Windows 7's grip on the enterprise desktop is loosening Microsoft last week updated its Windows 10 usage data, claiming 270 million devices now run its newest operating system. We've updated our numbers, too, namely the three sources we use to assess desktop operating system market share. And on our numbers, if Windows 10 is on 270 million devices Windows 7 is on about 750 million …
"Remember, also, that smartphones are selling at a rate of a billion a year, most on Android"
And how does that affect the enterprise desktop?
You shouldn't include a fact unless you are going to do something with it to inform the reader how it is related to the subject.
And how does that affect the enterprise desktop?
It doesn't. But it affects the total market size, the enterprise size isn't quoted.
In any case, MS is really worried about BYOD with Android and IOS eventually making inroads into the enterprise market. Hence, the focus on cloud and MS apps for the dominant mobile platforms.
You shouldn't include a fact unless you are going to do something with it to inform the reader how it is related to the subject.
None of these regular articles on stats bear much scrutiny. For example, the variation in Win 10 market share between NetMarketShare and StatCounter is greater than the margin of error.
The paragraph continues
" iPads are still selling decently. Some PCs just won't ever be replaced."
While it fails to mention Android tablets it does indicate the relevance of the link; a lot of consumers are not replacing Windows PCs and are opting instead for a non-Windows tablet or smartphone. My Mother is one of them. They are suitable for email and web-browsing but not much use for significant data/text entry. Simple use is what most non-enterprise users want.
Brother abandoned his laptop for a Samsung tablet, wifes parents couldn't give away theirs when they started using iPads exclusively. Niece needs a pc for degree work but uses her phone for everything else.
The death of the pc in consumer land is further along than many of us want to believe, an optional extra not necessity. Microsoft didn't shit on their own product without reason, the market changed, it's the implementation they got wrong.
For some a iThingy or Fandroid will work in the consumer/private use field. For others - not so much.
If you are into photography with a DSLR/DSLM, into drawing on/with the computer or into some serious gaming the ARM CPU and attached hardware won't do. That is (and will be for the near future) the domain of full sized CPU and often Windows/CS Software (i.e GIMP can replace PS Elements - if your time is cheap)
I agree.
The home PC/Laptop/Mac is really for SoHo use and only had a role in pure domestic use when there was no other way to do email/internet/social medja. People don't seem to write letters much these days. :-( But the Android phone has given users all these functions and with added games at an affordable price.
In the office, PCs are much more capable than they even need to be with software that already does far more than most people want- and machines last for years.
So the refresh cycle is much longer than once it was.
We have a pc in the house,it gets switched on by me for Android development... There it. It's Chromebook, Android tablets (my pixel C and keryboiard is amazingly good) and android phones.
There PS4 handles gaming and TV streaming. No need for PC outside my single use case. Why anyone else would want a malware prone 2000s windows device is beyond me..
You use Android and you call Windows malware prone?
Most Android devices are not kept up to date on security updates... a lot never get updated at all during their entire service life. Top tier makers like Samsung will usually push a few updates while the device is still in warranty, then you're on your own, and even Google's Nexus (where the updates were one of the selling points) get abandoned pretty quick once they're no longer the current generation.
I have a 7" Android tablet, but it sees little use compared to my PC. Why would I want to mess with a tiny screen device with the clumsy touch interface and even clumsier on-screen keyboard when I can use a real machine with a 25 inch monitor, real mouse, and mechanical-key keyboard, terabytes of local storage, not to mention more CPU power than my 8 year old laptop has (unlike nearly all smart phones)? It would be like driving around town on a riding lawnmower when I have a Lexus available.
I don't see very much value in mobile devices for my own use (other than doing it at work when I really should be working and not playing). If I'm out and about, I'd rather do whatever it is I am out doing than mess with a phone. If I am out with friends, I'd rather concentrate on that and let the glowing screens wait until I have time where I'm not doing anything else. And if that is the case, why would I stay out and use a phone for whatever when I can return home and do the same on my PC?
If I'm home, why bother with underpowered, clumsy things like phones and tablets when a PC with far superior ergonomics is available? I can use my PC for hours with relatively little discomfort, with the keyboard, mouse, and display all set up for maximum comfort, with a well-chosen chair and desk. The immobility is a strength if I don't have to be using it when I am out-- it means I can set everything up to be just right.
As for a console gaming system... it's a PC at its core anyway. Why would I buy one of those when my actual PC is superior in every way?
My tablet mainly sees use in situations when there is unavoidable waiting. It's a poor substitute for my actual PC, but it's a whole lot more portable. Fortunately, I am not in a job where I am subjected to long periods of waiting around (at airports or on planes, etc), so this time is minimized.
Browsing the web on the tiny 7 inch screen is frustrating and annoying for me. It's a small tablet, but still a little bit bigger than the biggest phones. I don't know how people can view them as anything but "it works in a pinch because I happen to have it on me, but it really sucks" devices.
...more like Windows 7 (no slurping, no child-like flat graphics from the bad old days of limited colour pallet, no Metro at all anywhere), it's share would be far higher.
Win 10 is gaining share partly by ripping Win 7 from the grasping, clawing hands (through forced upgrades) of frustrated users who don't want to lose Win 7. Frustrated users are less likely to give MS money in the future than happy users. C'mon MS, what does it matter what license we buy? Stop cocking about and sell what people actually want, rather than forcibly give them something they don't want.
If MS say that Win 10 is on 270 million devices, that sounds a bit like the total PC sales count for the year Win X has been out. Does that mean that PC sales have really bombed, or have most people managed to resist the forced upgrade?
If the majority of commentards here (sorry Windows 10 Fans) are anything to go by then they are really working hard to avoid having anything to do with Windows 10.
This will, in time come to bite MS really badly. If the IT Bods hate it then there will be less real effort going into doing their business upgraded (a few IMHO frankly silly companies excepted that is).
Then the average punter who uses a computer at work will see and use something different they may well take those experiences home and make the switch there as well.
As Linux/BSD/Linux based systems are basically free then there won't be much capital cost in moving away from W10. Indeed, there may well be some capital expenditure avoided simply because device makers can't be half arsed into making W10 compatible drivers for their bits of kit. Yet many will work OOTB with FOSS Software.
{posted from a Windows 10 free Environment}
Last month we spent a pleasant time changing all the computers for a client over to Open Suse and the company hasn't missed a beat.
The reason for the change. The MD had his computer, that had been running Win7, forcibly changed to win 10. I can't see them changing back no matter what microsoft does in the future.
Let me see. My private/BYOD "Notebook" is a Lenovo Helix (A-series). If I put a Linux on it I will loose:
+ Use of the WACOM hardware (Linux drivers are "early beta" IF they exist for the choosen Distri)
+ Use of OneNote and Journal with their local storage / store in company Sharepoint capabilities (It's Windows so it's allowed in the company network/domain, Evernotes "cloud only" approach does not work for my usage)
+ Use of DPP, Lightroom and PS Elements (With an external USB-3 SSD)
+ Use of EyeFi Cards and Selphy Photoprinter
+ Use of MiraCast
+ Use of about 20 programs for my hobby that do not exist in non-Windows versions
+ Use of Outlook/Exchange (It's Windows so it's allowed in the company network/domain)
'Let me see. My private/BYOD "Notebook" is a Lenovo Helix (A-series). If I put a Linux on it I will loose:
+ Use of the WACOM hardware (Linux drivers are "early beta" IF they exist for the choosen Distri)'
Wacom tablet works just fine for me on Debian Wheezy/LTS.
Try again.
Thing is I don't know any IT bods who do hate it, most just see it as another OS to be deployed and managed. There are two types who have reservations about it:
1. Anti-MS bods, but it wouldn't matter what OS MS came out with they'd find an excuse to bash it.
2. infosec bods, who are more worried about the slurping, cloud elements than anything else.
You aren't going to have this mad dash to linux, it's not going to happen, not now and not in 10 years. If it ever does happen it will be incredibly slow due to how embedded MS are, get the processes and tools in place to allow the shift then it might happen - but until then there's no chance.
Heck 99% of IT staff I've known over the past 15 years haven't touched Unix or linux in the past 5+ years.
Group 3) is not really a "hater" but the "We have just recently migrated to Win7" group is strong in company IT. And why not, after all to quote Scotty: "A good engineer is always a bit conservative. At least on paper"
Our staff here does Windows (Client and Server), SOLARIS and (for a few "cheap" customers) Linux (Red Hat) and they still do not hate Win10. It's just that "We went W7 in 2013 so why change again now". W8, W8.1 and W10 are tested and supported by our products (and our external IT support) but except a few QS and BYOD boxes currently not in "general deployment".
Like many folks, I recently had an experience with the "Windows X virus." My wife complained that her PC didn't boot right and had no Internet at all. I checked it, and found that Windows X had downloaded (no wonder my Internet connection had been so slow earlier) and tried, but failed, to install.
A quick rollback, installation of GWX Control Panel and some heavy-handed deleting of everything Windows X related solved all her problems. The next fix for her will be Linux Mint.
"So even if every PC sold this year runs Windows 10 – which won't happen, because lots will be Macs..."
You make that sound like a large percentage, or even most, will be Macs. Which is complete nonsense. Macs still make up only a small % of the number of PCs sold. Even if everybody wanted a Mac, most people can't afford one.
Macs lasting longer than PCs is generally a myth. Usally perpetuated by those that want to help justify the £1400 outlay to the wife and family over the £600 box the kids wanted to play BF4 on. The biggest killer of any computer is usually human stupidity than component fails. And then again the components whether Mac or PC are still all made by FoxConn.
It's only the case and OS that's different at the the end of the day.
I remember the folks I used to give Mac gear jobs to (before they went under) had plenty of people queuing round the block with faulty Apple gear.
I still do not see the link. Yes, a good hardware like an Optiplex-series DELL lasts a LONG time (I have a pre core-i box here running SOLARIS, that box was a XP initially) but that same old hardware often runs Win10 just as well (my core i5 tower came with Win7 and is now Win10. And yes, I bought W8 for it as well)
>My other half uses a 2009 13in Macbook (dual core CPU)
and I've got a 2009 iMac. It's actually running snow leopard but I understand it is capable of the latest OSX.
Mac's tend to be the consumer item of choice if budget allows.
I've gone opensuse because I'm an infosec bod, I despise the slurping by all of the big three and I like to run my own services. I'll have a local file server over gigabit copper, not onedrive over soggy string, thanks.
> Is your mac over 5 years old?
Yes... It's used daily for development running multiple VMs, has loads of music, etc. So why no upgrade...?
Partly because the current Macs are not upgradable and full of proprietary SSDs and the memory's not upgradable.
Partly because the performance of a 5 year old MacBook Pro with discs replaced with a 2TB SSD, is not far off of a current MBP.
Partly because there's no need to update as it works fine.
Partly because you can't get 17" MBPs.
Partly because there's no need to splaff £2500 on a new MBP with only marginal benefits. To be fair, the old machine would still fetch well over £1000 on eBay.
etc, etc, etc.
With a claim like that, I'm guessing yoiu're based in the US? In the UK (and Europe as a whole, I think) Apple have a very small installed base compared to Windows; I don't think I've seen one in a business that's not in the creative sector(and even THAT is due to inertia - with the same software available for Windows it really is a case of user attitude rather than necessity)
OSX just doesn't play nicely with the software you want to use in business. If there was an attempt to offer a substantially better AD implementation then maybe it would stand a chance, but Apple just aren't interested in the business sector - which is why they haven't mad a proper server in years (a Mac Mini with attached storage is NOT a server)
And Macs DO NOT last longer, either; I'd say in my own company we have slightly more hardware failures on the Macs than we do PCs; but we have 6-7 times more PCs! Add to that the need for creative teams to always be on very reent releases of software, and the replacement cycle is also much shorter
I am a Penguin, so my knowledge of Windows is thin and Macs even thinner. I keep seeing Windows PCs replaced because of software issues - the required software only runs on new versions of the OS, the new version of the OS will not work with old hardware. The hardware was fine. A quick Linux install, and ancient machines are useful. Resistance to Windows 10 may well push up the service life of Windows boxes.
From a Penguin's point of view, a desktop does not have a single age. The case might well be a relic from the nineties. There was a time for a Motherboard+CPU+RAM upgrades for speed. Later, a similar upgrade for power reduction or silence. Floppy disks barely got used because of network cables, and were retired in working order because of USB flash. Pre-SATA DVD players were retired when legacy PATA disappeared. After about a decade, the laser in a DVD player becomes too dim to play reliably. Keyboards and mice have a life time proportion to the cleanliness of the user. Disks got regular upgrades depending on bravery and the cost of restoring from backups, but SSDs are big and reliable these days. Properly specced power supplies last for ages (white box shippers liked to fit something with under 1W to spare so it would fry when you add a second hard disk). Monitors lasted until extra desk space was required, and I have not had a reason to refresh them since.
I am not sure how to compare the life time of a Penguin flavoured desktop PC to a Mac. Five years ago, I would have said replace the CPU/Motherboard/memory/SSD every five years, mostly to cut power consumption, and expect the rest to last a decade. The comparison has become irrelevant anyway. My final desktop was working fine when it was retired over two years ago because it's work could be done by £90/10W fist full of ARM (approximately equal to a Pi3 + SATA + GB ethernet + memory bandwidth). By the time that dies, a Raspbery Pi 6 will blend, and if I need something bigger, I will take a closer look at this.
"I am a Penguin, so my knowledge of Windows is thin and Macs even thinner. I keep seeing Windows PCs replaced because of software issues - the required software only runs on new versions of the OS, the new version of the OS will not work with old hardware. "
Yeah your knowledge is a little out of date. Maybe stick to your linux install on that Athlon XP 2600+ PC with 1GB of ram?
Windows has been getting better and better with old kit since Windows 7. Hence why people are not buying new machines. Windows (any version from 2009 onwards) should work just fine on any hardware since around Vista days. If you cant find a driver then Vista onwards drivers will work fine too. VMs will work fine for old software too in most cases.
..Windows has been getting better and better with old kit since Windows 7..
Sorry, but if this was the case, then why did my work fork out £silly_amounts for new hardware to run Win7, as it failed in many interesting and horrible ways on the old hardware?
Having hardware which runs Win7 in a not too painful manner, why are they now talking about £more_upgrades for the future intended deployment of Win10? (I've been told they've been testing for months now).
Work asides, lets talk about home machines...I'm having to turn down offers of perfectly usable systems (I have no free space left for all these boxes - I badly need a storage facility/workshop somewhere) thanks to people upgrading their hardware after finding that Win10 runs like a pig stuck in molasses on their existing Win7 boxes?
You forget that a lot of systems out there are the bare minimum specs required to run these OSes.
It could be an asset write-off. My current laptop is probably worth a bit on the second hand market, but because of its age and the cost of renewing an extended warranty, it makes more sense to purchase a new laptop and have the investment protected for 5 years with no business interruption, than run this laptop into the ground and wait for it to expire at a very inconvenient moment before replacing it. Many moons ago, I had a Toshiba Satellite Pro 490xcdt laptop I bought off an employer when it was being retired for a Windows XP migration. It was over ten years old by the time I sold it on, and still worked just as well as it did when I took delivery of it as a new machine. However, when you have to look after 5000 laptops in a business you can't operate on the basis that because one lasted a decade, so will all the others.
Indeed corporate IT buying has never been based in simple logic. I remember questioning why we paid £200 for 32MB of ram with 4 weeks wait when Crucial sold the same stuff for £75 with next day delivery.
I got told to 'shut up!"
Otherwise you sweat the assets for 5 years and then sell them out the back to a guy that takes them away. I then buy them off him for £60 a throw. Thanks very much the circle of life continues.
Often easier and cheaper to buy new kit every few years than sanitise and check 2000+ 5 year old laptops and PCs, re-spec and rebuild them. Plus all covered by support contracts etc. etc.
You seen the state of company issued laptops after just one year let alone 5+?
"About 25 million Macs per year is not a small number."
I love how we regularly hear this argument from Apple fans or Linux guys ("75 million installs over 20 years is not a small number...") in literally the same thread where they're telling us that 270 million Win 10 installs in 6 months IS a small number (or, for that matter, the remaining 275m+ PC sales per year which are on Windows, too).
I have about 100 optiplex 760s they are core 2 duo with 4gb,3ghz and 120gb ssds. They are about 6 years old and i have NO reason to upgrade them. Spares PSUs aplenty.
I have 10 optiplex 330s that are 7 years old. Even older still are the optiplex 280s P4s 1gb Ram (4 of them running weather stations) they have debian on them and were purchased in 2006
Why buy new if you have spares? You can buy a pallet of 30 core2duos are 50£ each and an SSD for 30. That will be faster than a non ssd new machine costing 3 times as much and you have spares.
The stats for market share are based on OS reported in user agent strings for web visitors, not unit sales.
If anything, the stats underestimate the number of PCs; I doubt Macs are seeing much use in manufacturing control or other such tasks. There are a great many still on Windows XP. Those devices are not out there browsing the web (and being counted), but they do exist.
As for lasting "much longer," I'll have to ask for your source on that. It's true that you can buy cheap in PCs, which is not true of Apple, but it doesn't mean that is the bulk of the market.
Right now, I have an 8 year old Asus laptop right here, currently running Win 7. To my left is a Compaq/HP laptop, 11 years old, running perfectly in its limited role, even after all this time. It was retired from standard duty because of obsolescence, even in this era of "Moore's law is ending".
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the reported numbers for Macs are just as trivial as they seem.
I work in supporting small business and domestic IT. I have yet to see a single Mac in any serious usage business wise.
Three of my customers decided to buy them for work even after I told them I didn't support them (pressure to buy them from their iPad using family). But all of them called me back within a year to 18 months to tell me they had gone back to Windows for work use.
No serious Mac support out there you see. What happens, Mac Store arrives and takes away 60% of the Mac support guys bread and butter work. Then Apple make the damn things harder and harder to take apart and repair and its not worth it financially. They give up. So if you are a Mac user the only support you can get is iTunes issues or if you've dropped it, from a 'Genius'.
And the revamp of the interface.
And the Store, which is next to empty and all but useless, but forced on you.
And the Cloud which, despite every marketing department's best efforts, still isn't accepted as the Universal Unicorn - plus there are more and more stories about how people have actually lost their data in the fluffy future of today.
The Interface is "a matter of taste". I prefer it to W7 (even more to W7+Aero) and many people who see an OS as "a tool to run my 10 prefered programs" liked W8 and W10 as good as/better than W10.
The store is a "use if you like, ignore if not". I actually installed ONE program from it (Miracast setup for the MS Miracast receiver), the other programs came in the "old fashioned way" (DVD)
Cloud is a "what type of cloud/what for". The company runs a Sharepoint server. That is basically a "local" cloud with backup and all when you add VPN access. Works fine and data security is "how good is your admin".
Privatly I use OneDrive for syncing documents over to a PC at my parents house and Amazon as a secondary backup for pictures. Works fine so far but the data is "not really important/replaceable"
Latest version of GWX Control Panel ought to do the trick. Haven't seen the GWX malware punch through it yet, though the author is sadly deferential to MS in his phraseology (both on his blog and in the language and choices available in the utility). I understand that as he has a relationship with MS (or with their staff) he doesn't want to burn his bridges, but when our best hope for barring this arrant filth is an MS-associated developer, we're really on planet la-la.
Disclaimer: WinX ain't so bad with ClassicShell. It's the GWX malware I really hate with a burning passion.
Until there is an aftermarket solution that can completely and permanently eliminate all traces of TIFKAM, 10 is not even a possibility for me. It's not a phone... it's not a tablet. It's a full PC... learn it, know it, live it, MS!
If you look further at the rate of change of each version of Windows, you will see that 7 is declining much more slowly than 10 is increasing. Most of the uptake in 10 is not coming at the expense of 7. With each coming month, more of the pool of people that were going to switch will have already done so, leaving us stalwarts in the Win 7 camp.
Hopefully, enough of us will resist 10 so as to force MS to extend security updates for a few years as they did with XP... by that time, their nutty gambit to use desktop PCs to create a mobile app market should have crashed and burned, so it wouldn't be as unthinkable as it is now. Maybe then they'll actually turn 10 into a reasonable product. Stranger things have happened!
Agree, I've installed it, backed it up (imaged it) then removed it, where I then stick a blue dot next to the licence, to show me that Windows 10 should activate on that machine in the future (should i sell it), if I choose to go there, but mostly I just carry on using the restored Linux and Windows 7, after the Win10 appraisal.
The more I used Windows 10 on a day to day basis, the more I disliked it. I thought Vista was bad at taking context away from what you are doing.
Windows 10 just loves to impress you with the things its doing and I couldn't care less. Just get out of the way, you're blocking my path, 'so to speak', like some drunk on a canal path.
Typed on an iPad for what its worth, not a PC.
(iPads need their text editing, text selection, cut, copy and paste to actually work before it ever becomes anything other a 'best in its class' consumption device)
It was Windows 10 and it's "telemetry" that prompted me to switch over to Ubuntu for day to day work, just keeping Windows as a dual boot option for those times when it has to be Windows. The funny thing is, I've found that I've hardly used Windows since, and superficial UI slickness aside, don't miss it at all. The other thing I've noticed is that my laptop's fan works hard when using Windows 10, and is hardly troubled by Ubuntu - which makes me wonder what the hell Windows is working at so furiously while idling?
I'm a gamer at home, so stuck with Windows unfortunately, at least on the gaming PC.
I tried Win 10 on my gaming rig, and it was a failure, stability issues, blue screens, driver issues etc. Went back to Win 7, and it's been solid (again).
I am now dual booting between Win 7 and Mint.
My plan now is to always use the Linux version of a game when available (which seems to be about 50% of my Steam library currently), and only use Windows versions as and when needed. (Some of which I can probably get running under Wine, which I've not tried yet, or Virtual Box).
My worry now is that we seem to be getting new applications and games that now need Win 8.1 or Win 10 as a minimum, and won't work on Win 7. Typically as they either need a newer version of DirectX, or sometimes is that they are using Windows APIs that are not available in Win 7.
I've only seen a couple of these so far, but this is bound to grow over time, which might start forcing peoples hands. :-/
Antivirus? My work Win 7 locks up for anywhere from 30 seconds to two minutes several times a day, when gospodin Kaspersky does his thing. In my case, ProcMon seems to indicate that Kaspersky is irritated by a program connected to a particular data server. YMMV.
Slightly unfair comparison. In my experience a genuinely 'clean' install of Windows is pretty rare - it normally runs a buttload of 3rd-party crud which is what kills the CPU and fan. I should know; I spend my life fixing overheating turd-infested hardware (and no, not by installing Mint, though the gag is always appreciated).
Also, some internal Windows services are hideously sluggish and will kill your superfast gaming rig. Best example: Unless you access a hotmail.com or outlook.com account from within Outlook (any version) then you can safely disable the Windows Search service and notice an instant, massive decrease in fan noise. This service is useless to anyone who knows which folders they have put their stuff in.
You can also safely ditch the following: the two Homegroup services (seriously - who the hell uses Homegroup - and why?) and the Skype update service. Actually, you can rip out nearly any update service other than Google's and Windows' own.
Get with it! , iPads aren't all £400-500 now. An iPad Air 16Gb is between £214-£249, depending where you look, hardly boasting, if you can't afford that, you're in the wrong line of work.
Actually mine was more one of complaint, editing on the iPad is buggy as hell and frustrating.
Fundamentals like copy don't always work, often the page will zoom,scroll, do anything rather than select text, or suddenly select a massive area of text. Needs to improve drastically.
iPads as they are now aren't 'Pro' devices, whatever Tim Cook evangelicaly want to purport..
After Windows 10 trashed my dual-boot laptop I removed it and dedicated the machine to Linux Mint.
Also downloaded Windows 10 into a VM on Linux Mint just to try updating my TomTom, but couldn't get the TomTom application to see the TomTom device on the USB port, so deleted the Win 10 virtual machine again. I wish TomTom would release updates via Linux as well as Windows / MAC; I imagine the device itself is Linux based so it shouldn't be rocket science.
I bet there are lots of temporary or aborted Windows 10 downloads / installs.
...with a simple custom install option like we had up and including Windows 98SE.
When you go to install a list of tick boxes appear with all the stuff that is not critical to the OS functioning and you get to untick all the stuff you don't want or need.
Windows 10 for me is becoming that huge Swiss Army knife display that has 258 different blades and tools in it and weighs 4KG when all I need is the little blade, bottle opener and screwdriver.
We assumed that Windows would be kept for enterprise in the future, but when I look around my office, I only see about half the office that actually need real PC's. The other half simply need email, a browser, Word, Excel and PowerPoint. They could definitely go down the web OS route.
All the stupid complicated or legacy internal systems we use have been put on Citrix or RemoteApp as it is less effort for IT than trying to get them work on everyone's individual laptop.
I know of some solicitors that simple use their laptops to login to a remote desktop so that everything is kept secure in a remote location.
Maybe the future market for Windows is even smaller than we first thought.
I remember speaking to a corporate IT at a bank a few years ago. He told me that Windows 7 was the last they expected to provide and support with a shift to BYOD by 2018. Starting to look eerily prescient.
You can't do everything via Citrix or the cloud. Mutlicore ARM v8 chips are now pretty beefy and SSD storage cheap enough. We've already seen Apple make its first steps in marketing the IPad-Pro as a notebook replacement – certainly not cheap – but cheaper and lighter than the Intel-based alternatives. I reckon we'll see more and more such attempts along with the Chromebook approach. However, I suspect we won't see a massive shift to a single new platform, just a crumbling of the Wintel one.
iPP cheaper? - sorry to break it to you but you can buy a modern transformable laptop with far more functionality, memory and SSD for far less than the £1000 for Pro+keyboard. Nice screen and all for a premium tablet but hardly anywhere near a notebook replacement.
iPP cheaper? - sorry to break it to you but you can buy a modern transformable laptop with far more functionality
You're not telling me anything new but the point is that an IPad Pro isn't a transformable laptop and people may be buying it for just that reason. I think Apple may be testing the water to see what the demand is like and to test MacOS / IOS crossover.
I also still fully expect them to release ARM-based notebooks at some point. Again, the single-port MacBook may have been a toe in the water. Will the next one come with a touchscreen and be transformable?
"I remember speaking to a corporate IT at a bank a few years ago. He told me that Windows 7 was the last they expected to provide and support with a shift to BYOD by 2018."
Which bank? I want to avoid them. As a freelancer I could provide my own kit but in a security-conscious client it wouldn't be allowed. I'd have hoped banks would fall into that category.
Actually I asume a lot of them are older boxes getting W10. Why not, Win10 is smaller/less power hungry than W7 and runs on a 2011 core-i box just fine. Not that MS cares as long as the user base, most important in the companies, stays the same and Surface/Pro (and Surface/3) make money.
There's a huge difference with Windows 10 which people don't realise - the EULA says you *have* to take all future updates, none of this defer indefinitely or GWX control panel malarkey. Word is, it's the last regular windows release so this is the way it has to be.
The few "upgraders" doing it now don't realise that not only is it the first hit or so that's free, but they're literally signing away their ability to get out in future.
"they're literally signing away their ability to get out in future"
In what way, exactly? If they need Windows, why would they not want the updates? If they don't need Windows, there's still nothing stopping them from installing something else, because all that UEFI FUD is still just FUD.
Every update published is an exploit given away for free to the Bad Guys. Month after month, a steady stream of ways to take over your PC and steal your work or identity. Why would you want that? Well, you wouldn't, obviously, so if you need Windows then you need the updates. Yes, the new UI sucks, but it isn't quite as bad as 8.1, which in turn was marginally better than 8, and let's be honest about 7 -- huge numbers of people thought that sucked so hard that they are still running XP.
But ... if you need Windows then you need Windows, so you've just gotta suck it up. Deal with it, or bite the bullet and figure out how to make an alternative OS work for you.
I disagree. People who are still running XP have obviously stopped caring about the UI some time in the previous millenium.
I think that XP remains used for essentially 2 cases : people who couldn't care less and "it's good enough for what I do", or PCs that run mission-critical software that won't run on any other platform.
There is a surprising number of the latter, I'm sure.
My guess is there is a third group of XP users that did not upgrade. The "borrowed the OS from a cousins cousin" group. A lot of the boxes that report XP in internet statistics come from regions with a "loose" approach to intelectual property.
And a "mission critical" XP box most likely will NOT show up on internet statistics anyway. That is more like the SCO Unix box I maintained well past SCOs turn from "builds a brilliant UNIX System 5" to "patent troll". No internet connection, access either remote through RS422 or the console.
This post has been deleted by its author
XP ... PCs that run mission-critical software that won't run on any other platform.
A related group is PCs that run control software for some really expensive lab or factory hardware which is still useful to the organisation. Replacing the equipment is out of the question (often because it's not mission-critical, just useful) and would cost a six- or seven-figure sum.
So we stick to running XP (or even Windows 98, Windows 3.1) until the day when the controlled equipment breaks down in an unfixable way, or until we can no longer fix the computer. (yes, we have two or three spare ancient PCs in stock, so provided they don't die in storage we're set for a good while yet).
And if such a business has to fork out half a million because the supply of obsolete PCs has dried up before the obsolete widget-spangler dies, that's a half-million's worth of guaranteed anti-Microsoft sentiment.
"they're literally signing away their ability to get out in future"
In what way, exactly? If they need Windows, why would they not want the updates?
Simple, you've overlooked what "long term servicing branch" actually means.
The stability of each LTSB is equivalent to the stability of XP, Vista, 7, 8 etc. ie. it is a commitment by MS to maintain compatibility. However, there is no commitment by MS to main compatibility from one LTSB to the next; hence moving between LTSB's is likely to be just as involved and disruptive as moving between XP -> 7 -> 8 etc. Now whilst the Enterprise is likely to explicitly use LTSB's and hence plan their migration from one to the next, the consumer will be automatically updated with little real warning from one LTSB to the next and we can expect things to break, just as we've seen with previous Windows/Linux/OSX/iOS etc. version updates.
So the reason why I've turned off GWX updates on Win7 and 8 systems isn't because I don't necessarily want 10, just that I want stable systems for the next few years - lower support effort and costs. Yes come 2020, I and many others, will have to decide what to do, in light of what is in the market at that time.
"If they need Windows, why would they not want the updates?"
You've never heard of an update (for any OS) breaking things?
You've never heard of people holding back applying updates until they're reassured by the absence of bad reports? In the new world of W10 you only have a limited option to do this. The rest of the users are sent out across open country to discover the hard way whether there's a minefield there or not.
Let's be honest: Joe Average Enduser does not read the websites where he can read the "Oh Update x does y if you have z" news. He either has Auto-Update on since the days of Win7 or not. And since an unpatched desktop with a 92+ percent market share is a prime target for criminals forcing updates to Joe Average is actually a benefit for the net.
Companies OTOH still can just buy a Enterprise version of W10 and have full decision power over when/what and can/will do it centrally through WSUS.
Telemetry was added to 7 and 8 with updates. GWX adware was added to 7 and 8 with updates. Win 7 gives me control over which updates I install, so I've avoided those "features" I don't want. I suppose there is a level of irony in Microsoft illustrating why control over updates is necessary as part of their effort to promote a product where control over updates is removed.
Win 10 doesn't give me the choice to avoid unwanted updates like those listed above-- not just because it doesn't have an option for "notify me when updates are available, but don't download them until I say so", but also because nearly all of the updates for Win 10 are big monolithic things that are more like monthly service packs than any updates we have had before. You can't separate the telemetry and adware updates from the necessary security updates; they're all in one single package.
I need windows for one program only. It lives inside virtualbox with no network connectivity
And there you have an example of a major functional limitation of Win10, as currently shipped, namely it is not suited to being installed in a VM that will either only occasionally be used or requires to be of a specific build; something that was trivial to achieve with all previous versions of Windows.
Smartphones and tablets are consumption devices. Trying to type on a tablet is a slow and often frustrating experience. While a stylus is useful, many people that do work on a computer find it easier to still use a mouse. When it gets to the point where "work" is just prodding a box on a screen, that job hasn't been automated due to some union contract and will be gone at the next contract negotiations.
I wonder how many Windows 10 installations are done under protest. I've seen several stories where it just installed itself without the user wanting it. I'll likely stick with 7 until a crucial piece of software needs to be upgraded to a version that needs a newer OS. In the mean time, I do most of my work on a Mac anyway and I keep my fingers crossed that one day Solidworks will work under a MacOS.
I have also heard stories of guys walking over water and others (from the same region) bending spoons with their mind. I don't believe them either. Win10 installs itself when you allow it to do so. and ONLY then. So the "installs without the users permission" is likely "Freddy Fastclick" going off half-cocked
As for the rest - people who see a OS as an "App launcher" are generally quite open as long as their software runs and is easy to find. Something that for many end users (That have 10-20 regular programs) work just fine with Win8 or 10 and Modern UI.
@mmeler
"Win10 installs itself when you allow it to do so. "
Oh FFS!
My daughter would have had in on her win8.1 laptop if I hadn't caught it in the act of installing winx.
Accept the fact the Microshaft have been very underhand in pushing out "accidental" upgrade commands.
Otherwise, do fuck off.
I've noticed many of the the 'upgraded by itself comments' are from individuals who like to use obscene language in their posts - I wonder if there's any connection? Tin foil hats - maybe Cortana is listening to you and wreaking her revenge on your crude aggressive attittude to language and life.
I've noticed that the "It couldn't have upgraded by itself comments" are from anonymous winx fanboys. How strange. For all you poor M$ amnesiacs out there, here it is again ;
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/10/15/pushy_windows_10/
For those averse to clicking on links, here is the appropriate text :
"After a to and fro between El Reg and Microsoft's spokespeople, it has emerged that the "optional" Window 10 update should not have been ticked, and was a blunder by Redmond.
"As part of our effort to bring Windows 10 to existing genuine Windows 7 and Windows 8.1 customers, the Windows 10 upgrade may appear as an optional update in the Windows Update (WU) control panel. This is an intuitive and trusted place people go to find Recommended and Optional updates to Windows," a Microsoft spokesperson told us on Friday.
"In the recent Windows update, this option was checked as default; this was a mistake and we are removing Windows 10 from Windows Update for users that have not reserved a copy of Windows 10."
A mistake. Yeh, right....
"http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/10/15/pushy_windows_10/
For those averse to clicking on links, here is the appropriate text[...]"
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/10/15/pushy_windows_10/
I'm averse to clicking on links that don't, well ... click.
(NOT the same A/C)
Cortana is getting vengeance on people who use bad language by forcing upgrades to the OS that contains Cortana? How does Cortana manage to take actions before it is even installed?
While I tend to watch my language, I note that it could be that people who have found themselves with an unwanted upgrade to 10 are angrier than the average bear, and thus more likely to use profanity.
@ anonymous shitarse
Too scared to put your id out there?
No, she had come up for the weekend and I was updating her computer. In case arseholes like you forget, M$ "apologised" last October (subs please check date)for forcing an upgrade without permission.
So you can go the way of mmeler (who he?) and fuck off.
I see all the WINx fanboys are out in force today.
(all seven of them.)
@mmeier
You were doing really well until that last 'Fact' that Win10 installs itself when you allow it to do so and ONLY then.
I have lost count of the number of people who have had Win10 forced onto their machine by MS.
The GWX software was not installed by choice it was installed by MS abusing the Update Mechanism in Win7/8/8.1.
The subsequent updates are then 'forced' through by MS making the update 'Recomended' or 'Security Update' which again the update mechanism will allow through, if you have 'Windows Update' set to recommended settings.
The only way to take full control is to Stop ALL Updates and constantly check all updates by hand to see if they kick off the install.
Depending on a level of knowledge or experience to avoid an install is NOT choice by any description.
Once it has been allowed to start the install most none-IT users will not be able to stop it without the risk of rendering the machine corrupt with Win 7/8/81 not performing as intended, if at all.
I have been building Computers of all flavours/OSes for 30+ years as part of my various 'Techie' roles in IT.
I know how to configure Windows to not install updates automatically, yet it still managed to get past and install on a few machines, before I locked it down from ANY updates to stop the GWX grief and/or the sneaking in of the 'odd' KBxxxxx update.
People ARE being upgraded without their permission ...... FACT!!
MS is constantly changing the 'Attack' vectors to achieve this aim.
Tricking users into clicking something to start the install is not a 'choice'.
Making a reboot, to complete installation of updates, start the Upgrade is not 'choice'.
It is not possible that ALL reports of forced installs are from 'Dumb Users' (including myself).
The use of the word 'choice' is just semantic gymnastics worthy of 'Marketing Drones'. :)
captain badmouth, you are talking out of your arse. Windows 10 does not install itself.
Even the link you provided didnt affect all Windows users and would only affect those who chose to automatically download and install the available updates.
As we can tell from you malformed posts, she didnt let her laptop automatically install Windows 10, nor did she click on a button to automatically install it - you already told us you were updating her latop. Did you just see it in the list of available updates or something? This made your blood boil so much? The mere thought of your daughter using something made by Microsoft was so disgusting that you had to go out there and add to the blazing bonfire that is the current public perception of Windows 10 by, wait for it, lying?
Fuck me, I wonder how many more lying cunts like you are out there.
@1Rafayal
Let's get one thing straight, the person that was me back in October never thought that M$ would put a nefarious "update to winx now" in the recommended security updates. I was merely making sure her laptop was secure and downloading such. I know know better, naive windows user Captain Badmouth is no more, he now has a toothcomb to hand for all windows updates. Not only does my daughter use Microshaft she has a full paid-for office package on her laptop for her work. I also use win7 pro. My issue with M$ is the sneaky, underhand way they've gone about pushing winx onto the windows user community. My daughter is not that computer literate, if not for me being there I would no doubt have been trying to roll back a winx installation last October. That is the problem which would affect most home computer users in this country. I am not a lying cunt as you suggest. You, however, seem to be in denial.
This post has been deleted by its author
One wonders why sales of hardware and sales/activations of an OS that has a smaller footprint that Win7 are mashed together. Basically every box that could run Win7 "fast enough" can run Win10 just fine (some notebooks with missing drivers excluded) so this is a first (well second if you count Vista) time that the new Windows version does NOT call for a new hardware.
My Win10 systems are basically all "2010/11 vintage" (The Helix is a 2014 production run but the design is older) and all run as fast/faster unter W10 than they did under W7 (or W8 in case of the Lenovo). Same for other systems of similar age. So the hardware stays (maybe a new drive) and the OS changes.
Not sure why you got the downvote.
From what I understand, after the major criticism MS got over Vista, they spent a lot of time and effort optimising Windows 7 to make it faster than Vista, and bring things like memory usage and CPU cycles down.
MS, and with a focus on getting Windows to run on more mobile devices, continued that effort with Win 8.0, then 8.1 and now 10.
Benchmarks and other analysis done over the years shows this is the case, with things like games running faster on the same hardware with the newer Windows versions.
So other than driver issues with older hardware, anything built for Vista/Win 7, should be faster and have a a reduced memory usage, if Windows 10 is installed.
PS: This isn't a comment on the rest of Win 10, I still don't like the snooping or the GUI changes, and will stick to Win 7 for now for personal use.
A tool I have found to be useful in combatting the telemetry in Win 7-10, is "SpybotAntiBeacon" from Safer-Networking Ltd. You can find it here.
I use that, the GWX control panel, and a beady gaze cast over any Windows updates on offer, to keep the wolf from the door.
So far, so good, although my resentment grows daily at the effort I must go through to simply, not upgrade.
@ 1Rafayal
"Unless you have removed the updates from Win 7, 8.x then you have them installed."
All of the Win7 installations I do are on bare metal, whether for myself, friends, relatives, or customers. Windows Update is turned off, I manually choose which updates to download and install.
"The only way they wouldn't have shown up is if you chose not to install any updates/chose to install them manually."
Yes, exactly.
Even us lUNatIX appreciate a full-sized desktop. However, the headshot to MS' dominance may come in the form of Android N[ougat|utbrittle]'s windowing multi-tasking. Imagine you can take your 'phone, with it's eight ARM64 cores, oodles of RAM and 3D graphics, and plug it into (or sit it on top of, with an inductive charger and some optical trickery as a data link) a hub with mouse, keyboard, NIC and an HDMI link to a proper monitor.
It's pretty much do-able now but Android's multi-tasking is clunky. RemixOS does a fairly good job of previewing what a proper Android window manager could look like. Ultimate hot-desk. You can bet Apple won't be far behind, either.
That's assuming that anyone by that point can get to the office without getting run over because they're too busy staring at the bloody phone to watch where they're going...
Well aside from the fact that I don't need Android for that (WP10/Continuum will allow that as well) the question is Why?
If I really need a "desktop" I'd rather go with a Atom or core-i based tablet pc with LTE. That will likely offer a better performance/price ratio and is useable on the go for reading complex documents and note taking. Let's go "spending crazy" for a second:
+ Surface/3 with LTE (4GB/128GB SSD) and Stylus and a book case => 900€ at around 700gram
+ The dock (if wanted/needed) comes an extra 230€. Or I can simply use the USB-port and HDMI port
The closest android equivalent is a Samsung Note 5/64GB at around 750€ and 200gram
Yes, the Note is lighter but has a smaller screen, a toothpick stylus and 3 month after the Note 6 is out (maybe sooner) there'll be no more bugfixes etc. for it (Cyanogen does not count since it can not support the stylus)
Both are to big for a normal pocket and either end up in a backpack etc or carried along in the bookcase. One is a mere Android phone the other is a fully capabel PC that can run (and due to stylus use) standard programs. And external USB-3 devices without adapters and prayers. Want a checkcard-sized 256GB SSD - For just 99€ you get one, plug and go (Samsung T1) that can be used just like the internal one (Okay, USB-3 speed)
Interesting reading.
My guess is that 'gamers' are more likely to want the new shiny shiny, such as DX12, whereas more 'regular' users, basically don't care about the OS (stability of shiny etc).
Plus there are now a few DX12 games coming out, some of which are DX12 exclusive, which is forcing their hands, "Want this new game? You need Win 10!".
As far as I know, there are only a couple of games so far that are DX12 exclusive, but this is likely to increase over time.
As an example: Gears of War Ultimate Edition is DX 12 and Win 10 only, and can only be bought through the Windows 10 MS store. Lucky for me, it's not a game I have any interest in!
I dont know how big the games industry is for Windows these days.
Does it cost more for a developer to make a Linux version of a cross platform game? And even then, is there enough of a market place for it?
Here is an interesting example, Kerbal Space Prorgam has been chugging along on 64 bit Linux for quite some time. It plays like a dream. The latest preview of the Windows version has only just brought 64 bit support in. This version has been rebuilt against a new engine and comes with a new physics engine etc and has primarily been put together for the upcoming console release. None of this has brought many changes to the Windows (or indeed Linux) version of the game, so how relevant is Windows 10 to the gaming community?
(gamer here, I use lots of OS's, mainly old Windows, to play games)
The Windows games market is literally over 100 times larger than Linux, despite the valiant efforts of Valve/Steam to provide the alternative. You'd have to be nuts to develop games for Linux except where its unpaid work for fun or a fairy godmother steps in. Windows 10 DirectX performance is considerably better than Windows 7 in critical areas and thats before adapting to DirectX 12. Vulcan should help level out for better performance on Linux over next year or so.
The slow arrival of 64 bit is really just a consequence of the slow upgrade rate in the PC world from the 32 bit version of Windows that ought to have been sent to the scrapheap 5 years ago. This meant some dev. middleware/engines...were going lowest common denominator 32bit for years with consequences to game devs that used it.
Quote: "The slow arrival of 64 bit is really just a consequence of the slow upgrade rate in the PC world from the 32 bit version of Windows that ought to have been sent to the scrapheap 5 years ago. "
Eh? Slow arrival?
XP was the last bastion of a common 32bit Windows OS (as it's 64bit version wasn't really XP).Vista (2007) was available in 32 and 64 bit, although it was probably a 50/50 split.
With Win 7 (2009). I've rarely seen it in its 32 bit version, usually just on ye olde netbooks or similar otherwise outdated hardware.
So from at least 2009/2010 64bit has likely been the most common.
A quick check on Steam's hardware survey, and your looking at maybe 6% on a 32bit OS, and that's mostly legacy XP users.
"The slow arrival of 64 bit is really just a consequence of the slow upgrade rate in the PC world from the 32 bit version of Windows that ought to have been sent to the scrapheap 5 years ago."
Well you only have MS to blame for that one! They decided to release 32 and 64 bit versions of Vista, 7, 8 and 10. Additionally, as I've stated previously, for reasons unknown GWX update can be a bit of a lottery. I have a client system that was running Win7 x64 and GWX upgraded it to Win10 32 - go figure...
As for the slow arrival of full 64 bit games, well that is down to decisions made by the games developers...
"270 million devices means about a million installs a day for nine months."
And how many of those were 'wanted' as opposed to forced down the users throats as people just gave up over the constant nagging to install windows 10 and let it get on with it.
Ohh, all those lovely future subscribers for M$.
I could see 2in1 with a good Wacom or NTrig replacing many of the company notebook+dock that are in use today. Basically they ARE a core-i or Atom notebook that can be used as a simple notepad in meetings, project data wireless to the beamer etc.
Sure in "tablet" mode I am not producing the 10.000 word document. But I sure can produce the outline, draft notes, comment/review/annotate etc. Actually I have been doing that for years....
"Microsoft last week updated its Windows 10 usage data, claiming 270 million devices now run its newest operating system."
Microsoft: Windows 10 will be on 1 billion devices in two to three years
"There are currently an estimated 1.5 billion or so PCs running some version of Windows worldwide."
So will they convince two thirds of Windows users to switch by the Summer of 2017? 2018? Place your bets.
Given the new Microsoft, I'm actually reminiscing and warming to Steve Ballmer in a big way. OK, he bet on Windows 8.0 (Hate, point none) / Julie Larson Green, we all make mistakes.
If Metro had been implemented as an add-on option to the core OS, I think it would have been better received and have had more installs, than it ever got. Microsoft need some self confidence, that people will actually use their products even when they aren't been forced onto their machines.
Smashing the plates of Windows 7 is just pure madness.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
