Microsoft's Windows business lead on Windows 8 sales: "It's a solid start" [Update]

Microsoft's recently named chief financial officer of its Windows Division , Tami Reller, has given a new interview where she claims that sales of Windows 8 are "solid" while once again adding that there were not enough touchscreen-based PC and tablets to go around during the holiday shopping season.

AllThingsD.com reports that, according to Reller's take on Windows 8 sales, "We are really only just getting started ... It’s a solid start." Microsoft has said it has sold 60 million licenses for Windows 8. She also repeated what she said in November about a lack of touchscreen products from PC OEM companies during the launch period, saying, "It’s built for a generation of new devices ... They didn’t all come for holiday."

With PC sales on the decline, Reller says that Microsoft believes that the touchscreen features of Windows 8 will help the OS break into the tablet market, adding, "Clearly, we think that presents opportunities for growth." Of course, Microsoft launched the Surface tablet, running on Windows RT, at the same time as Windows 8. The Surface Pro tablet, based on Windows 8 Pro, will officially go on sale on Saturday, although you can check it out in some retail stores right now.

Update: In a new chat with ZDNet.com, Reller said the rate of Windows 8 sales to OEMs is about the same as the sales rate for Windows 7 during the same time period. She also said that Microsoft is trying to find out why those same OEM makers didn't have enough Windows 8 touchscreen devices on sale for the launch.

Source: AllThingsD.com | Image via Microsoft

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Google to offer up $3.14159 million if you can crack Chrome OS

Next Story

New version of 3DMark for Windows 8, 7 and Vista finally released

54 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

So what if Windows 8 does well? McDonalds does well. Does it mean they sell good products? Prime time television shows do well? Does it mean it's quality viewing? Nope. It usually means the opposite. Microsoft constant seek the lowest common denomintaor and the boradest possible audience, because like many app developers jumping on the bandwagon, their primary motivation is to make vast amounts of money by selling the equivalent of popcorn to stupid people.

What Tami Reller imply is that win 8 would have a bigger success , when more touch based device would be available in stores. Which implicitly could mean that win 8 is not so good for "regular" Pc.

The problem with Windows 8 is 2-fold.
1 - They went and ask 2 people who appeared to have hated Windows intuitive UI and gave it this colorful ugly shell from hell. Somehow someone felt this was a good idea. Sinofsky probably hated it, so the women conspired to get him fired. Now Sinofsky is at his new job laughing at MS for making a rush moved to revamp Windows insead of gradually evolving it. That is why Vista didnt get support. It was a good move that should have been gradual. When you have 1.3Billion people using your software, you can ust click a light and expect them to run to it. They will run away...like rats...roaches and mice.

2 - The Metro UI...it is useless on a desktop PC...period. Yes I understand it kinda replaces the start menu. But it doesn't. In fact it lost much of the function of the menu. The search routine is nothing like it use to be on WIndows Vista/7. The tiles, though unformative are ugly. I dont know if is the size or not. It does look cool on the Windows Phone. It also looks cool on the Surface. Businesses however are not going to make use of Metro. Its not the point that they can turn it off, what is the point is 8 doesnt offer anything over 7. if those guys just tested apps in WIndows 7, they arent ready to break them in WIndows 8. Though I am sure many will work just fine.

The fact that Metro is so separate from Windows. he browser even tho it is IE10, works by itself and is not connected with the one in desktop mode. So if I load a bunch of tabs and then swtich to desktop, what I was viewing doesn't follow me. That's lame! Then the fcat yet again, Microosft moved stuff around just for the sake of maing 8 appear diffeent. Making extra ckicks to reach what only took 2 mice clicks is just stupid.

Microosft didnt need to rush and make Windows fit the tablet form factor. They could have taken another year to provide a better desktop option. But RT and Pro for the tablet is perfect for each device...tho again some of the issues like with th browser isnt good for those 2 devices.

As someome stated above...it took 6 months for Windows 7 to sell 100M licenses and Windows 8 is already at 60M in 1/2 te time. As the woman above said "its aoff to a good start". What more weere the haters here expecting her to say? Would you rather she lie?

TechieXP said,
The problem with Windows 8 is 2-fold.
1 - They went and ask 2 people who appeared to have hated Windows intuitive UI and gave it this colorful ugly shell from hell. Somehow someone felt this was a good idea. Sinofsky probably hated it, so the women conspired to get him fired. Now Sinofsky is at his new job laughing at MS for making a rush moved to revamp Windows insead of gradually evolving it. That is why Vista didnt get support. It was a good move that should have been gradual. When you have 1.3Billion people using your software, you can ust click a light and expect them to run to it. They will run away...like rats...roaches and mice.

First of all, the Windows UI is far from "intuitive". A user sitting down at it for the first time would not have any more of a clue than they would with any other PC OS. Familiar is the word you're looking for.

The rest of this paragraph is just fantasy land bull****. Vista was a complete rebuild of the Windows codebase, and Windows ****ing needed it. XP was and still is ripped to shreds by modern networks, and had a completely unstable driver stack.

TechieXP said,

2 - The Metro UI...it is useless on a desktop PC...period. Yes I understand it kinda replaces the start menu. But it doesn't. In fact it lost much of the function of the menu. The search routine is nothing like it use to be on WIndows Vista/7. The tiles, though unformative are ugly. I dont know if is the size or not. It does look cool on the Windows Phone. It also looks cool on the Surface. Businesses however are not going to make use of Metro. Its not the point that they can turn it off, what is the point is 8 doesnt offer anything over 7. if those guys just tested apps in WIndows 7, they arent ready to break them in WIndows 8. Though I am sure many will work just fine.

What? More fantasy land BS not backed up with sources. There is nothing lost, functionality wise, from the Start Menu to the Start Screen. None. I can still type to search, and browse All Apps. The Live Tiles provide new functionality that the Start Menu never and would never have, and provide me with information at a glance. Saying businesses won't make use of Metro is like saying businesses won't make use of the "superbar" or jump list features of Windows 7. But, They have.

TechieXP said,

The fact that Metro is so separate from Windows. he browser even tho it is IE10, works by itself and is not connected with the one in desktop mode. So if I load a bunch of tabs and then swtich to desktop, what I was viewing doesn't follow me. That's lame! Then the fcat yet again, Microosft moved stuff around just for the sake of maing 8 appear diffeent. Making extra ckicks to reach what only took 2 mice clicks is just stupid.

Metro apps are sandboxed.

The reasons the OEM's didnt have PC's ready is they tried to pull a Vista. They felt Windows 8 wasn't going toi do well and to help it fail, they tried to not have hardware ready. It's sabatage. Vista worked great for me. They poor OEM driver support trying to force everyone to buy new hardware was a sham. The only thing Windows 8 requires is a touchscreen.

How are is it for them to take a PC they have pretty much already hadplanned for 2013 and just add a screen with a touchsensor? Its not hard at all...

its their fault Vista was lame and it was their fault tablets didnt take off before. The reason they dint have hardware too is because after seeing the Surface, they knew that crap they had planned to sell wasnt goping to fly. HERES LOOKING AT YOU ACER.

They wanted to basically do the sameexact BS they did with the tablets before. Microosft raised the bar and they saw they needed top raise it, or push MS into making PC's which would surely kill many of them...like again ACER.

The only PC I see running Windows 8 Pro outside the Surface Pro would be the Lenovo IDeaPad running Windows 8 Pro or a nice laptop from Samsung. The HP Envy Touchsmart os also very beautiful.

pirajoc said,
I really don't understand the people who say windows 8 sucks

I really don't understand the people that try to justify their purchase by continuing to say it doesn't suck. As for the number of licenses sold ... they mean **** nothing. I have 3 copies of Win8 pro, *HOPING* that A: Win9 doesn't suck a choad also, and B: I can use them to get a cheap upgrade to Win9.

Everybody is going to have their own personal opinions, and that is fine. Some are going to find that Win8 does not work in the best way for them, and so they are going to prefer a different version of Windows. However, there are a good number of people who are commenting who have a vested interest in another manufacturer - Apple, Google, etc. - and need to try to jump on the Win8 is bad bandwagon (or, better, create the bandwagon) in the hopes that people will leave Windows and support their personal favorite instead. Convince someone that Win8 is horrible, and even though they will not try it themselves, maybe the next computer they buy will be an iPad, a Chromebook, or an Android tablet. And with that sale they can brag that even though it is not about the money, the number of sales, developers, developers, developers, it is really about the quality and experience, look at how much money company X made, how many devices they sold, how many apps they have, but you are a hater for criticizing poor quality or experience.

I bought windows 8 as soon as it got released and it's awesome,it's faster than windows 7 on my 2 year old pc,it easier to use,you just need a day or 2 to get to know it better,my problem is with people who never used windows 8 and say it sucks,or who have used it for a few minutes and didn't understand a **** because they are too dumb and they say it sucks,at first I didn't like it too,it seem too difficult and after a day I started to love it,and for sure I will never go back to windows 7,I don't say it's bad,I say windows 8 has all I need

runningnak3d said,
I really don't understand the people that try to justify their purchase by continuing to say it doesn't suck.

You say that as if people could not possibly like Windows 8 and simply bought it blindly, when Microsoft release Preview versions for free so that people could try it out. It's fine that you don't like that but don't project that onto others (and yes, the same goes for the original poster).

I would be more interested to see who is actually using Win8...not just who bought a copy. Of course MS is only worried about copies sold, but real usage would tell a better picture on how Windows 8 is doing. I bought a copy and have the trial loaded on a test system...but not using it ATM.

2 surface system in my class in mid wales one Dell convertible and my American friend alex who got hers for Christmas... me and 3 other of my friends. so far I am seeing this machines more than I see macs. so yes they are buying them... OEMs do complain about not selling much hardware well that will be a major probe... even my 2005 hp pav dv6000 is running windows 8 without a single prob. and this modern i5 iwhatever will only make it hard for people to upgrade as the hardware are becoming so powerful. but I know people are buying the license anyway... me too is one.

And where were you asking these questions when Win7 was released? We are seeing numbers that are on par with Win7, but nobody was asking "how many copies were really installed?" "how many OEM licenses were actually used?" "how many people wiped their computer and installed Win7/XP?" and so on. We must find some narrative to try to prove that Win8 is doing horribly, and use it to show that Chrome OS is doing wonderfully (oops, sorry, did I go off topic? Don't want you getting upset with me.)

benalvino said,
2 surface system in my class in mid wales one Dell convertible and my American friend alex who got hers for Christmas... me and 3 other of my friends. so far I am seeing this machines more than I see macs. so yes they are buying them... .

Not talking about the Surface. I am talking about Win8 sales compared ot people actually using the OS after they bought it. I know a ton of corporations get new versions of Windows with new PCs, but a lot of them downgrade. and stick with the previous version of Windows.

nohone said,
And where were you asking these questions when Win7 was released? We are seeing numbers that are on par with Win7, but nobody was asking "how many copies were really installed?" "how many OEM licenses were actually used?" "how many people wiped their computer and installed Win7/XP?" and so on. We must find some narrative to try to prove that Win8 is doing horribly, and use it to show that Chrome OS is doing wonderfully (oops, sorry, did I go off topic? Don't want you getting upset with me.)

Windows 7 was widely accepted and anticipated after everyone was fed up with Vista. And sorry, I cannot remember what I said and commented on the past 3.5 years when it concerns Win7. And the company I worked at, stuck with XP and downgraded the OS for a while until we had a time to test all of our apps/processes.

techbeck said,
I would be more interested to see who is actually using Win8...not just who bought a copy. Of course MS is only worried about copies sold, but real usage would tell a better picture on how Windows 8 is doing. I bought a copy and have the trial loaded on a test system...but not using it ATM.

MS does collect user data so they know more or less how people use it and they can get a good idea of the type of people by the apps they run I bet.

techbeck said,

Not talking about the Surface. I am talking about Win8 sales compared ot people actually using the OS after they bought it. I know a ton of corporations get new versions of Windows with new PCs, but a lot of them downgrade. and stick with the previous version of Windows.

And where did the article discuss how many are actually in use? The article did, however discuss Surface and WinRT, but nothing about how many were installed or uninstalled, downgrades, etc. Please stay on topic.

nohone said,

And where did the article discuss how many are actually in use? The article did, however discuss Surface and WinRT, but nothing about how many were installed or uninstalled, downgrades, etc. Please stay on topic.

Yea, now you are just being difficult. Not going to comment to you again but I find your replies and trying to stick it to me amusing. Keep it up

techbeck said,

Windows 7 was widely accepted and anticipated after everyone was fed up with Vista. And sorry, I cannot remember what I said and commented on the past 3.5 years when it concerns Win7. And the company I worked at, stuck with XP and downgraded the OS for a while until we had a time to test all of our apps/processes.

I am just asking in general. When Win7 was selling well after Vista's release, we didn't see these questions about how many copies were really in use. But a narrative must be created to convince people that Win8 must really be bad, that even though copies are being sold on par with Win7's sales, it is really doing poorly.

Reminds me of the Xbox 360's sales. People were buying them, but many claimed that they were being returned en masse, people were lining up with the lines stretching to Terre Haute, just to return them. And when we saw the numbers did not support that theory, then the story switched to the only reason they were selling was because people were buying 1, 2, or 10 new machines to replace their original RRODed device.

Everything is just about creating a story to try to prove that the actual numbers are incorrect.

nohone said,
We must find some narrative to try to prove that Win8 is doing horribly, and use it to show that Chrome OS is doing wonderfully (oops, sorry, did I go off topic? Don't want you getting upset with me.)

No, no, just comparing apples vs oranges....

techbeck said,
I would be more interested to see who is actually using Win8...not just who bought a copy. Of course MS is only worried about copies sold, but real usage would tell a better picture on how Windows 8 is doing. I bought a copy and have the trial loaded on a test system...but not using it ATM.

And many individuals and businesses do the same thing with every version of Windows. Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. What matters most to Microsoft is the sales figures and the fact that you bought a copy is good enough. When it comes to the next version of Windows the goal will be the same, except then people who were unhappy with Windows 8 are going to be more likely to upgrade (à la Vista to Windows 7).

For what it's worth, I've been running Windows 8 as my primary operating system since the Consumer Preview and bought the upgrade on the day of release. I prefer it to Windows 7 but at the same time there is a lot to criticise - particularly how the Metro and desktop environments interact.

techbeck said,

Windows 7 was widely accepted and anticipated after everyone was fed up with Vista. And sorry, I cannot remember what I said and commented on the past 3.5 years when it concerns Win7. And the company I worked at, stuck with XP and downgraded the OS for a while until we had a time to test all of our apps/processes.

And Windows 8 is being chosen because XP users realise they finally have to move on. And what is on offer?

Calling it a "solid start" is hardly positive language. The sales for Windows 8 have been very slow considering that it has been offered at a substantial discount; with that period now over it's likely that sales will drop off quite substantially, though new computers will be unaffected.

The Windows division now has a new head and that's the perfect opportunity to respond to criticism. Tablets are obviously an important market but desktop systems aren't going away in a hurry, especially not for PC gamers - a very vocal segment of PC users. Windows 8 included a lot of worthwhile improvements but now it's time to properly unify the experience. Mouse gestures need to be consistent throughout the operating system and the Control Panel and PC Settings interfaces should either be merged or fully duplicate each other, as jumping between the two is not good for touch or mouse users. Windows 8 was rushed.

Windows 9 needs to do what Windows 7 did, in that it needs to polish and improve the new design elements introduced in the previous version.

Windows 8 is doing to interface paradigms what Windows Vista did to OS subsystems:
Completely changed them.
And of course, everything that people and developers were used to more or less broke.

While it's easy to say Windows 8 was rushed, consider the task at hand: Windows 7 and earlier are almost completely unusable with fingers, and typing on the virtual keyboard is a pain. Windows 8 and Windows RT are highly usable with fingers. Microsoft Office is highly usable with fingers. It's not a polished experience, certainly, but it's a... solid start.

theyarecomingforyou said,
The sales for Windows 8 have been very slow considering that it has been offered at a substantial discount; with that period now over it's likely that sales will drop off quite substantially, though new computers will be unaffected.

The majority of Windows licenses are sold as new machines. Upgrades are a very low percentage of total sales, and anyone who wanted to upgrade probably already did. I predict you'll see Windows 8 grow at about the same exact rate in the next 3 months as the previous 3.

theyarecomingforyou said,
Calling it a "solid start" is hardly positive language. The sales for Windows 8 have been very slow considering that it has been offered at a substantial discount; with that period now over it's likely that sales will drop off quite substantially, though new computers will be unaffected.

The Windows division now has a new head and that's the perfect opportunity to respond to criticism. Tablets are obviously an important market but desktop systems aren't going away in a hurry, especially not for PC gamers - a very vocal segment of PC users. Windows 8 included a lot of worthwhile improvements but now it's time to properly unify the experience. Mouse gestures need to be consistent throughout the operating system and the Control Panel and PC Settings interfaces should either be merged or fully duplicate each other, as jumping between the two is not good for touch or mouse users. Windows 8 was rushed.

Windows 9 needs to do what Windows 7 did, in that it needs to polish and improve the new design elements introduced in the previous version.

When you look at the actuall real figures, you should know that Windows 7 was the best selling OS __ever__

Windows 7 sold 100 million in 6 months

Windows 8 sold 60 million in 2 months.

So the reality on the ground is that Windows 8 is off to a very solid start. QED

Darrah Ford said,
Yeah "solid start" is textbook corporate doublespeak. I mean what else is she gonna say.

Typical textbook doublespeak for "I would find some way to complain and claim it was a lie if they said they sold 500 million copies"

theyarecomingforyou said,
Calling it a "solid start" is hardly positive language. The sales for Windows 8 have been very slow considering that it has been offered at a substantial discount; with that period now over it's likely that sales will drop off quite substantially, though new computers will be unaffected.

The Windows division now has a new head and that's the perfect opportunity to respond to criticism. Tablets are obviously an important market but desktop systems aren't going away in a hurry, especially not for PC gamers - a very vocal segment of PC users. Windows 8 included a lot of worthwhile improvements but now it's time to properly unify the experience. Mouse gestures need to be consistent throughout the operating system and the Control Panel and PC Settings interfaces should either be merged or fully duplicate each other, as jumping between the two is not good for touch or mouse users. Windows 8 was rushed.

Windows 9 needs to do what Windows 7 did, in that it needs to polish and improve the new design elements introduced in the previous version.

MS is aware of the fact that metro and the desktop don't mix that well yet, thus they are going to release windows blue so soon and overall speed up their development to make the transition quicker. I think windows 9 will be even more different than what we have now as they change the desktop even more.

theyarecomingforyou said,
Calling it a "solid start" is hardly positive language. The sales for Windows 8 have been very slow considering that it has been offered at a substantial discount; with that period now over it's likely that sales will drop off quite substantially, though new computers will be unaffected.

The Windows division now has a new head and that's the perfect opportunity to respond to criticism. Tablets are obviously an important market but desktop systems aren't going away in a hurry, especially not for PC gamers - a very vocal segment of PC users. Windows 8 included a lot of worthwhile improvements but now it's time to properly unify the experience. Mouse gestures need to be consistent throughout the operating system and the Control Panel and PC Settings interfaces should either be merged or fully duplicate each other, as jumping between the two is not good for touch or mouse users. Windows 8 was rushed.

Windows 9 needs to do what Windows 7 did, in that it needs to polish and improve the new design elements introduced in the previous version.


Windows 7 "buy machine now and get Win7 later" was free
Windows 8 "buy machine now and get Win8 later" was/is $15

Windows 7 special offer was $50
Windows 8 special offer was $40

Windows 7 had a 3 licenses for $150 family pack offer
Windows 8 doesn't have it.

What substantial discount bull**** you are talking about?

The preorder price for the Windows 7 upgrade was $50 for the Home Premium version, $100 for the Professional version (the Ultimate version wasn't even offered a discount) - it was also only available BEFORE launch. The discount price for the Windows 8 upgrade was $40 for the Pro version and lasted months AFTER launch. More importantly, the Windows 7 upgrade was more expensive in non-US markets.

Windows 8 was substantially cheaper and the discounts lasted much longer.

PS- There was no need for such hostility - my post was perfectly polite.

theyarecomingforyou said,
The preorder price for the Windows 7 upgrade was $50 for the Home Premium version, $100 for the Professional version (the Ultimate version wasn't even offered a discount) - it was also only available BEFORE launch. The discount price for the Windows 8 upgrade was $40 for the Pro version and lasted months AFTER launch. More importantly, the Windows 7 upgrade was more expensive in non-US markets.

Windows 8 was substantially cheaper and the discounts lasted much longer.

PS- There was no need for such hostility - my post was perfectly polite.


Windows 7 HP doesn't map to Windows 8 (MC requires Pro).
IIRC Windows 7 $50 offer was extended or re-offered.
There is also the $15 early-buy offer which had no parallel in Win7 (mostly Pro vs HP again as you noted).
And even then, for most people the Pro features don't offer anything substantial for day to day use.

Hostility is needed because there is so much crap going on around "Why Windows 8 is a FAIL" every-single-day. Just read techbeck's post below.

theyarecomingforyou said,
Calling it a "solid start" is hardly positive language. The sales for Windows 8 have been very slow considering that it has been offered at a substantial discount; with that period now over it's likely that sales will drop off quite substantially, though new computers will be unaffected.

The Windows division now has a new head and that's the perfect opportunity to respond to criticism. Tablets are obviously an important market but desktop systems aren't going away in a hurry, especially not for PC gamers - a very vocal segment of PC users. Windows 8 included a lot of worthwhile improvements but now it's time to properly unify the experience. Mouse gestures need to be consistent throughout the operating system and the Control Panel and PC Settings interfaces should either be merged or fully duplicate each other, as jumping between the two is not good for touch or mouse users. Windows 8 was rushed.

Windows 9 needs to do what Windows 7 did, in that it needs to polish and improve the new design elements introduced in the previous version.

I am curious, have you ever sold 60M of anything that cost 39.99? Oh yeah, that's what I thought...you havent. 60M licenses sold, is a good start. WIndows 8 OEM sales she says are about equal to where Windows 7 was. What more do you need to read into that?

There are over 1.3B know Windows users. It takes time for a new OS to show a significant gain. Look how long it took Windows 7. Do you expect that the people or businesses who just upgraded to Windows 7 will drop everything and buy Windows 8 or buy new hardware to run it? Highly unlikely.

But the number are good no matter how you look at it. If you can do better, go apply for a job at Microsoft and explain to them what they are doing wrong. At least get paid for you criticism thats unwarranted.

BajiRav said,
IIRC Windows 7 $50 offer was extended or re-offered.
There is also the $15 early-buy offer which had no parallel in Win7 (mostly Pro vs HP again as you noted).
And even then, for most people the Pro features don't offer anything substantial for day to day use.

You deliberately misrepresented the price of the Windows 7 discount to fit your point, while ignoring the fact that the Windows 7 promotions were substantially more expensive outside of the US. As for your other point, hostility is NOT a valid response to opinions that you disagree with; rather it indicates that you aren't able to debate your position on its merits and that you're letting your emotions get in the way of a mature debate.

I ran Windows 8 from the Preview Release and used it as my default operating system from the Consumer Preview; I upgraded to the final version on the day of release and have been using it ever since. I never claimed that Windows 8 was a failure; all did was offer my opinions about where Microsoft went wrong with Windows 8 and where it could improve with Windows 9. I prefer Windows 8 to Windows 7 but there are some aspects of it that I really don't like. It's fine that you disagree with me but don't misrepresent my position.

theyarecomingforyou said,
The preorder price for the Windows 7 upgrade was $50 for the Home Premium version, $100 for the Professional version (the Ultimate version wasn't even offered a discount) - it was also only available BEFORE launch. The discount price for the Windows 8 upgrade was $40 for the Pro version and lasted months AFTER launch. More importantly, the Windows 7 upgrade was more expensive in non-US markets.

Windows 8 was substantially cheaper and the discounts lasted much longer.

PS- There was no need for such hostility - my post was perfectly polite.

It wa snot a substancia discount. Windows 7 was offered for free to anyone who bought a new PC with XP/Vista on it. FREE is a substancial discount. BUy a machine with Windows 7, get 8 for $15...or buy the upgrade for $40...it was $50 for Windows 7. I fail to seee this substancial discount. $10 less is not a sunstancial discount. It just isn't. Substancial would be 50%-75% off.

To me WIndows 8 should have been free to anyone who bought Windows 7 just prior to release. For those of us who wanted to upgrade it should have been only $15 since we dont have touchscreen to use it and thus it is a mediocre update to Windows 7...much like most OIS X updates. But I still wont complain about $40.00. I bought 2.Much cheaper than bying a new POC or paying full price. $40.00 vs $99 is a substancial discount. $40.00 vs 199.99 is a substancial discount. $40 vs $50 simply isnt.

recursive said,
I think you hit a nerve there. Baji seems to have too much invested in Windows to fathom its failure.

And the person who's avatar depicts him pushing away Windows and loving a Penguin (representing Linux) does not have too much invested in a Windows alternative to wish that Windows is a failure? And note your Freudian slip there - you called Windows a failure, not Windows 8, showing that it is not about Win8 at all, that you just want to make sure that people believe Windows as a whole is a failure.

TechieXP said,
It wa snot a substancia discount. Windows 7 was offered for free to anyone who bought a new PC with XP/Vista on it. FREE is a substancial discount. BUy a machine with Windows 7, get 8 for $15...or buy the upgrade for $40...it was $50 for Windows 7. I fail to seee this substancial discount. $10 less is not a sunstancial discount. It just isn't. Substancial would be 50%-75% off.

Ignoring the terrible English, including an upgrade to the latest version with new systems isn't a substantial discount - it's simply designed to prevent people holding off buying a new computer. Either way Microsoft gets the money for a full Windows licence and many companies have similar offers. The important discount is for people who want to upgrade from an existing version of Windows, as that's new money for Microsoft.

And again, comparing $40 to $50 is deliberately misleading (as explained above).

BajiRav said,


Hostility is needed because there is so much crap going on around "Why Windows 8 is a FAIL" every-single-day. Just read techbeck's post below.

So, someone disagree with you, you call the dissenting opinion cr@# and therefore, in your opinion of course, hostility is needed.
Interesting....

theyarecomingforyou said,

Ignoring the terrible English, including an upgrade to the latest version with new systems isn't a substantial discount - it's simply designed to prevent people holding off buying a new computer. Either way Microsoft gets the money for a full Windows licence and many companies have similar offers. The important discount is for people who want to upgrade from an existing version of Windows, as that's new money for Microsoft.
And again, comparing $40 to $50 is deliberately misleading (as explained above).

deliberately? hardly! $50 was the only "special offer" price for Win8 available out there. It's the cheapest Win7 upgrade against cheapest Win8 upgrade (during special offer). How is that misrepresentation from me?
There is no "substantial discount" as you claimed and in fact the "free" buy-now-get-8-later didn't exist for Win8.
Fritzly said,

So, someone disagree with you, you call the dissenting opinion cr@# and therefore, in your opinion of course, hostility is needed.
Interesting....

Uh no. Hostility is needed for misinformation not because he disagrees with me (which didn't even happen here because he is OP and I have my own reservations when it comes to Win8 )

BajiRav said,
It's the cheapest Win7 upgrade against cheapest Win8 upgrade (during special offer). How is that misrepresentation from me?

Because they are different versions - you're comparing Windows 7 Home Premium to Windows 8 Pro. And again, the Windows 7 discounts were only that price in the US - they were substantially more expensive in other territories.

As for hostility, you're the only one spreading misinformation yet I'm not resorting to hostility against you. I'm perfect happy to make my case based upon its merits.

Just goes to show that the predictions of the people on a tech site are not representative of the actual reality of how Windows is sold. That is, Windows will always generate a profit as long as people need Windows, and most people don't care what version of Windows they're using.

billyea said,
That is, Windows will always generate a profit as long as people need Windows, and most people don't care what version of Windows they're using.

And as long as every new PC has windows when bought.

Darrah Ford said,
bull****. Most people care once they're held hostage by a captive store environment.

Are you talking about Windows RT? Or iOS or Android?

This story is about Windows 8.

Darrah Ford said,
bull****. Most people care once they're held hostage by a captive store environment.

WHoooah there buddy
What you call being held hostage by a captive store environment, I call a global distribution channel to get my application discovered, with trust and security built in, so the user will actually install what I make rather than assume it's some form of malware because it's not hosted on megaupload or reviewed by anandtech or PC mag.

deadonthefloor said,

WHoooah there buddy
What you call being held hostage by a captive store environment, I call a global distribution channel to get my application discovered, with trust and security built in, so the user will actually install what I make rather than assume it's some form of malware because it's not hosted on megaupload or reviewed by anandtech or PC mag.

^This. I am in college writing apps which will pay the rest of my way through it, as well looking good on a resume. And currently its prime time to get discovered on the Windows Store because its smaller size! The Windows Store is great

Darrah Ford said,
bull****. Most people care once they're held hostage by a captive store environment.

They do? Point to examples.

Darrah Ford said,
bull****. Most people care once they're held hostage by a captive store environment.

Yeah because that is what I'm hearing from family and friends - that damn captive store environment /s

deadonthefloor said,

WHoooah there buddy
What you call being held hostage by a captive store environment, I call a global distribution channel to get my application discovered, with trust and security built in, so the user will actually install what I make rather than assume it's some form of malware because it's not hosted on megaupload or reviewed by anandtech or PC mag.

As a developer that is precisely the environment I don't want. To many restrictions, fees, and other bull**** to deal with.

I prefer an open operating system. It already costs me thousands of dollars in the software I need to produce my application. I don't need nor want to pay thousands more to Microsoft just to sell it through them.