do them.

Linux record growth (3, Funny)

jamesl (106902) | about 10 months ago | (#45855105)

And meanwhile, desktop Linux made record growth from 1.56% to 1.73%.

Re:Linux record growth (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855141)

Neckbeards, rejoice!

Re:Linux record growth (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855151)

But does your beard run SoupOS?

Re:Linux record growth (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 10 months ago | (#45855241)

Yeah, that was me. I set up two more desktops with Linux on them.

19.97% on Steam (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855169)

I have very little faith in website statistics. Rather, check out Steam's Hardware Survey [steampowered.com] . The total for all versions of Windows 8 and 8.1 are now at 19.97% and climbing.

"Windows 8 is a piece of shit !" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855187)

"Sentiment: preventing an intellectually honest discussion on /. since 1997".
 
Windows 8.1 is just fine. It has an unlucky divide between desktop and rt apps which I don't like. Otherwise, it's hugely stable and very usable. It's fine if you disagree, but be so kind as to point me to an OS supporting roughly the same amount of hardware.
 
But, for the life of me, don't mention ubuntu. I've had that dual booted probably since day 0 and it's been, let's say, problematic. And pretty please, don't blame me, the user of the OS, for it's malfunctioning. (it's the flawed video driver btw, but I really, really don't care, AND NEITHER SHOULD ANY END USER).

Re:"Windows 8 is a piece of shit !" (1)

Ihlosi (895663) | about 10 months ago | (#45855229)

It's fine if you disagree, but be so kind as to point me to an OS supporting roughly the same amount of hardware.

Strangely enough, I found out that my scanner wasn't supported anymore after I got a new machine with W8 on it. It worked just perfectly under XP, but under W8 the only choice is to throw it away (again: throw away a fully functional piece of hardware) and buy a newer one.

I think I'll try booting into a USB linux installation whenever I want to scan something.

Re:"Windows 8 is a piece of shit !" (1)

bobthesungeek76036 (2697689) | about 10 months ago | (#45855293)

It's fine if you disagree, but be so kind as to point me to an OS supporting roughly the same amount of hardware.

Strangely enough, I found out that my scanner wasn't supported anymore after I got a new machine with W8 on it. It worked just perfectly under XP, but under W8 the only choice is to throw it away (again: throw away a fully functional piece of hardware) and buy a newer one.

I think I'll try booting into a USB linux installation whenever I want to scan something.

Or you could install XP in a VirtualBox instance and not have to reboot when you want to scan something...

Just had my first experiences with 8 ... (5, Interesting)

Ihlosi (895663) | about 10 months ago | (#45855203)

... over Christmas break. And no, I don't like it. Even after the "upgrade" to 8.1, I don't like it.

The UI is a mess. It's completely alien to anyone coming from XP/W7, and the features that supposedly make it touchscreen-friendly are completely counter-productive to anyone who doesn't intend to use a touchscreen (for example people with a 27-inch screen that sits two arm-lengths away). Hotspots in particular - just moving the mouse cursor somewhere causing an action is an absolute no-no and very counter-intuitive. How is anyone supposed to know that moving the mouse cursor to the top right corner does something special and right-clicking in the lower-right corner has a completely different meaning than right-clicking anywhere else on the screen? Actions should be initiated by mouse clicks on visible UI elements, not by mouse movements to magic areas on the screen.

And the app store is a mess. I only knew the app store for Symbian and thought it was a mess since Symbian is officially dead and buried (app store full of nonsense crapware, X varitions of the same app with each author hoping you'll miss the best one and install his instead, etc), but the windows app store suffers from the exact same problems.

Oh, and it doesn't come with solitaire. And the solitaire from the app store (for which you nee an "MS account") is an overloaded piece of bloatware. Luckily, XP solitaire still runs on W8. This saved the day.

Re:Just had my first experiences with 8 ... (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855261)

The UI is a mess. It's completely alien to anyone coming from XP/W7,

And yet it's completely familiar to anyone who has used Win3.1. Windows is older than you want to admit, kid. Now get off my lawn.

The bigger news here. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45855371)

Mac has doubled their market-share in the last 3 years, from 4% to 7%.

If MS becomes too big of a pain in the rear, the execs at Apple can Gut Microsoft in a heartbeat.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?