Windows 8 sales dissapointing


 Share

Recommended Posts

threetonesun

It's not even faster at boot. If you compare full boot on Windows 7 & 8 to logon screen, Windows 8 is actually couple of seconds slower (Samsung 830 SSD, clean install, chipset drivers and Windows updates only)

Do you have real numbers?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dot Matrix

No it wasn't. Hop back in your time machine and you'll find there was a discounted Windows 7 upgrade price after it came out as well.

True. There were Windows 7 discount deals aplenty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PGHammer

1 & 2: You have got to be kidding. I know you're not. But your experiences with nested folders and search baffle me. Start page Zoom for searching, seriously? /s

3: I don't disagree with what you say here. But as it relates to the success of Windows 8 particularly in the consumer space, no one cares. Microsoft needs to make sure quality apps get to the platform, one way or another.

Generalized search (outside of application searches) is no different really than it was in Windows 7 - the issue is hooking applications into it If an application (regardless of what API it uses) is going to hook into Search, it needs a *how*. (I've so far not seen how applications would - or even could - hook into Search in Windows 7, let alone previous versions of Windows. Hooking into Search in Windows 8, on the other hand, is better defined, though actual USE of the methodology by apps and applications is slapdash. That does indeed need fixing.)

Better applications/apps for RT are indeed needed - I'm not disputing that. (If anything, I stipulated it.) However, what is the incentive for the *developer* to abandon Win32 for WinRT (in terms of API)? If anything, there's a disincentive, due to the WinRT API not being supported by Windows 7 or earlier. The results so far (from Win32 developers) are half-baked RT apps (Kindle for RT) or no RT apps at all. The few RT apps that are worth anything aren't coming from developers with Win32 histories.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PGHammer

Um, well when you are almost giving away for free, it's natural you will reach a specific number much faster. Whether or not those people who bought still use it, is a whole different story.

Windows 7 was sold at a FULL price.

Please - Windows 7 was almost NEVER sold at full price. (The only exception was the non-upgrade (full) version of Ultimate; however, System Builder 7 Ultimate was then, and remains today, two-thirds that same price - and that was outside of sales at retailers and e-tailers, such as Newegg, TigerDirect - even Amazon.) That remains true today (sales of 7 haven't stopped merely due to 8's launch).

The last NT version of Windows to sell at full price was Windows 2000 Professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Luc2k

Who cares that it wasn't sold at full price, it definitely didn't get sold at W8 discount prices.

Link to post
Share on other sites

threetonesun

Who cares that it wasn't sold at full price, it definitely didn't get sold at W8 discount prices.

Except when it did. In fact, students could get it for $29.99, less than what the Windows 8 upgrade costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

pwgarner

Um, well when you are almost giving away for free, it's natural you will reach a specific number much faster. Whether or not those people who bought still use it, is a whole different story.

Windows 7 was sold at a FULL price.

Linux is free why has it stalled at such a low install rate? Also I installed Ubuntu only to wipe that drive after finding the unity UI totally confusing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Luc2k

Except when it did. In fact, students could get it for $29.99, less than what the Windows 8 upgrade costs.

Still it's was only students, but the 40$ one is for everybody (as a student you can get a lot of MS stuff for free), then there's the 15$ price. I might be wrong but was any other version sold at release that cheap?

Link to post
Share on other sites

threetonesun

Still it's was only students, but the 40$ one is for everybody (as a student you can get a lot of MS stuff for free), then there's the 15$ price. I might be wrong but was any other version sold at release that cheap?

I'm pretty sure the $15 Windows 8 upgrade on a new PC was free for Windows 7. There were various ways to get the home version upgrade inexpensively as well.

Also, MS is now competing with OSX, who's made upgrade pricing a much different ballgame since 7 was released.

Link to post
Share on other sites

neo1911

Microsoft should have allowed Metro Apps to run on Desktop and also allowed them to resize and minimize to taskbar. Was that difficult? Frikking NO. But Microsoft wanted to stick finger up everyone's ***.

This would have definitely helped to bridge Metro and Desktop UI even more and reduced complaints. Now I think Apple's approach to apps since OSX Lion seems far superior and reduces learning curve.

While I have no issues personally and managed to grab a license for ? 700 ($13), no other family member is impressed with Windows 8. :/

Our iPad and MBP running OSX Lion gets more usage these days.On the upside, I can have the PC all by myself. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

+LogicalApex

Except when it did. In fact, students could get it for $29.99, less than what the Windows 8 upgrade costs.

There hasn't been a version of Windows in recent history as cheap as Windows 8 was at launch for the majority of users. Microsoft offered insanely deep discounts to the regular public, with even pirates converting to legitimate copies @ $15 a pop.

Previous versions of WIndows only had 1 major discount program. The upgrade version would be heavily discounted for those who purchased Windows within a few months leading up to the new version launching. Including deals for students is disengenuous at best. Windows is free for MSDN subscribers and who knows what the price is for Software Assurance customers; the discussion on price has to be limited to an apples to apples comparison... As in the public price.

There was no $40 upgrade program in those days. The regular upgrade price was the same as normal (retailers were free to discount on their own and some did for other reasons).

Windows 8 is the cheapest version of Windows at launch in recent memory, possibly ever...

You had the $15 upgrade program where they didn't put any checks in place to limit it to acual PC upgrades. With Windows 7, for instance, you were required to pass an authentication to verify your computer shipped after the eligibility period. Then you had to $40 discount program for everyone else. Only the former having previously existed and previously had walls.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

threetonesun

This would have definitely helped to bridge Metro and Desktop UI even more and reduced complaints. Now I think Apple's approach to apps since OSX Lion seems far superior and reduces learning curve.

Not allowing iOS apps to run on the desktop AT ALL? No, it does not seem superior.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

AJerman

That's exactly my point. Until someone can prove it has failed or succeeded it is all supposition.

Hence 'supposedly' it has failed, based upon what specific people have said.

There is 0 proof, and all early indicators actually show a sales rate faster than Windows 7.

It took Windows 7 almost a year to reach the 10 sales per second mark.

It took Windows 8 about 4 days.

Since it doesn't look like anyone has posted this link yet: http://readwrite.com/2012/11/19/newegg-exec-calls-windows-8-launch-slow-predicts-201 Second link in Engadget's sources for their recent article.

Link to post
Share on other sites

+LogicalApex

I'm pretty sure the $15 Windows 8 upgrade on a new PC was free for Windows 7. There were various ways to get the home version upgrade inexpensively as well.

Also, MS is now competing with OSX, who's made upgrade pricing a much different ballgame since 7 was released.

What? Apple has had super cheap OS upgrades for at least the last decade... If anything, Apple upgrade prices have went up and not down... This is all well before Windows 7, Windows XP, and Windows ME so for Apple OS pricing to influence Microsoft now makes no sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Luc2k

I'm pretty sure the $15 Windows 8 upgrade on a new PC was free for Windows 7. There were various ways to get the home version upgrade inexpensively as well.

Also, MS is now competing with OSX, who's made upgrade pricing a much different ballgame since 7 was released.

OSX has that upgrade pricing because Apple charges a lot for a wide range of hardware. Meanwhile MS only has Surface, and even if it blows sales expectations can barely touch the number of Windows desktops/laptops out there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

threetonesun

What? Apple has had super cheap OS upgrades for at least the last decade... If anything, Apple upgrade prices have went up and not down... This is all well before Windows 7, Windows XP, and Windows ME so for Apple OS pricing to influence Microsoft now makes no sense.

10.1 was free for users of 10. It was $129 for users of OS 9, and each release after was $129 to upgrade. It wasn't until Snow Leopard that the $29 upgrades showed up, and then the $29 upgrade + full versions.

OSX has that upgrade pricing because Apple charges a lot for a wide range of hardware. Meanwhile MS only has Surface, and even if it blows sales expectations can barely touch the number of Windows desktops/laptops out there.

That doesn't explain the old $129 OSX upgrade pricing. People are starting to expect updates free with their hardware... that's our new upgrade cycle, either you get free updates or you get a new device. OS pricing is going to fall in line with that model, so it's not a huge surprise that 8 is cheaper than 7, and we can expect 9 to be even less.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TheLegendOfMart

So Microsoft was supposed to simply ignore tablets and have Google with Android (and now the Chromebook) eat their lunch?

PCs arent tablets, theres no need to have a touch orientated UI on a desktop computer. Save it for the tablets.

They could have easily put out Surface with Windows RT and left Windows 8 to be a regular Windows 7 style OS.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

fix-this!

the bottom line is every other version of windows sucks. if w8 is another failure for microsoft that's strike 3. zune=failed, wp7=failed, w8=jury still out but not looking good. i honestly couldn't recommend anyone buy w8 if their content with w7.

Link to post
Share on other sites

+LogicalApex

10.1 was free for users of 10. It was $129 for users of OS 9, and each release after was $129 to upgrade. It wasn't until Snow Leopard that the $29 upgrades showed up, and then the $29 upgrade + full versions.

Why didn't you bother to read the source I linked to? Which is Apple directly. I'll quote the relavent part for you:

The Mac OS X v10.1 retail package is available for a suggested retail price of $129 (US). Current Mac OS X users can upgrade using the standard Mac OS Up-to-Date program for $19.95 (US). A free Instant Up-to-Date upgrade kit for existing Mac OS X users will be available through October 31, 2001, or while supplies last through Apple?s retail stores and at participating retail outlets.

10.1 was the first upgrade for OS X and the pricing is made very clear. Apple had a promo for a short period where they could all get it for free "while supplies last" and standard upgrade pricing was $20. My point is still the same, Apple has been doing dirt cheap upgrades for well over a decade now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

fix-this!

PCs arent tablets, theres no need to have a touch orientated UI on a desktop computer. Save it for the tablets.

They could have easily put out Surface with Windows RT and left Windows 8 to be a regular Windows 7 style OS.

exactly, as has been said many times. w8 should of shipped with a touch screen version and one meant for desktops/laptops with no touch screen. the blending of the UI is whats killing this product.

Link to post
Share on other sites

threetonesun

Why didn't you bother to read the source I linked to? Which is Apple directly. I'll quote the relavent part for you:

10.1 was the first upgrade for OS X and the pricing is made very clear. Apple had a promo for a short period where they could all get it for free "while supplies last" and standard upgrade pricing was $20. My point is still the same, Apple has been doing dirt cheap upgrades for well over a decade now.

Did you read what I wrote? That was for 10.1, this trend didn't continue for future upgrades.

To clarify, Lion (released in 2011) was the first to offer a $29.99 universal upgrade.

Link to post
Share on other sites

AJerman

the bottom line is every other version of windows sucks. if w8 is another failure for microsoft that's strike 3. zune=failed, wp7=failed, w8=jury still out but not looking good. i honestly couldn't recommend anyone buy w8 if their content with w7.

How does every other version of Windows suck when Windows 7 is fairly unanimously considered to be their best OS ever, and pretty well received among fans of every different OS. Most OS X and Linux users I know would tell you that Windows 7 isn't bad, they just don't like Windows.

And what made you pick those random products to bunch them together and call them 3 strikes? An MP3 player, a phone, and a desktop OS? :rofl:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

+LogicalApex

Did you read what I wrote? That was for 10.1, this trend didn't continue for future upgrades.

To clarify, Lion (released in 2011) was the first to offer a $29.99 universal upgrade.

Understood better now, thanks.

But my point still remains the same. Why would MS price Windows close to OS X now when they failed to do so in the past?

Link to post
Share on other sites

fix-this!

How does every other version of Windows suck when Windows 7 is fairly unanimously considered to be their best OS ever, and pretty well received among fans of every different OS. Most OS X and Linux users I know would tell you that Windows 7 isn't bad, they just don't like Windows.

And what made you pick those random products to bunch them together and call them 3 strikes? An MP3 player, a phone, and a desktop OS? :rofl:

me sucked, xp great. vista sucked, w7 great... see the pattern. and zune, wp and w8 all have one thing in common, metro/modern.

Link to post
Share on other sites

threetonesun

Understood better now, thanks.

But my point still remains the same. Why would MS price Windows close to OS X now when they failed to do so in the past?

Because it's what people expect. The number of people out there who will pay $100+ for a OS upgrade without getting new hardware is dwindling. When your phone, game console, and toaster get free updates as long as they're supported, what's the real argument for charging $xxx to upgrade your PC?

This is especially true (for OSX and Windows) if there's no particularly good reason to upgrade, as is the case for most people running Windows 7, or was the case for a lot of people running Snow Leopard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.