Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 28th Nov 2012 15:17 UTC
Windows "As we pass the one month anniversary of the general availability of Windows 8, we are pleased to announce that to-date Microsoft has sold 40 million Windows 8 licenses. Tami Reller shared this news with industry and financial analysts, investors and media today at the Credit Suisse 2012 Annual Technology Conference. Windows 8 is outpacing Windows 7 in terms of upgrades." Not bad, but there are the usual asterisks, as Ars notes.
Thread beginning with comment 543428
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Wed 28th Nov 2012 19:08 UTC
Member since:

In my personal experience, which may or may not differ from yours, rarely anyone ever buys Windows. Most people buy a PC with Windows pre-installed.

A lot of people don't even know what version of Windows they are using even if it has been Windows XP for the last decade. I doubt these users will suddenly feel an urge to buy a new version of it.

It is interesting to me is the marketshare of XP, Vista and 7. Vista has the smallest, probably because it wasn't very good at the start (it did improve). If Windows 8 also turns out to be not very popular it may also end up with a small share as customers and companies will stick with Windows 7.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by MOS6510
by lucas_maximus on Wed 28th Nov 2012 19:47 in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
lucas_maximus Member since:

Vista is unfairly picked on. There were only 1 major bug (the file copying), the rest was unpowered machines being sold with it and bad drivers.

Also Windows 2000 and XP were bloody awful at release.

Windows Vista 64bit, used the same kernel as Windows Server 2008 R1 and was damn solid.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by MOS6510 on Wed 28th Nov 2012 20:06 in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
MOS6510 Member since:

Yes, but given a choice between XP, Vista and 7, would there by any reason to pick Vista? If the hardware can handle Vista then it should also run 7. XP will run fine on hardware where Vista and 7 don't run well on.

If 8 is added to the list, does it really improve on 7? I don't like the split between Metro and classic. It should be either, not both.

Even if 8 is fine, I'm not sure it currently is a must-have upgrade to 7.

Windows 7 is great and I would have liked Microsoft to have improved upon it and not started the Metro experiment.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510
by Morgan on Thu 29th Nov 2012 07:24 in reply to "RE: Comment by MOS6510"
Morgan Member since:

There were only 1 major bug (the file copying)

Perhaps in your experience, but in mine and thousands more across support forums over the first three years of its release, it had serious issues with WiFi connectivity. Regardless of the chipset, driver, manufacturer or interface, wireless connections with Vista were notoriously unreliable and difficult to diagnose.

It wasn't until the second service pack that these issues were cleared up; apparently there was a nasty bug in the networking stack (I've heard more than one network expert refer to it as "a broken mess"). I ran into this bug again just yesterday, reinstalling Vista Business on a client's laptop. It simply refused to connect via wireless to three different networks, until I connected a hard line and finished all of the Windows updates. Two reboots later, it finally connected successfully to my router and my phone's WiFi tethering.

Vista can be a decent OS once it's set up properly, but with support dropping soon after XP goes to the pasture, it makes no sense to continue using it today. I'd rather someone use Windows 8 than Vista at this point.

Reply Parent Score: 2