Windows 8 market share up to 2.36% for January while Windows 7 falls

The latest market share data from Net Applications has shown that, for the first time since the launch of the operating system, Windows 7 market share has declined, dropping to 44.48% in January from 45.11% the previous month. Meanwhile, Windows 8 market share is up, having gained 0.58% in January to post an overall market share of 2.36% - this shows marginally slower growth for Windows 8 in January, with the operating system's December market share rising 0.66%.

Unsurprisingly Windows Vista continued to see market share loss, falling to 5.24% from 5.67% in December, while Windows XP saw a gain of 0.43% in January to post a share of 39.51%. Overall, Windows still sits on a commanding lead with 91.71% of the market (down 0.03%), with Mac OS second (7.08%, up 0.01%) and Linux third (1.21%, up 0.02%). Windows 8 still doesn't have the newest iteration of Mac OS X beaten, with OS X 10.8 installed on around 2.44% of computers.

The numbers from Net Applications indicate that Windows 8 is growing mostly at the expense of Windows 7, while Google's Chrome OS - which according to Acer has had "amazing" sales - still hasn't managed to register as a separate OS (instead it forms part of the Linux market share).

Source: Net Applications via: The Next Web

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Wordament becomes first web browser game with Xbox Live Achievements

Next Story

Microsoft updates News and Finance Windows 8 apps

86 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

My prediction: Windows 8 market share will go DOWN when people realize / figure out that they can *UPGRADE* (downgrade) to Windows 7

The issue is for a lot of business if they don't do much on the web and just use the computer as a workstation there is NOTHING wrong with XP. Sure it's not the newest or the greatest, but if what they have works, I can see why they would want to leave well enough alone.

warwagon said,
The issue is for a lot of business if they don't do much on the web and just use the computer as a workstation there is NOTHING wrong with XP. Sure it's not the newest or the greatest, but if what they have works, I can see why they would want to leave well enough alone.

Yeah, often the argument used to disregard Xp old Os is security. You must absolutely regularly update your OS, or it would be attacked, or whatever. Just don't connect it to Internet ...

warwagon said,
The issue is for a lot of business if they don't do much on the web and just use the computer as a workstation there is NOTHING wrong with XP. Sure it's not the newest or the greatest, but if what they have works, I can see why they would want to leave well enough alone.

That's not the issue surrounding XP though. Companies/people sat on their asses while Vista rolled out, and continued to do so after 7 rolled out, until they realized, their laziness put them behind, and for some reason are blaming Microsoft for it. I still hear BS about stuff not being compatible, which is just absurd at this moment as Vista was released 7 years ago. If you haven't taken the time by this point to understand the post-XP things and doings, then you have no right to complain.

Dot Matrix said,

until they realized, their laziness put them behind

Well, a concrete example to illustrate this point , would be great.

This just reflects the inherent "divide" between consumers and businesses. Formerly, Windows-based Operating Systems were designed for both. Then, Windows-8 attempted to continue that philosophy (and failed). Now, the marketplaces are picking the OS that best suits their needs--Windows-7 for businesses and serious users; and Windows-8 for consumers. It should come as no surprise that the consumer Windows-7 users are moving to Windows-8. How soon will Microsoft recognize this "divide" and update Windows-7 for businesses?

Why even count Windows 8 Touch numbers? Most people with Windows 8 likely wont use IE10 on the Metro side, they will mostly use the desktop versions. The Metro one which I too dont use is ugly. Plus if you use it and then switch over to the desktop, your pages dont automatically load when it opens which should be easy to fix. Its like you are running to separate OS' on the same desktop. Thats the only real downside to 8 for me.

TechieXP said,
Why even count Windows 8 Touch numbers? Most people with Windows 8 likely wont use IE10 on the Metro side, they will mostly use the desktop versions. The Metro one which I too dont use is ugly. Plus if you use it and then switch over to the desktop, your pages dont automatically load when it opens which should be easy to fix. Its like you are running to separate OS' on the same desktop. Thats the only real downside to 8 for me.

Actually if you use the command "open in desktop" within Metro IE, it will automatically open the same page you're on but in desktop IE. It doesn't open the other tabs you have open. That could be by design though, given that you basically open desktop IE from Metro IE only to open a page/website that doesn't work well within Metro IE.

I use the majority of time Metro IE, I actually appreciate the understated look and full screen browsing, but I have to say my device is 11.6 inch tablet hybrid.

I spoke to the IT implementer's for our organization the other day after they came to do an audit. (I work in education). I asked them about the situation with Windows XP approaching EOL in April 2014. They said, that is something I should take up with the Ministry of Education. She said I should not worry about it, because having Windows 7 does not make any sense, since the syllabus is based on using Windows XP and Office 2007 and the students would be confused using Windows 7 and Office 2010. Considering the majority of students who bring their laptops to school are running Windows 7 and using Office Starter 2010. I don't understand if they seem to move between generations of software easily (XP school systems), (Windows 7 personal systems), I don't see how this is a problem.

Besides that, the same IT implementer's who are rolling out new hardware to new schools have them come preloaded with Windows 7. So the lies and hypocrisy there does not make sense.

This is all common sense. With new systems coming with Win8 ,and tablets be coming more and more popular....then this is really no big surprise. Happens every time a new OS is released...well, cept maybe for Vista and ME.

techbeck said,
This is all common sense.

How do you explain the increase of XP market share.
From article :"Windows XP saw a gain of 0.43% in January".

The share from touch enabled devices is still low, because those devices are still rare in the market to be find and the choice very limited.

The majority of this share is coming from upgrades and in a minor way from new hardware I believe. I think the growth will slow down a little in the coming 2-3 months given the end of the promotion for upgrades, while it will start growing consistently and possibly faster when the market will be flooded with more touch enabled devices

I just ordered a physical copy of 8 on Amazon today, as its the last day to get it discounted, it'll be in the mail soon, you can add me to that list of future people running 8

MS need to pay attention. Apple tells its users what they should like and its usually right, but then look at their share of chart. MS should not try this, they will end up running a great os into the ground, trying to be cool.

Of course it will go up! Every PC sold in big box stores has Windows 8. If the consumer had a choice, they'd choose Windows 7. These stats are meaningless.

JHBrown said,
Of course it will go up! Every PC sold in big box stores has Windows 8. If the consumer had a choice, they'd choose Windows 7. These stats are meaningless.

At least these are stats, objective and verifiable data from statistic company, compared to your completely subjective and unsupported statement that consumers would choose Win7 if given a choice..

Windows 8 stats definitely WOULD NOT go up if a customer had the option of seeing Windows 7 and 8 side by side.

I know several people who's first computer was Windows 7 who have recently purchased new computers with Windows 8 on them and they almost instantly asked if I could down grade it to 7 for them!!

Can't say as I ever had anyone ask me to down grade Windows 7 to Vista but sure have tons of people ask me to down grade Vista to XP!

I wouldn't call this slight rise of Windows 8 any major news though as it obviously HAS to go up seeing as that's the only thing being sold!

[quote=JHBrown said, If the consumer had a choice, they'd choose Windows 7. These stats are meaningless.[/quote]

I wouldn't - I'm a consumer and i'd rather have Windows 8.

EVERY single person I have showed my Slate 7 with Windows 8, being used as a tablet or a laptop, told me how much they liked the new UI and they were going to consider a new laptop with touchscreen very soon. Windows 8 on a laptop without touchscreen? I still would choose Win8 for many reason, but there are less advantages.

So I can say my personal experience is exactly the opposite of yours. The problem is, these are not facts, these are our personal comments, experiences etc.. all things we can't demonstrate and even when we could, cannot be considered as market analysis.

My point is still valid, as much as it comes to usefulness of a study, these stats from a statistic company are definitely more reliable and objective than your and mine personal experience or opinions. These data can be obviously commented, but you can't dismiss them as not worthy because your completely personal and unproven opinion is different from what they show.

You don't need proof. MS said they're close partners. Net Apps has indirect interest to release slightly cooked results in favor of MS when needed. We, as customers or whatever, better look at a more independent company.

Of course it will go up, every single computer sold in shops now has Windows 8 on it. It would be ridiculous to think it would go anywhere but up. Doesn't mean its any good though..

HoochieMamma said,
Of course it will go up, every single computer sold in shops now has Windows 8 on it. It would be ridiculous to think it would go anywhere but up. Doesn't mean its any good though..

Network share numbers are by far a better indicator than any other number that anyone including MS can throw around such as their 60 million licenses sold number.

I can roll out 50 brand new PCs next week to a client of mine, that will have Win8 licenses attached to it but have been downgraded by me to Win7. As far as MS is concerned, those are Win8 licenses sold and in use. Network use stats however will show those PCs as Win7 PCs.

HoochieMamma said,
Of course it will go up, every single computer sold in shops now has Windows 8 on it. It would be ridiculous to think it would go anywhere but up. Doesn't mean its any good though..

Here we go again with the shelves myth.

Queue Windows 8 lovers thinking this is major thing. What is this piece of crap gaining? Less than 1% a month?

Nashy said,
Queue Windows 8 lovers thinking this is major thing. What is this piece of crap gaining? Less than 1% a month?

Queue Windows 8 haters thinking we give a crap about their imaginary world where new windows versions don't sell because they think one change is bad.

Nashy said,
Queue Windows 8 lovers thinking this is major thing. What is this piece of crap gaining? Less than 1% a month?

Hey, it took Linux 2 decades to get that 1%!

rfirth said,

Hey, it took Linux 2 decades to get that 1%!


On the desktop yes, but it only took them 10 years to replace UNIX and become the most used operating system in the world... (Servers, HPC, Smartphones, ... all run on Linux)

Personally the only thing stopping me using the OS is the lack of game support. Linux has moved fast in the last few years which, IMO, is down to Ubuntu releasing some great releases. Valve with Steam has started the ball rolling so hopefully gaming on Linux might soon be starting to gather some ground.
Sadly, until gaming becomes supported natively and not bodged (wine) I am afraid I will be sticking with Windows.

SK[ said,]Personally the only thing stopping me using the OS is the lack of game support. Linux has moved fast in the last few years which, IMO, is down to Ubuntu releasing some great releases. Valve with Steam has started the ball rolling so hopefully gaming on Linux might soon be starting to gather some ground.
Sadly, until gaming becomes supported natively and not bodged (wine) I am afraid I will be sticking with Windows.

Believe me bro there about 1 million more reasons why the average consumer shouldn't even touch it.

SK[ said,]Personally the only thing stopping me using the OS is the lack of game support. Linux has moved fast in the last few years which, IMO, is down to Ubuntu releasing some great releases. Valve with Steam has started the ball rolling so hopefully gaming on Linux might soon be starting to gather some ground.
Sadly, until gaming becomes supported natively and not bodged (wine) I am afraid I will be sticking with Windows.

Gaming isn't going to give Linux traction in the least. There's still the main issue of Linux just being plain junk, with little third party support, and developers still trying to drag it out in all directions. Companies don't want games, they want stability, support, and ease of use. Linux offers none of that.

If you want to stay locked in a perpetual death trap of 90's nostalgia, then use Linux, but if you want to join us in the 21st century of computing Apple or Microsoft are the companies you should be looking to.

SK[ said,]Personally the only thing stopping me using the OS is the lack of game support. Linux has moved fast in the last few years which, IMO, is down to Ubuntu releasing some great releases. Valve with Steam has started the ball rolling so hopefully gaming on Linux might soon be starting to gather some ground.
Sadly, until gaming becomes supported natively and not bodged (wine) I am afraid I will be sticking with Windows.

Even though Ubuntu has its part in the development of Linux, do know it heavily relies on Debian's development as well.
Although the focus is slowly swifting to favor Ubuntu, which I think is the wrong approach for Linux, but thats just my opinion. Rather stick to Debian's core values. I'm not to found of Ubuntu's core values.

I don't think XP will die for at least another 10 years! Too many corporate PCs running them as well as the abundant distribution of pirated copies in developing nations.

ingramator said,
I don't think XP will die for at least another 10 years! Too many corporate PCs running them as well as the abundant distribution of pirated copies in developing nations.

We'll just have to wait and see. Support ends very soon.

mrp04 said,

We'll just have to wait and see. Support ends very soon.

Indeed, hopefully that will shift enterprises away from it but still doesn't solve the problem of pirated copies. I'm hoping it can just be buried on old computers.

ingramator said,

Indeed, hopefully that will shift enterprises away from it but still doesn't solve the problem of pirated copies. I'm hoping it can just be buried on old computers.

Expect a huge bump in sales around the time XP support ends. Corporations absolutely cannot continue using it after support ends. That's a huge liability.

Once the unpatched vulnerabilities start piling on, XP will die fast.

rfirth said,

Expect a huge bump in sales around the time XP support ends. Corporations absolutely cannot continue using it after support ends. That's a huge liability.

Once the unpatched vulnerabilities start piling on, XP will die fast.

IE6 says hello. While there will most likely be an increase in sales, the question is what will they buy? 7 or 8?

Luc2k said,

IE6 says hello. While there will most likely be an increase in sales, the question is what will they buy? 7 or 8?

Again, IE6 is still supported until April 2014. And Windows 8 will be 18 months old by then, will already have been updated to Blue, and probably about to get another update. With Microsoft's sped up development cycle, we might be 6 months away or less from Windows 9 when XP support ends, and Windows 8 will have 20% marketshare.

Hmmm... I was extremely surprised few weeks ago when I've heard that a virus has attacked the computers from my national Tv chain. All runing Windows 98
So, yes, there are chances that Xp will survive in some computers even after 10 years from 2014.

rfirth said,

Expect a huge bump in sales around the time XP support ends. Corporations absolutely cannot continue using it after support ends. That's a huge liability.

Once the unpatched vulnerabilities start piling on, XP will die fast.

I refuse to support a company or network still running XP after next year. Unless, that company is willing to jack up my pay, I will politely tell you to go pound sand.

Dot Matrix said,

I refuse to support a company or network still running XP after next year. Unless, that company is willing to jack up my pay, I will politely tell you to go pound sand.

Please send your business my way then. I have no problems nor qualms about supporting companies using XP. Heck I have clients who still have DOS, Win98, and Win2000 PCs amongst their equipment.

dtourond said,
Where are all the Windows 8 haters.

Seeing as there's nothing to defend yet, here's a bone: Windows 8 Touch + RT Touch have 0.1%.

Luc2k said,

Seeing as there's nothing to defend yet, here's a bone: Windows 8 Touch + RT Touch have 0.1%.

Where are they collecting "Windows 8 Touch" data from? It should just report "Windows 8" whether you have touch or not.

mrp04 said,

Where are they collecting "Windows 8 Touch" data from? It should just report "Windows 8" whether you have touch or not.

Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 10.0; Windows NT 6.2; Trident/6.0)
Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 10.0; Windows NT 6.2; Trident/6.0; Touch)

Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 10.0; Windows NT 6.2; ARM; Trident/6.0)
Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 10.0; Windows NT 6.2; ARM; Trident/6.0; Touch)

Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 10.0; Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; Trident/6.0)
Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 10.0; Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; Trident/6.0; Touch)

Edited by rfirth, Feb 1 2013, 8:35am :

That "touch" bit is from the metro version of IE10 I bet, unless metro and desktop IE have the same agent. Though looking at the list posted above that doesn't seem to be the case.

GP007 said,
That "touch" bit is from the metro version of IE10 I bet, unless metro and desktop IE have the same agent. Though looking at the list posted above that doesn't seem to be the case.

Nope. Both the desktop and metro version of IE10 have the same user agent string. The "touch" bit is added if your hardware supports touch.

I'm here!

I'm still on Windows 7 and awaiting Windows 9... or whatever the future holds. Android maybe...?

Market share holds little value.

rfirth said,

Nope. Both the desktop and metro version of IE10 have the same user agent string. The "touch" bit is added if your hardware supports touch.

Ahh IE 10 does that. Chrome and Firefox do not.

Tpiom said
I'm here!

I'm still on Windows 7 and awaiting Windows 9... or whatever the future holds. Android maybe...?

Market share holds little value.

Windows 9 is going to be more integrated with the Modern UI. I don't worry about the market share. I use the OS that works, and Windows 8 works.

Luc2k said
Seeing as there's nothing to defend yet, here's a bone: Windows 8 Touch + RT Touch have 0.1%.
Well Windows 8 is a great OS and it packs a lot of improvements and some new features that do make it a lot better than 7, but if people are fine with using inferior software, then fine.

Most of the haters I see everyday are blinded by the Modern UI and they can't see (or they refuse to see) how great it really is. It's their loss really.

dtourond said,
Well Windows 8 is a great OS and it packs a lot of improvements and some new features that do make it a lot better than 7, but if people are fine with using inferior software, then fine.

Most of the haters I see everyday are blinded by the Modern UI and they can't see (or they refuse to see) how great it really is. It's their loss really.

Great opinion piece, but what does that have to do with Touch market share? Or do you only know how to defend against "I hate Windows 8".

Luc2k said
Great opinion piece, but what does that have to do with Touch market share? Or do you only know how to defend against "I hate Windows 8".
I was originally talking about the Windows 8 haters, not about Touch. If you want to talk about that, then go right ahead, but I'll defend it either way because it is a great product.

dtourond said,
I was originally talking about the Windows 8 haters, not about Touch. If you want to talk about that, then go right ahead, but I'll defend it either way because it is a great product.

Why quote me with the generic defence then?

yeah, if i see performance wise .. Windows 8 is not worse than Win 7. but little better.
rest .. everyone has its choice.Use whatever you like.. its depends on what app you use and on what OS its runs smoothly.

Trust me, my company is still on XP for the desktop. Only our laptops are on Windows 7.

Luc2k said,
Haha, good ol' XP. I bet it will still have a good chunk even after support is dropped.

I could imagine after Nuclear fallout, all the remain of computer technology will be XP desktops laying around...and still working!

MDboyz said,
Trust me, my company is still on XP for the desktop. Only our laptops are on Windows 7.
Your IT decision makers are idiots.

MrHumpty said,
Your IT decision makers are idiots.

I have people out here in the NYC tristate area that I know who work for the big banks such as Goldman Sachs, Morgan, Citibank, etc. They are all mostly still all using XP. Someone whom I know at Goldman told me a short while ago that they are upgrading Office to 2007 (not even 2010 or 2013) and everyone is dreading it.

So I'm sure that the IT Depts at the TBTF banks appreciate your opinion of them...

Or so,e companies don't see the need to upgrade if what you have works. At my company we have 20 users. When I first started with them, they were all using Windows 98SE. We stayed with that until Windows 2000 Pro came. We stuck with that until XP. Most of us are still on XP. Only a few with much newer systems that came with Windows 7 have it. I have WIndows 8 because I use my own laptop at work, and IT which I work with, doesnt get to tell me what I can run. We are pretty liberal here. On some level. But my partner says if he could, he would have just stayed with 2000 as it was the best OS MS had....EVER!

For IT departments that can support Windows XP even after no one is doing so, is their choice. They can spend their money however they want. Eventually XP will drop even lower.I think the biggest of the users are pirates. Its very easy to pirate XP. However Windows 7 is easy to pirate too if you know where to look.

Condere said,

I have people out here in the NYC tristate area that I know who work for the big banks such as Goldman Sachs, Morgan, Citibank, etc. They are all mostly still all using XP. Someone whom I know at Goldman told me a short while ago that they are upgrading Office to 2007 (not even 2010 or 2013) and everyone is dreading it.

So I'm sure that the IT Depts at the TBTF banks appreciate your opinion of them...

If it is a bank that is still running XP on user's devices, then yes, they are idiots. The number of security enhancements added to Win7, including bitlocker to keep any user data that may be on a laptop secure, running IE sandboxed to make sure that user data cannot be accessed from the browser, as well as general security fixes - all items that are not supported in XP.

While I can see not upgrading to Win8 since most companies like to wait a little while before upgrading, any organization dealing with critical user information not at least on Win7 should not be allowed to manage user data.

nohone said,

If it is a bank that is still running XP on user's devices, then yes, they are idiots. The number of security enhancements added to Win7, including bitlocker to keep any user data that may be on a laptop secure, running IE sandboxed to make sure that user data cannot be accessed from the browser, as well as general security fixes - all items that are not supported in XP.

While I can see not upgrading to Win8 since most companies like to wait a little while before upgrading, any organization dealing with critical user information not at least on Win7 should not be allowed to manage user data.


You seriously think a bank relies on the security of the OS they run? hahaha

ATM machines in Holland of some banks still run on DOS systems, some banks their ATMs run on an XP Embedded.

But sure those systems are more insecure then you running Windows 8.

Shadowzz said,

You seriously think a bank relies on the security of the OS they run? hahaha

ATM machines in Holland of some banks still run on DOS systems, some banks their ATMs run on an XP Embedded.

But sure those systems are more insecure then you running Windows 8.

I don't mean for the POS devices, even though they need to be secured also. I am talking more about the employees walking around with a laptop full of user names, account numbers, and passwords. Every few months you hear of them leaving one on a bus, and there is a panic.

MrHumpty said
Your IT decision makers are idiots.
Agreed. XP works, but it is outdated and if people are okay with using outdated software, why don't they use Windows 95 and 98 while they're at it. I mean, it works, doesn't is..

Condere said,
I have people out here in the NYC tristate area that I know who work for the big banks such as Goldman Sachs, Morgan, Citibank, etc. They are all mostly still all using XP. Someone whom I know at Goldman told me a short while ago that they are upgrading Office to 2007 (not even 2010 or 2013) and everyone is dreading it.

So I'm sure that the IT Depts at the TBTF banks appreciate your opinion of them...

I've worked with the IT Department of JPMC. Idiots describes them quite well. Although, they are only allowing Windows 7 on their network for new installs.

Frankly, I don't care what firm you work with, big or small. If you're choosing to operate a decade's old OS over Win7. You're an idiot, plain and simple.

Shadowzz said,
ATM machines in Holland of some banks still run on DOS systems, some banks their ATMs run on an XP Embedded.

Hey look. Someone who doesn't realize ATM's run on their own network. They techinically fall under the "unplug it from the internet" security best practice.

You can run whatever you want on those things. They can only talk to highly controlled remote hosts and have insane physical security.