Corporate Desktop: Windows 7 gaining ground, XP still at 60 percent

In a report from Forrester this week, it has been revealed from their research that Microsoft's Windows XP operating system is still the OS of choice for corporations with around 60% still using it. Windows 7, the company's most recent operating system software has risen in use by approximately 11% in the past year, surpassing Windows Vista usage.

Windows XP usage amongst businesses however is on the decrease as Windows 7 proves a popular replacement for the operating system that was first launched back in 2001. Windows Vista, which was considered by many to be Microsoft's worst OS release, has never been implemented on a widespread basis and has been on the decrease in the past year, with it managing only 14% share back in November 2009.

The report, published on the 16th of June, amounts to data that was collected from over 400,000 computers from 2,500 companies around the world, according to ZDNet. As company hardware, much of which was put in place in the first half of the last decade, begins to age it has had the effect of accelerating the uptake of Microsoft's latest computer operating system.

What operating system companies use on their systems is not necessarily a deciding factor on whether the OS is successful or not but the figures do provide an insight as to whether it is popular in a variety of markets or concentrated in only a few.

Image Source: zdnet.com

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Hackers start exploiting Patch Tuesday vulnerability

Next Story

Commodore 64 all-in-one PC ready to ship next week

56 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

If XP were to die or all XP machines got off the internet you'd see a marked decrease in spam, DDoS attacks, and other botnet foolishness.

Please, corporate IT directors, keep your XP IE6 machines off the internet for the sake of the rest of us.

KingCrimson said,
Interesting that in 18 months Windows share is down 3% and Mac OS X is up 3%. Even on the enterprise, CIOs are going for Macs.

Probably because they're really good at their job. Just imagine the money they'd save with the switch to Macs.

KavazovAngel said,

Probably because they're really good at their job. Just imagine the money they'd save with the switch to Macs.

lolwut

KavazovAngel said,

Just imagine the money they'd save with the switch to Macs.

WTF ... is this sarcasm, or more delusional nonsense from a deluded Jobsian fanatic?!?

When Vista came out I stayed with XP but once I installed Window 7 I was hooked. Most of these people still on XP today tho are older people that knows nothing about a "OS" and is happy with that they got.

Dusco25 said,
When Vista came out I stayed with XP but once I installed Window 7 I was hooked. Most of these people still on XP today tho are older people that knows nothing about a "OS" and is happy with that they got.

I'm old and I know much about OS and I hate Windows 7 and 8. Waiting for free open source Windows 9.

i blame microsoft for this. end the xp support and people will upgrade. i switched to osx but i still use windows 7 occasionally. the way windows 8 is shaping up i may skip the release.

Shaun said,
I expected more on Windows 7

If we were stuck with Win7 for as long as we were stuck with XP then you'd get the same thing, it's only been 2 years or so and this is only talking about business.

hope xp's 60% drops soon so that more corporate users switch to modern web browsers as alot of those xp computer still have ie6 installed not ie8 or other browsers

torrentthief said,
hope xp's 60% drops soon so that more corporate users switch to modern web browsers as alot of those xp computer still have ie6 installed not ie8 or other browsers

-__-
IE8 is not a modern browser. You must be thinking of IE9 or above.

I always found it fascinating that a company I used to work for...used Windows XP for an OS...and used Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Publisher)...but would not use Outlook for their email distribution. They insisted on Lotus Notes.

texasghost said,
I always found it fascinating that a company I used to work for...used Windows XP for an OS...and used Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Publisher)...but would not use Outlook for their email distribution. They insisted on Lotus Notes.

The same here. Tens of thousand XP + Office + Lotus Notes.

texasghost said,
I always found it fascinating that a company I used to work for...used Windows XP for an OS...and used Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Publisher)...but would not use Outlook for their email distribution. They insisted on Lotus Notes.

I worked at one of those, too. Token ring and Notes. It was crazy-unsupportable.

First of all, Windows Vista was never a failure, at one point it was on over 400 million systems world wide. I personally ran Windows Vista from beta 1, beta 2, RC 1, 2 and the RTM until Windows 7 build 6801 came along and also had Vista on my other systems. A lot of Vista's problems were more perceptions than realiality. What happened in January of 2007 was due to unfortunate circumstances beyond Microsoft's control. Microsoft had provided a pre-release version of Windows Vista build 5048 at WinHEC April 2005, this was at least 15 months before Vista RTMed and code was frozen meaning, the driver model was solid and IHV's which was the target audience didn't have to expect any surprises. It was the same case for ISV's at PDC 2005 who had already received the first beta 2 months earlier (August 2005). These two groups had gotten ample time to get their products and technologies ready for Vista. But you know when they chose to actually start testing and getting their products ready? When Vista GA'ed January 31st 2007.

Regardless of this though, many manufacturers got their hardware updated within 2 months of the operating systems release with regular driver updates made available through Windows Update and manufacturers website. As for ISV's some took a bit longer such as Intuit, Peach Tree and some developers, but most applications continued to work while some industry standards took an additional 6 months. Most of which were solved within that time frame. Many persons said that maybe Microsoft should have waited that extra 6 months just to avoid what became its life long perception on the market.

There were other issues too that were resolved such as the performance of the OS, with the release of SP1, then again, if you look at some of the systems that were being sent out of the factory with Vista pre-loaded, they would be more suitable for a 2001 OS, not an OS of 2007. My sister in law bought a laptop from DELL with 512 MBs of RAM, Sempron and Vista Home Basic, it was dog slow, no to mention the shared graphics made things worst. I immediately formatted it for her and reloaded XP. On the other hand, I got a laptop in December 2006 with 2 GBs of RAM, discrete graphics, 2 GHz 64 bit processor running Vista 64 bit and it was amazing running it, performance, boot time, everything just worked according to plan. When you contrast it what a lot of people were experiencing when they were trying upgrade their old 2001/2002 systems or running it on cheap computers that manufacturers purposely sent out, then you could understand why Vista wasn't liked. If you compare Windows 7 and Vista's minimum system requirements, they are basically the same.

In 2008 though, I started seeing a lot of capable laptops come out on the market that were Vista ready, in late 2007 when I started doing some IT courses, a girl doing accounting had I HP with 4 GBs of RAM and Vista Ultimate 64 bit, on campus, everybody wanted to use that laptop, another girl had a similarly configured laptop with Vista Home Premium 64 bit and it was wooing the guys who used it every chance they had. Many more systems going into 2008 I started seeing popping up with Windows Vista, I took moment when I had the chance and asked these people, what they thought about Vista. Most responses were positive, its great, I like it, no problems here. Its unscientific, but I can guarantee, none were negative.

Part of what made Vista look bad was the execution of the OS into the market place, Apple and Linux spreading propaganda (and they were extremely loud with it). Whats interesting, both are still stuck at 3% and 0.76% market share respectively.

Mr. Dee said,
Part of what made Vista look bad was the execution of the OS into the market place, Apple and Linux spreading propaganda (and they were extremely loud with it). Whats interesting, both are still stuck at 3% and 0.76% market share respectively.

Vista had several issues: some of them were fixed, as you also stated, with SP1, other as sluggish network data transfer remained problematic for some/many people.

MS had its responsibilities too: "Vista compatible", "Vista ready" labeling, minimum specs set ridiculously low did not help choose the right machines.

Also what MS completely blew was "Vista Ultimate": people who bought it never saw all those adds-on materialize.

Therefore it was not a blow but neither it was a success. At least not commercially speaking.

Said that I did not have many problems with it because I ran it on quite new and powerful boxes.

I agree completely. Most of the negative attitude was pushed by Apple with their "I'm a mac" campaign. My last computer was a pre-built HP Pavilion that came with Vista - it had 2GB of ram, Intel integrated graphics, and a decent sized hard drive, on which Vista ran very smoothly. It ran even better when I put a PCI-E graphics card in it.

I still like Vista for its looks over 7, it had a lot more polish and consistency on the UI compared to 7. 7 still has a lot of remaining elements of Vista that were missed when they changed from the green-blue color scheme of Vista over to the light blue color scheme of 7.

Fritzly said,

MS had its responsibilities too: "Vista compatible", "Vista ready" labeling, minimum specs set ridiculously low did not help choose the right machines.

$150-200 PCs (including the monitor in that price) are labeled by sellers as Windows 7 compatible PCs here. Is that Microsoft's fault too?

KavazovAngel said,

$150-200 PCs (including the monitor in that price) are labeled by sellers as Windows 7 compatible PCs here. Is that Microsoft's fault too?

Yes. OEM pay Microsoft for that sticker.

Fritzly said,
Also what MS completely blew was "Vista Ultimate": people who bought it never saw all those adds-on materialize.

If someone bought Ultimate for the extras and not, because it's the only way to get the enterprise edition without a volume contract, that person is out of his mind…

alexalex said,

Yes. OEM pay Microsoft for that sticker.

Not really, when you are marketing the PC "Windows 7 compatible", but you don't put any stickers on it.

MFH said,

If someone bought Ultimate for the extras and not, because it's the only way to get the enterprise edition without a volume contract, that person is out of his mind…

Personally I expect to receive what is advertised.

Windows 7 or any other Windows version will never gain XP's market share (as high as 80%+). By the time Win7 will gain 30-40% , Win 8 will be out, and than Win9..... Win XP is the last of its kind.

As a guess 2014 would probably be the turning point for that though. Once XP is officially dead with zero updates, XP will hopefully drop into that <0.1% category along with the other relics. By that time either move on or shoot at least switch over to OSX or Unix, something that's getting security updates.. anything.

alexalex said,
Windows 7 or any other Windows version will never gain XP's market share (as high as 80%+). By the time Win7 will gain 30-40% , Win 8 will be out, and than Win9..... Win XP is the last of its kind.

It's part of the plan. Much shorter release cycles. XP wasn't meant to last that long.

XP wasn't the "last" of it's kind, it was the only one of it's kind. Microsoft had never let a product hang around that long. I disagree, however, that latest generation software can't get to 80-90%. If the corporate environment gets more flexible, and microsoft goes out of the way to make this easy, then I can see the corporate envelopment keeping up much better, especially with all the optimization going into thin-systems. latest office running on <200$ hardware WELL? compaines are going to buy that up

alexalex said,
Windows 7 or any other Windows version will never gain XP's market share (as high as 80%+). By the time Win7 will gain 30-40% , Win 8 will be out, and than Win9..... Win XP is the last of its kind.

Maybe, that's if you expect everyone who updated to Win7 to update to Win8 also, but that's not always how business works. I think we'll end up seeing a nice split between Win7 and Win8 going forward as both eat and replace XP together. Remember those who just updated to Win7 this year or late in 2010 are NOT going to do the same next year. At best they'll probably update in 2013 when Win8 is at SP1 or just stick with Win7 at SP2 etc etc.

The only important thing is that in the end XP will be gone in by 2013 I bet.

Meh it fluctuates for them all. OSX went up for a while, and now it's going down again with Windows climbing back up. Linux got a fration of a percent for a while but it's dropping again too.

Windows Vista, which was considered by many to be Microsoft's worst OS release,

Sure it had its faults, but most definitely not their worst release. Who are these "many" anyway?

TCLN Ryster said,

Sure it had its faults, but most definitely not their worst release. Who are these "many" anyway?
People using crappy computer that are 10 years old....

TCLN Ryster said,
Who are these "many" anyway?

Those pros that never tried Vista but read that it sucks of course…

TCLN Ryster said,

Sure it had its faults, but most definitely not their worst release. Who are these "many" anyway?
I'd say Windows ME still gets the gold medal for worst release

MFH said,

Those pros that never tried Vista but read that it sucks of course…
well it DID suck at first, until they released its first service pack

Brando212 said,
well it DID suck at first, until they released its first service pack

And the drivers eventually improved. At least on my systems anyway a lot of RTM's problems weren't even Microsoft's fault.

MFH said,

Those pros that never tried Vista but read that it sucks of course…

Running Vista x64 with 5GB ram here it's fine. My other computer runs Windows 7x64 on 4GB ram so I can switch but really after styling Windows Vista to look like Windows 7 I don't see much difference.

The only thing I don't like is Windows Vista has a lot of HDD access even on a SATA drive. But I try and defrag often as long as you keep it all up to date Vista aint THAT bad.

I would like to buy the upgrade disc to Windows 7 but to much money (from Vista), I'm sure MS will support Vista for a few years yet with updates.


Brando212 said,
well it DID suck at first, until they released its first service pack

QFT. I tried vista, and the longhorn beta, the longhorn beta was so slow and **** it was almost unbelieveable. Vista ran only slightly better.

TCLN Ryster said,

Sure it had its faults, but most definitely not their worst release. Who are these "many" anyway?

The grandparents with PCs from the 80s, most likely.

TCLN Ryster said,

Sure it had its faults, but most definitely not their worst release. Who are these "many" anyway?

Pentium 4 2.5GHz with 512MB or 1GB RAM. ****ty computers, basically.

n_K said,

QFT. I tried vista, and the longhorn beta, the longhorn beta was so slow and **** it was almost unbelieveable. Vista ran only slightly better.
That is because you did not upgrade your computer until when you buy Windows 7 then you upgrade and it feels a lot faster than Vista....

MFH said,

Those pros that never tried Vista but read that it sucks of course…

People opinion differ, for example, believe it or not, I never had any issue with Windows ME.
Yes I am serious.

Fritzly said,

People opinion differ, for example, believe it or not, I never had any issue with Windows ME.
Yes I am serious.

I have no problem with people having different opionions. Problem is that most people that say Vista was bad NEVER even tried it…

TCLN Ryster said,

Sure it had its faults, but most definitely not their worst release. Who are these "many" anyway?

Vista was epic. I kinda like some parts of it's Aero better than 7's. I like flashy!

thatguyandrew1992 said,

Vista was epic. I kinda like some parts of it's Aero better than 7's. I like flashy!

What was better with Aero in Vista that isn't in Windows 7? From what I've seen and read, there were multiple improvements to Aero in 7 that weren't in Vista, such as better blurring behind windows, even higher-quality graphics and AA for Windows Flip 3D, and much smoother, more defined animations.

Brando212 said,
I'd say Windows ME still gets the gold medal for worst release

Our family loved Me, could burn a cd on our setup faster than 98 or XP for some reason, used Me longer than any other Windows OS (4 years).

PlogCF said,

What was better with Aero in Vista that isn't in Windows 7? From what I've seen and read, there were multiple improvements to Aero in 7 that weren't in Vista, such as better blurring behind windows, even higher-quality graphics and AA for Windows Flip 3D, and much smoother, more defined animations.

Black window borders for maximized apps.

Brando212 said,
I'd say Windows ME still gets the gold medal for worst release

+1
I installed ME back when I was like 12 or 13, used it for about 2 weeks, then all of a sudden IE would cause the whole system to freeze. It would never actually launch, then after about 30 seconds the computer would freeze. If however, you entered a web URL into a File Explorer window, it would turn into IE and work just dandy.

MFH said,

I have no problem with people having different opionions. Problem is that most people that say Vista was bad NEVER even tried it…

bull****. I fix computer for a living. Everytime I have to work on a PC or laptop with Vista, I hate it a little more every time. Vista was a piece of crap.

saw this article somewhere else earlier

I'ts good to see businesses realizing that Windows 7 is finally the one that can replace XP
(now if only my school would jump to 7 already )

Brando212 said,
saw this article somewhere else earlier
I'ts good to see businesses realizing that Windows 7 is finally the one that can replace XP
(now if only my school would jump to 7 already )

I think big business might, but small business still buy more XP than 7. I just build 20 new PCs for a large retail store, all with XP Pro. Good thing I still have a bunch of those.