In only two weeks since the official commercial launch of Microsoft's latest operating system, Windows 7 has managed to surpass Apple's Snow Leopard market share. Snow Leopard has been on the market for three months while Windows 7 has only been on the market for two weeks.Microsoft still stands dominant in the market share, holding strong at 92.52% of all computers in October, compared to Mac OS X with 5.27%, Linux with 0.96% and 1.25% with other operating systems.
Windows 7 managed to surpass Snow Leopard's market share (1.17%); Windows 7 managed to grab 2.15% of the market share, where Vista shows 18.83% and Windows XP with 70.48%.
In the weeks leadng up to this holiday season, sales for Windows 7 are sure to climb higher; Windows 7 has already exceeded Windows Vista in the first two weeks of their launch by 234%.
Image Credit: Arstechnica
For Linux to win VS Microsoft, Linux should win first VS Apple.
lol yes..
XP's marketshare remains constant as windows 7's stagnates...
I think MS screwed up by not giving Vista users cheap (like $25) or free upgrades to 7. Vista users don't have as much reason to upgrade as XP users do, and they make up a large percentage of those with new hardware. The XP users are generally running older hardware and will not upgrade to 7 until they upgrade their hardware.
My prediction is that 7 is going to have a slow year in 2010. I suppose there is also a chance that OS X and Linux could grab some users, but it will only be a couple of percentage points, and no mass migration.
As long as MS gets Windows preloaded by all the major OEMs, things are never going to change. Maybe if Apple made a deal with a few PC OEMs to make Mac clones it could get more mainstream buyers. Imagine if Dell made a Mac-compatible?
My prediction is that 7 is going to have a slow year in 2010. I suppose there is also a chance that OS X and Linux could grab some users, but it will only be a couple of percentage points, and no mass migration.
As long as MS gets Windows preloaded by all the major OEMs, things are never going to change. Maybe if Apple made a deal with a few PC OEMs to make Mac clones it could get more mainstream buyers. Imagine if Dell made a Mac-compatible?
Well, I think that Microsoft did offer some pretty good deals for upgrading to Windows 7 and that there IS a lot of value added to Windows 7 that makes the upgrade worthwhile.
As for mac clones, that I don't suspect will happen unless Apple loses that law suite brought by Psystar. I do hope that they do lose though, as I think Psystar's in the right.
Was gonna say the exact same thing. not surprised here either...
While the case maybe, for the time being, that Mac marketshare has went up, you have to also keep in mind that many of those same OSX users also dual boot with Windows. There was a study done a week or 2 ago about this? Something like 60% of Mac owners also use Windows as well.
which is why im so confused as so what OSX has to offer thats so exclusive it has to be used
the hardware isnt special, its actually of lower quality, and windows 7 runs solid and smooth
the hardware isnt special, its actually of lower quality, and windows 7 runs solid and smooth
the hardware used on mac's are actually very good quaility, it might be that mac users need access to windows applications.
I don't understand how this comparison can be made until the marketshare between the two is 50/50.
Also as was mentioned by steve jobs, you don't need Microsoft to fail for apple to win / work. The same goes for linux, you don't need apple or microsoft for linux to win, there are enough computers and computing devices (mobiles) for each of the three and many of the obscure to thrive in the IT market.
the hardware isnt special, its actually of lower quality, and windows 7 runs solid and smooth
From a graphic designer and print production point of view things are just so much easier in that aspect. A Windows machine is too clunky. Honestly the only reason we have a Windows machine around is because of Microsoft Office. Yeah there's alternatives to that but for Publisher??? We have these customers that love to setup brochures and flyers in publisher that make our jobs that much harder (try explaining the need for a pdf to them!). Then you have the whole CMYK and RGB profiles and I can go on and on and on...In my field Macs have become a requirement and I stand by that 110%. The University here has thrown out their Windows machines almost entirely in favor of Macs and are quite proud of it! There's just too many variable when it comes to a Windows machine, you have all sorts of manufacturers for HDD, RAM, Graphics, Monitors, Mobos. On a Mac there's just a single provider for every component. And usually things tend to run "solid and smooth"! IMO...
apparently being restricted, having no freedom to choose parts, and overpaying for crap is awesome.
apparently being restricted, having no freedom to choose parts, and overpaying for crap is awesome.
Macs are a historical aspect of graphic design and most graphic designers would budge from a Mac for the same reason that, historically (I'm not sure if it was true of the newer CS series), Adobe releases Photoshop and Illustrator for Mac first.
That doesn't make him a mactard; Macs have an established history in that space that isn't likely to change anytime soon. It seems to make you a total retard though...
What was his point about color profiles, that Publisher sucks? Like it's the only graphics tool on Windows?
His rant is all fluff and has no points.
This is a case of mac users being stuck using mac, I work in education too and we wiped all the macs out from design/art etc because they were pointlessly expensive and inferior for professional network use. I suppose if you running it in your basement you dont have to worry though....
Last edited by John S. on 07 Nov 2009 - 09:29
This made him a mactard. There's just as many manufacturers in an Apple machine as a Dell / HP or whatever else machine you buy. Tell me when Apple starts making their own CPU, Videocard, RAM, PSU, etc.
And was proven to be a fabrication. So you are saying that since boot camp was released 60% of mac users installed windows? lol.
It can't. This is nothing more than ego stroking and propaganda.
So what do you call those commercials that Apple is airing? Oh yeah, ego stroking and propaganda. Sauce for the goose perhaps?
Actually the figures given prove the reverse of the author's arguement.
If you say that Win 7 has a 2.17 % share of 92.52 % Windows total marketshare this means that an adjusted uptake on Windows machines is about 2.4 %.
If you say that Snow Leopard has a 1.17 % share of 5.27 % Mac OS total marketshare this means that an adjusted uptake on Mac machines is about 22%.
Now Microsoft would kill to have an uptake of 22% for Windows 7.
This made him a mactard. There's just as many manufacturers in an Apple machine as a Dell / HP or whatever else machine you buy. Tell me when Apple starts making their own CPU, Videocard, RAM, PSU, etc.
I think you missed his point. Apple choose the Hardware specifically for their Macs, and specifically for OS X and create the necessary drivers.
It means 60% of the mac users use windows OS more than Mac
the hardware isnt special, its actually of lower quality, and windows 7 runs solid and smooth
From a graphic designer and print production point of view things are just so much easier in that aspect. A Windows machine is too clunky. Honestly the only reason we have a Windows machine around is because of Microsoft Office. Yeah there's alternatives to that but for Publisher??? We have these customers that love to setup brochures and flyers in publisher that make our jobs that much harder (try explaining the need for a pdf to them!). Then you have the whole CMYK and RGB profiles and I can go on and on and on...In my field Macs have become a requirement and I stand by that 110%. The University here has thrown out their Windows machines almost entirely in favor of Macs and are quite proud of it! There's just too many variable when it comes to a Windows machine, you have all sorts of manufacturers for HDD, RAM, Graphics, Monitors, Mobos. On a Mac there's just a single provider for every component. And usually things tend to run "solid and smooth"! IMO...
I work in the printing industry and we just got 2 Windows 7 machines. They open all the Adobe programs in seconds. Processing and rendering and file conversion is a snap. We don't like Macs only because most of our Clients/customers send us files using a Windows based PC, plus the GUI just sucks on a Mac.
On the other hand Mactards don't know the meaning to what a stress free life is. Also people who don't like choice also don't like change....I can go on and on about this but it would just make the fire even higher.
+1. It's a very solid OS. I'm very happy with it as well.
as for color calibration windows 7, like vista, i only need to install the icc profile, make it as default in color management and thats that. no more tinkering around gamma and stuff.
This is a case of mac users being stuck using mac, I work in education too and we wiped all the macs out from design/art etc because they were pointlessly expensive and inferior for professional network use. I suppose if you running it in your basement you dont have to worry though....
Not entirely true, we had the water company come in with their several hi rez images in psd format of the entire city. We basically pieced them all together in Photoshop to create a 28gb, hi-rez, psd file...all on a mac...in well under an hour. Walk into any design/art department in any school/university and I can guarantee you will not see a room filled with PCs. On a separate note I was a Windows fanboy for many years much like most of you. I designed on the Windows platform in the past for some years. Windows is not built properly to handle multiple windows open at one time, hence the cluttered taskbar. OSX uses expose to handle multiple windows at once or atleast makes it easier to switch between multiple windows/programs.
A Mac machine is too defiant.
I believe the term is monopoly.
the hardware isnt special, its actually of lower quality, and windows 7 runs solid and smooth
From a graphic designer and print production point of view things are just so much easier in that aspect. A Windows machine is too clunky. Honestly the only reason we have a Windows machine around is because of Microsoft Office. Yeah there's alternatives to that but for Publisher??? We have these customers that love to setup brochures and flyers in publisher that make our jobs that much harder (try explaining the need for a pdf to them!). Then you have the whole CMYK and RGB profiles and I can go on and on and on...In my field Macs have become a requirement and I stand by that 110%. The University here has thrown out their Windows machines almost entirely in favor of Macs and are quite proud of it! There's just too many variable when it comes to a Windows machine, you have all sorts of manufacturers for HDD, RAM, Graphics, Monitors, Mobos. On a Mac there's just a single provider for every component. And usually things tend to run "solid and smooth"! IMO...
wow. Just about everything is wrong with this post. The person who wrote this mostly speaks in terms of what's rumored. I won't cal him a mactard, but he's a major macfan.
If I've learned anything after 30 years of being around both pc and apple, I've grown tired of hearing "from a graphic designer" point of view, because they almost always say they use mac. Like parrots or sheep, they all copy each other. I don't say that to be rude, but every where I turn, I see young 20 somethings not knowing what to do. So they turn to mac because they think they have to. My challenge with this is that I've had a recording studio for over 25 years, and more recently done lots of video and effects. And after all this time, NEVER has there been something I couldn't do on a pc and do a great job of it. And that's even more true in 2009.
Yet I often find iFans act as if it's mac or nothing. Perhaps its because it's a stereotype that macs are for that sort of thing. And that's probably due to apple helping to progitate this myth in the background. You go to youtube, and a majority want to use mac to edit video. Even though it's possible to create and render video in 1/2 the time for 1/2 the price of a mac. That's right. I have an i7 at 3.6ghz, ddr3, 1TB HD all for $830 and a $1600 imac with core 2 duo can not even come close to it. I know that recently apple is going to have i5/i7 but they are a year late and want $2000! That's innovation?
I can just as easily load Adobe CS4 or a zillion other video or audio editing programs on PC. My computer handles pdf's just fine. My friend who has an imac didn't believe my system was faster. He was shocked when I showed him it saving out video twice as fast as his imac. Then I did hackintosh and showed him a mac twice as fast as his. In fact it's quicker than a $2500 mac pro. And yes he was sick, but mostly said it was great.
Then microsoft office runs on mac, so his claim that he needs a pc is unfounded. As for CMYK and RGB profiles, this is nothing new and has been on PC for practically forever. Then going on to say macs are a requirement and they are PROUD of it, LOL. It's the proud of it part that made me laugh because that's what iFans do best. Well, I'd say an artificially demanded requirement by some mac head. If you push something hard enough, long enough, it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.. almost. As for hardware, he acts as if it's nearly impossible to get a windows machine running, even though they are at a university!!! That's BS. Sorry. Anyone with any sense would throw the macs out in favor of a well chosen PC with cash left over for even better software. No wonder people got upset with his post up there.. But people use mac for artwork etc, because they think they have to, but not because they have to. That's the difference. I seriously don't see any logical reason for apple to stay dominate in the graphic design and media world. Sure I get people will keep pushing it. But does it truly and honestly make sense? Nope. Either system can run any software..
If I've learned anything after 30 years of being around both pc and apple, I've grown tired of hearing "from a graphic designer" point of view, because they almost always say they use mac. Like parrots or sheep, they all copy each other. I don't say that to be rude, but every where I turn, I see young 20 somethings not knowing what to do. So they turn to mac because they think they have to. My challenge with this is that I've had a recording studio for over 25 years, and more recently done lots of video and effects. And after all this time, NEVER has there been something I couldn't do on a pc and do a great job of it. And that's even more true in 2009.
Yet I often find iFans act as if it's mac or nothing. Perhaps its because it's a stereotype that macs are for that sort of thing. And that's probably due to apple helping to progitate this myth in the background. You go to youtube, and a majority want to use mac to edit video. Even though it's possible to create and render video in 1/2 the time for 1/2 the price of a mac. That's right. I have an i7 at 3.6ghz, ddr3, 1TB HD all for $830 and a $1600 imac with core 2 duo can not even come close to it. I know that recently apple is going to have i5/i7 but they are a year late and want $2000! That's innovation?
I can just as easily load Adobe CS4 or a zillion other video or audio editing programs on PC. My computer handles pdf's just fine. My friend who has an imac didn't believe my system was faster. He was shocked when I showed him it saving out video twice as fast as his imac. Then I did hackintosh and showed him a mac twice as fast as his. In fact it's quicker than a $2500 mac pro. And yes he was sick, but mostly said it was great.
Then microsoft office runs on mac, so his claim that he needs a pc is unfounded. As for CMYK and RGB profiles, this is nothing new and has been on PC for practically forever. Then going on to say macs are a requirement and they are PROUD of it, LOL. It's the proud of it part that made me laugh because that's what iFans do best. Well, I'd say an artificially demanded requirement by some mac head. If you push something hard enough, long enough, it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.. almost. As for hardware, he acts as if it's nearly impossible to get a windows machine running, even though they are at a university!!! That's BS. Sorry. Anyone with any sense would throw the macs out in favor of a well chosen PC with cash left over for even better software. No wonder people got upset with his post up there.. But people use mac for artwork etc, because they think they have to, but not because they have to. That's the difference. I seriously don't see any logical reason for apple to stay dominate in the graphic design and media world. Sure I get people will keep pushing it. But does it truly and honestly make sense? Nope. Either system can run any software..
GREAT post. In my experience dealing with graphic designers and the like I have only found ONE software package that was Mac only and it had been developed 10 - 15 years ago or something with NO UPDATES... Clearly the developer has lost all desire to work on the project. Additionally, the application is used in a VERY small and specific industry, making it less than worthwhile to take up development of such a large application as well. There's no need to use Macs for most graphic design fields...
monopoly
.
I think you need to look up the definition of Monopoly.
That's what I was basing it off of. It wouldn't be as popular until developers made software for OS X. But once the developers come, the hackers come along with it, and there would just be a massive back and forth battle.
Considering the current prices of the upgrades they would be much higher than Microsoft's.
Competition is good, so osx growing to 10% would only make MS do even better.
No Apple is going to continue what they're doing. They keep saying they're not about being the biggest but being the best which we all know means charging more for the "best" not to mention the image they've worked so hard to create (which also allows them to charge more).
It's already 11% in the US.
There are lots of developers for Linux, yet we don't have endemic viruses and malware. Care to explain this, or was that statement a regurgitation of the widely disproven security in obscurity argument? MS fans have been predicting this sudden influx of mass virus infections on other OS's which have so far failed to materialise. Or perhaps you just like the delusion that windows isn't the only one targeted?
That's because neither linux or OSX have become big enough for anyone to care about let alone both writing viruses for lol
Maybe when OSX Gets to 10-20% or Linux gets about 2% lol But can't see either of those things happening anytime soon lmao
Source?
No it's not just a cat, it's a kitty cat :p , but I think the blanket/cover should have been snow white
What people should be paying attention to is the _conversion rate_ from Windows XP / Vista to Windows 7 - and Tiger / Leopard to Snow Leopard. Meaning what percentage of installed PC users have begun to use Windows 7 and what percentage of installed Mac users have begun using Snow Leopard. The installed user base for both platforms are, for most part if you discount Boot Camp, virtualization, or hackintoshes, completely different groups and therefore not comparable.
Using straight numeric quantity to imply market success between these two products is irrelevant.
It shows the Apple commercials are not winning.
But at the end of the day, they do have a larger install base, but who here is honestly surprised?
Seen any of Apple's Windows bashing commercials lately?
Exactly. If it's not a direct competition then somebody should let Apple know.
So when Microsoft first started they already had a billion+ userbase?
how did they get so ahead is the question apple should be asking or fanbots from apple and linux should be asking.
How is it that more copies of a windows os are pirated in a day than linux copies are handed out for free?
give credit where its due, ms captured 95% of the worlds computer market, they must not be as dumb or as backwards as apple makes them out to be.
Macs aren't losing, they are not competing with Windows directly. They're making their money and are profitable. Doesn't matter how many Windows OSes Microsoft sells, the only thing that matters at Apple is making money off their products, which they're doing.
You got to love these remarks... I can see your extensive knowledge of OSs, way to go of spreading the word
To be fair the company was going down the gutter while he was away. Had it not been for the clones program though there may not have been a company for him to come back to.
Last edited by TRC on 06 Nov 2009 - 19:03
Apple continues to gain marketshare year on year, while MS loses marketshare year on year for it's OS, browser, office suite, exchange server etc. Who's really losing?
LOL do they hell.... Its not like the *Mac* office is taking off...
Nice troll, but Windows marketshare grew compared to last year. Oh wait, Mac fans only talk about NA, because worldwide they aren't really gaining anything.
I've learnt something today :- Microsoft isn't proprietary ???
See, I've read the opposite. The clone programme did more harm than good as Apple were trying to achieve something that they had no hope of doing: overtaking Microsoft Windows. Custom-built software locked down to specific hardware gave them a unique selling point. I suppose it all depends on your definition of "quite well". Just because a lot of hardware manufacturers signed up doesn't mean it was a profitable endeavour. It doesn't take a genius to work out that Apple would've rather you bought a Mac with System 7 than a clone with System 7. They'd created competition in the hardware sector where they initially had none. I can't see how on earth it was a good idea, but feel free to provide sources for your claims.
Apple is first and foremost a hardware company, and the fact that Snow Leopard was sold for £25 highlights that.
Well, for a company not competing with Windows, Apple sure likes to tell people fud in an attempt to get them to use Macs.
Twist it around all you want, but Apple's competing with Windows.
Btw I like those numbers. Dont believe though that are correct but Microsoft wins and thats enough for me!!!!
You take those ads far too seriously. They're fresh and comic and whoever gets so worked up over them needs to chill and get a life. Personally, I wish Microsoft's adds were wittier than they are. It's not a war. It's competition.
Would Apple winning make you unhappy and why do you care at all? Apple is a successful company, so is Microsoft. They're both winning if you take a look at their financial results. I think they're both happy with their OS market share, it serves their strategy. If Apple wanted to compete with Windows on equal terms, they'd have released their OS for PC years ago and the picture would be completely different now.
People don't tend to get worked up over them... more bored with the constant childish nonsense Apple come out with. By definition the Microsoft adverts are more witty than the apple ads. The Apple ads are probably better classed under "wishy washy monotony"
Would Apple winning make you unhappy and why do you care at all? Apple is a successful company, so is Microsoft. They're both winning if you take a look at their financial results. I think they're both happy with their OS market share, it serves their strategy. If Apple wanted to compete with Windows on equal terms, they'd have released their OS for PC years ago and the picture would be completely different now.
actually if OSX was for the pc, it would be a different story for apple
Why abandon something that is working so effectively?
Keep an eye on the XP marketshare numbers. That alone will determine windows 7's degree of success.
Yep, MS shouldn't abandon its Ads.
Yeah, those idiotic Apple ads are so effective. Even many Apple fans agree that the latest ones are just stupid lies.
I read an article a while back that summed it up nicely:
"As usual, Apple hopes to shift the debate away from a battle over specs and value and toward a battle we can all understand: cool kid versus nerd. But these days, aren't nerds like John Hodgman the new cool kids? And isn't smug superiority (no matter how affable and casually dressed) a bit off-putting as a brand strategy?"
it was just a matter of time. 1 month latter and it will suppress the whole mac platform duh!
Last edited by rm20010 on 06 Nov 2009 - 17:38
I think it's more intresting seeing the relative market share of the new release vs. the last release of each OS itself, in the same time since the official launch.
That's what the chart shows, not what this news is supposed to talk about.
Last edited by Gabotril on 07 Nov 2009 - 02:05
Uhh.
Next week maybe?
Now before anyone gets mad, I'm just joking. (It's very unlikely they'll get that high).
10.6 has taken 22% of the installed mac market
windows seven has taken 2.3238218763510592304366623432771e-4% of the windows market.
also mind you that a large portion of the mac market CAN'T upgrade to 10.6 because they dont' have intel processors
And, as with PowerPC Mac systems, not every Windows computer has the hardware to run Windows 7.
actually 7 is as is seen by the numbers
So does this mean the iPod is not the best MP3 player, despite it's overwhelming market dominance?
I lol'd, way to start a firefight.
Honestly guys you all need to grow up. Everyone will have a different preference for their OS; techies will always like Linux, some people will always like OSX, and some people will never try anything other then Windows. It's the way the world works.
If you get offended by television commercials you should seriously seek some outside time.
Of course, some of these Windows 7 installtions are on a Mac so Apple should extend some gratitude to Microsoft.
I wonder why. I was at Sam's Club this morning and all I saw was Windows 7 on computers and not 1 Apple.
What would one expect? The manufacturers have been busy loading Windows 7 on machines and will continue to do that.
I wonder what it means when a store stocks plenty of one product but not another. I'm sure there's some reasoning behind that, what could it be?
That nobody cares about Apple?
1. PEOPLE ARE JUST GETTING SICK AND TIRED OF APPLE'S RETARDED ADVERTISING
2. WINDOWS 7 IS REALLY SOLID
3. SNOW LEOPARD HAS BEEN HOW SHALL I SAY THIS NICELY EXPERIENCING EMBARRASSING BUGS, USER ACCOUNT DATA ANYONE
i wont be surprised that 7 soon will beat the XP market share, no offense to anyone XP was good, but its become old, and 7 is the true "descendent" !!!
Seriously? This is news?
Because this post is about vista...and yes, I am being sarcastic.....
This is about 7 and SL..period. so get the Vista crap outta here. Vista has already been labeled a failed OS...so try again.
This thread is concerning 7 which Windows fans live...and SL...which OSX fans love...period.
You must be really annoyed. As last time you were telling everybody Windows 7 wasn't having any success because of all the performance problems it would supposedly have.
Now that none of that appears to be true (gee, who would have thought) you resort to number twisting and changing your own rules like a true Anti-MS zealot. You must be so proud!
weird comparison..I use ubuntu anyway
... pointless trolling as always.
this makes no sense .. did users have that compelling reason to shift form ME and 2000 to xp in the first place ?!
same thing to me
same thing to me
A compelling reason to switch from Me to XP? You're kidding right?
Gladly what you see or do not see, is of no importance to anyone other than yourself.
Yes, exactly. This isn't about upgrading so to speak. They both started at 0 and are being compared based on their INDIVIDUAL market share. Not anything prior...
Its always the way, apple picked the fight and its time for them to take a smack or two, microsoft certainly has in prior years...
in your face steve jobs
Microsoft has what...90% of the market? So it just stands to reason that they would surpass someone who
has something like 5-10% of the market in a short time?
Microsoft has what...90% of the market? So it just stands to reason that they would surpass someone who
has something like 5-10% of the market in a short time?
Don't let facts get in the way..... This is Neowin, home of folk, and lore.
Mactards at their best.
It's not like I'd get an award or something for this, therefore I don't see any reason why I'd post crap.
The first step is admitting the problem. Denial comes later.
Oh, and I forgot to mention. I'll be running Windows 7 on it exclusively, so include me in this market share analysis. o/
Last edited by Pharos on 06 Nov 2009 - 23:37
As for Dell, given my horrendous experiences with them in the past, you're wise to avoid them. LOL
PC manufacturers really do need to step up their game. It's sad when Dell seems to be the best design out there for PC's... Some of them look right out of the early 90's... I would love to see someone give Dell a run for their money. Someone with reliable, good hardware, elegant designs, customizable options, etc.
HP has some a new offering that somewhat mimics that type of minimalist form. Check out their dm3 series
http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping...ble/dm3t_series
2% of Windows 7 >>>>>>>>> 2% of Mac
The way this new compares it is the right way.
That's not the discussion though. It's comparing Windows 7 market share to Snow Leopard market share. Nothing prior is factored in to the equation...
Oh, I don't expect everyone to drop XP, but I do expect many to. Aging hardware is going to need to be replaced, corporate environments are going to be eying an update, consumers that skipped Vista are going to be feeling a bit behind the times, etc. I fully expect XP to be around for years, but to take a severe hit in market share from Windows 7. I guess we'll see what happens...
bicker bicker bicker bicker bicker...
haha. OK.
Windows market share as a whole beats every single Mac OS ever released ten fold.
Let me make it more simple:
Windows 7 is a brand new OS from Microsoft.
Snow Leopard is a brand new OS from Apple.
Windows 7 has more market share than Snow Leopard.
Snow Leopard has less market share than Windows 7.
Windows Vista & 7 (or just XP) > Every Mac OS* In terms of market share.
That should be easy to understand.
What is relevant is the uptake of the new version and raw numbers are not a reasonable comparison but percentages are.
Actually the figures given prove the reverse of the author's arguement.
If you say that Win 7 has a 2.17 % share of 92.52 % Windows total marketshare this means that an adjusted uptake on Windows machines is about 2.4 %.
If you say that Snow Leopard has a 1.17 % share of 5.27 % Mac OS total marketshare this means that an adjusted uptake on Mac machines is about 22%.
Now Microsoft would kill to have an uptake of 22% for Windows 7.
I laugh at the countless ways Mac fans find to make their OS shine. LEaving percentage asides, in everyday language: More people are using Windows 7 than Snow Leopard, and Windows 7 came later. That should suffice.
I laugh at the countless ways Mac fans find to make their OS shine. LEaving percentage asides, in everyday language: More people are using Windows 7 than Snow Leopard, and Windows 7 came later. That should suffice.
Exactly. They're market share is being compared independently... Why are people trying to twist the figures? LOL
I've got a 98 box I use for old games once a year and an old pc with NT server that doesn't work properly but that's it, jesus I cannot actually believe people use such old OS's!
XP FLC's would be better even!
Mac OS X has about 5% of the market share, while Windows has about 90%. Given that the two OSes are good upgrades and can be installed on pretty much the same hardware than their predecessor OS, the probability that Windows 7 sales surpasses Mac OS X Snow Leopard sales is huge.
For an Apple fan like me, I am not surprised at all by this. If Apple's surprised on their side, I really wonder why...
Windows 7 is a great OS, I've been using the RC for months, and regardless of whether I was using XP or Vista, 7 gives many more reasons for someone to want to upgrade than Snow Leopard.
I'd like to see 7's adoption numbers compared to a feature rich OS X release like Tiger.
I still have to log off/restart Windows 7 whenever I make certain changes. What is the deal with that?
MacOSX still doesn't seem to have an easy to use multi-client messenger program.
Why do I have to pay so much for Windows 7 upgrade when Snow Leopard upgrade is only 25-35$?
I could go on with advantages/disadvantages, but I've made my point.
Because your hardware will fail within a few months.
Because it would cost you $1000 USD to upgrade your RAM, no matter where you look for it.
Because you can only play games on Windows and that's all that computers are good for.
Because, if you don't switch, you'll become assimilated into the Apple religion, of which Steve Jobs is the god.
Because we only support one mouse button.
Because the iPhone has no buttons.
Because Snow Leopard is crippled.
Because you can only run Windows in a crippled virtual machine on a Mac.
Of course, all this is only true if you believe everything coming from the comments on Neowin.
Because your hardware will fail within a few months.
Because it would cost you $1000 USD to upgrade your RAM, no matter where you look for it.
Because you can only play games on Windows and that's all that computers are good for.
Because, if you don't switch, you'll become assimilated into the Apple religion, of which Steve Jobs is the god.
Because we only support one mouse button.
Because the iPhone has no buttons.
Because Snow Leopard is crippled.
Because you can only run Windows in a crippled virtual machine on a Mac.
Of course, all this is only true if you believe everything coming from the comments on Neowin.
+1 Thumbs up
Never. That would require them to think and to put aside their childish fanboy attitudes.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.