Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

djgamble

macrumors 6502a
Oct 25, 2006
989
500
It is truly amazing how the Windows world has fragmented itself. It used to be that people advance ordered the new Win and could not wait to get it. Seeing a third of the WinWorld still using XP is amazing and I know some who are using Win2k in machine-specific roles. This really shows a lack of enthusiasm by MS's customers and they need to get back to building an OS people actually want to use.

On that note Win XP's support period is just about to run out. My work (a multinational) just upgraded to 7 and that was a 3 year project. I would speculate that:
- A lot of businesses have used XP and never upgraded. This includes larger ones that are less flexible and smaller ones who CBF upgrading because their ~6 year old computer does their specific task perfectly. No need for speed that will only be noticed by high-end users and eye candy that will only confuse them.
- Home users (like myself) have an XP installer CD. It can still run a lot of pretty modern games so I see no point paying $300+ for a Windows 7 license. That's seriously how much they charge, when my PC isn't even worth that much. I think Windows 8 is significantly cheaper? Might get it...
 

Solomani

macrumors 601
Sep 25, 2012
4,785
10,477
Slapfish, North Carolina
Once again someone has come up with a way to draw a pretty picture of the magical market share.

Still no one has shown why it matters.

Yes, they get paid to come up with stupid pie-charts about market share. They get a pay bonus when the charts imply that Apple is doing poorly. Because negative Apple news sells. MacRumors is a perfect example, just look at all the rabid Apple-haters that gloat in ecstasy anytime there is news of someone overtaking Apple market share or sales.
 

MagnusVonMagnum

macrumors 603
Jun 18, 2007
5,193
1,442
How much of the Windows market is business related versus home market, though? Macs seem to me to be more of a home machine now and 90% for Windows sounds enormous, but I know some businesses that purposely downgraded their new machines to XP even when Vista or 7 was available since that's what their IT approves. Businesses don't like surprises and upgrading a working manufacturing or service sector setup just for the "heck of it" means nothing to these companies including the one I work for. The overall system needs to work. Things like browsers and email mean nothing since they are not used on the industrial equipment we use.

I mean take gaming. Macs are not great for gaming, we know. But you can't just say Windows has 90% of the market share for personal computing gaming (non-console) because I'm guessing at least half those machines will never see a game on them save maybe mine-sweeper or solitaire. How many Macs might see a few casual games if 90% of them are home user machines? Suddenly the market looks more like 45% vs 7% or something, which is still tilted massively towards Windows, but then competition is greater on Windows as well so a small developer might get more attention on a Mac, for example (I don't think piracy is as rampant on Macs either so you have to figure that in if you're considering a game). So then what of other software? How many Windows machines are using something like Handbrake vs Macs? That might tell me more about home use than overall statistics, for example. Then there's the fact I can run Windows 7 or 8 if I need to (and already run XP and 98 under VMWare for older games I had).
 

D.T.

macrumors G4
Sep 15, 2011
11,050
12,460
Vilano Beach, FL
its enterprise.
Enterprise software / hardware is extremely hard, if not next to impossible to replace. Regression testing takes years to get enterprise platforms working on latest released Operating Systems. When you're talking about extremely large behemoth of Corporations running very large enterprise back ends, you dont get a lot of quick Turnover.

[...]

Change management at large corporations.... it's a pain

Good post. I’d also lump public sector/government in that “Enteprise” install base as well. One of my businesses deals with development in the Fed sector, and it’s amazing the number of XP machines. **

Another area is in vertical markets: POS systems, various controller systems for fab/manufacturing, etc., tons of ancient machines running XP.



** Surprisingly, one of the Fed clients I deal with is now on Win7 ... and Chrome, they _actually_ deployed Chrome. I thought I was in a alternate universe when I heard about it :D
 

LordVic

Cancelled
Sep 7, 2011
5,938
12,458
Never tried vista but cant be worse than windows 8

you've never actually used either have you. Admit it... with a post like this...

Windows 8 itself, despite the UI overhaul which people complain about, is a extremely stable, robust and feature filled OS. The performance enhancements in 8 (and 8.1) are great. the overall requirements for running WIn8 are extremely low and the Operating system actually runs very very very smoothely.

Vista...

Was anything but.
it was buggy. Unstable, crashed a lot, still suffered from Blue Screens of Death and had a ridiculously high system requirement for the time just to run smoothely. In fact, even meeting the system requirements didnt guarantee performance or stability. it took forever to load. Forever to do anything, Chewed up your RAM like no tomorrow and was generally faily slow.

Windows 8 is lightyears ahead of Vista in every imaginable way.
 

MyMac1976

macrumors 6502a
Apr 14, 2013
511
1
On that note Win XP's support period is just about to run out. My work (a multinational) just upgraded to 7 and that was a 3 year project. I would speculate that:
- A lot of businesses have used XP and never upgraded. This includes larger ones that are less flexible and smaller ones who CBF upgrading because their ~6 year old computer does their specific task perfectly. No need for speed that will only be noticed by high-end users and eye candy that will only confuse them.
- Home users (like myself) have an XP installer CD. It can still run a lot of pretty modern games so I see no point paying $300+ for a Windows 7 license. That's seriously how much they charge, when my PC isn't even worth that much. I think Windows 8 is significantly cheaper? Might get it...

We have software that was never upgraded that runs our internal information channel TV station. The software requires XP but in the en it's OK because the WS that runs it is not on any network. It's going to be many years before there is now XP out there.
 

AnonMac50

macrumors 68000
Mar 24, 2010
1,578
324
you've never actually used either have you. Admit it... with a post like this...

Windows 8 itself, despite the UI overhaul which people complain about, is a extremely stable, robust and feature filled OS. The performance enhancements in 8 (and 8.1) are great. the overall requirements for running WIn8 are extremely low and the Operating system actually runs very very very smoothely.

Vista...

Was anything but.
it was buggy. Unstable, crashed a lot, still suffered from Blue Screens of Death and had a ridiculously high system requirement for the time just to run smoothely. In fact, even meeting the system requirements didnt guarantee performance or stability. it took forever to load. Forever to do anything, Chewed up your RAM like no tomorrow and was generally faily slow.

Windows 8 is lightyears ahead of Vista in every imaginable way.

I'll agree Windows 8 is pretty good in stability.

And that Vista was not. Notice the was. I'd been using Windows Vista on my Dell tower for a long time, until I put Windows 8 on it last year (the computer is older than Windows 7). Anyway, Vista was really good. Sure most consumer hardware at the time of Vista's release wasn't really capable of handling it that well, and it was really buggy, but it seems that Microsoft really fixed many of the stability issues in later updates and service packs, and that when hardware finally caught up with the requirements it became good.
 

redmotion

macrumors newbie
Apr 30, 2012
25
1
This graph is actually more telling about how long people keep a computer for.

Windows OS is expensive and noone wants to pay to upgrade to something that hardly changes and when it comes included with a new computer - they'll just buy a new computer. Mac hardware is expensive/overpriced even when it's Black Friday, most sensible (and emotionally secure) people stick with a computer until it's totally out of date or totally dead. You can still get by with XP. I imagine win7 will last much longer than XP - it's the best WinOS ever.

Apple will never win the PC race while it keeps it's prices in the "luxury" goods price range. APPLE PRICES ARE NOT COMPETITIVE. Right now, all Apple can win is the desirable poll which is the same as Ferrari winning a poll which asks, do you want a Skoda or a Ferrari?
 

MagnusVonMagnum

macrumors 603
Jun 18, 2007
5,193
1,442
This graph is actually more telling about how long people keep a computer for.

Apple will never win the PC race while it keeps it's prices in the "luxury" goods price range. APPLE PRICES ARE NOT COMPETITIVE. Right now, all Apple can win is the desirable poll which is the same as Ferrari winning a poll which asks, do you want a Skoda or a Ferrari?

What race? Apple managed to grow past Microsoft's value awhile back selling a tiny fraction of the user base. This is because there's more profit in hardware, particularly when you hold a virtual monopoly on the hardware for OSX (i.e. if you want OSX you have to buy Apple hardware short of hacking). Thus, one might argue that it has never been Apple's goal to have a market share comparable to Microsoft, but rather to have a capital net worth as high as possible. Steve Jobs wanted to be RICH, not have higher net numbers than Bill Gates. Steve also wanted some style, something that Microsoft products have traditionally lacked.
 

nick_elt

macrumors 68000
Oct 28, 2011
1,578
0
you've never actually used either have you. Admit it... with a post like this...

Windows 8 itself, despite the UI overhaul which people complain about, is a extremely stable, robust and feature filled OS. The performance enhancements in 8 (and 8.1) are great. the overall requirements for running WIn8 are extremely low and the Operating system actually runs very very very smoothely.

Vista...

Was anything but.
it was buggy. Unstable, crashed a lot, still suffered from Blue Screens of Death and had a ridiculously high system requirement for the time just to run smoothely. In fact, even meeting the system requirements didnt guarantee performance or stability. it took forever to load. Forever to do anything, Chewed up your RAM like no tomorrow and was generally faily slow.

Windows 8 is lightyears ahead of Vista in every imaginable way.

Well it is a good thing I never used Vista because I have a windows 8 laptop that I have had nothing but problems with and I can't stand the os at all so it just sits there unused.
 

Sky Blue

Guest
Jan 8, 2005
6,856
11
According to the go squared site in the OP, Mavericks is about 35% of all Mac OS X. Had a big spike three weeks ago, probably people getting new laptops for Christmas.

25% - 10.8
18% - 10.7
18% - 10.6
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.