Microsoft only sold 1/3 of internal sales projections of Windows


Recommended Posts

To Microsoft, have you ever heard of common sense? Tell me, why should I upgrade when my computer does everything I want it to right now? I can see why you would want to go from 98 to XP, but 7 to 8 - there's not much point (unless you absolutely want Metro). I only use desktop PCs - I find tablets to slow to work with.

Huh...I could swear that I have 8 installed on my desktop and working just fine...otherwise this is one hell of a heavy non-portable tablet that uses a mouse and keyboard...

Story...singular...and it's Paul Thurrott. I've already explained this before. He cites no actual sources for the story, and just leaves it up to you to sort of assume he knows what he's talking about.

The problem is that PT hasn't actually really had any 'ins' at the company for quite some time now...due to the way he throws fits when he doesn't get all the insider access he wants.

In fact read the following excerpt from his update:

Those are simply my best guesses, not "facts," and certain debatable. But you can expect Microsoft to eventually release sales numbers for Windows 8, numbers that it will use to prove (or at least contort) that everything?s just fine.

That's my point...sour grapes...he admits what he says is just a guess, not a fact, and then goes on to say that Microsoft will eventually give numbers (because they haven't) to prove (or contort...because yeah PT is awesome and can use words like contort) that things are fine.

In other words (reading between the lines)...PT has no idea what is going on...is making a guess...and then states that Microsoft will lie...but claim it is truth in order to pat their own bruised egos.

Like I said...sour grapes.

Between the still-crappy economy, and the basically flat hardware requirements (compared to 7), what is there to drive either hardware OR OS upgrades - even assuming that Windows 8 were unchanged from Windows 7? (I'm citing Windows 8's critics, mind - my opinion on Windows 8 is known.)

Since when is a software upgrade determined by the hardware requirements? If it required more horsepower, then you wouldn't upgrade because your computer can't handle it, but if it's the same, then you would. Make sense? Unless you're counting new computer sales.

he admits what he says is just a guess, not a fact,

Really doesn't seem that way to me. He flat-out states as a fact:

Microsoft has not met is [sic] internal projections for Windows 8 sales.

Then he goes on to speculate about possible reasons for poor sales:

some possible explanations for what went wrong [...] Those are simply my best guesses

So it seems it's only the explanations (for poor sales) that are based on guesswork.

Really doesn't seem that way to me. He flat-out states as a fact:

Then he goes on to speculate about possible reasons for poor sales:

So it seems it's only the explanations (for poor sales) that are based on guesswork.

That's my point. If he actually had this 'source' he would know why. He wouldn't be guessing.

He's contradictory on things...because he no longer actually has 'ins' at MS. He hasn't for quite some time..at least not anyone who actually can provide him with good usable data.

So most of what he does is guess...and he often misses the mark. That was what my point was. He's guessing at the supposed cause of an event that cannot actually be confirmed to exist.

The whole post is supposition...and he usually does this shortly after MS denies him access to something he wants.

Snipped

That's my point. If he actually had this 'source' he would know why. He wouldn't be guessing.

Sorry. I can't follow you there. Like he says, the explanations are debatable, there's not necessarily a single correct explanation that Microsoft (and/or his source) would know about. As far as I can tell, you're essentially accusing him of lying when it comes to his assertion that

Sales of Windows 8 PCs are well below Microsoft?s internal projections and have been described inside the company as disappointing.
No offense, but Microsoft has internally determined that Windows 8 is selling worse than expected. [...] it's an attempt to figure out what happened. Because it did happen.

Since when is a software upgrade determined by the hardware requirements? If it required more horsepower, then you wouldn't upgrade because your computer can't handle it, but if it's the same, then you would. Make sense? Unless you're counting new computer sales.

I didn't say it was - I said that there was an assumption with Vista (which was largely untrue) that it required greater hardware than XP. That was largely untrue; however, there was indeed bad hardware released during the Vista era.

The hardware requirements for 7 and 8 are absolutely identical - however, 7 is familiar as it changed little in terms of UI/UX from XP or Vista; that is, in fact, the ONLY advantage that Windows 7 has. 7 is vanilla - which is enjoying a return to favorability. Notice that I did NOT say that Windows 7 is a "bad" OS - merely that it's a "vanilla" OS. Windows 8 isn't a bad OS, either - it's just that some folks, after having tried the fancier *flavor* of Windows, seek a return to "vanilla" (7).

Notice that I did NOT say that Windows 7 is a "bad" OS - merely that it's a "vanilla" OS. Windows 8 isn't a bad OS, either - it's just that some folks, after having tried the fancier *flavor* of Windows, seek a return to "vanilla" (7).

If I am understanding you correctly, you're calling Windows 8 fancier, I however find it the opposite, I see it as flat, plain and boring

Not even as fancy as vanilla.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • I've been on Deezer for over a decade, but glad that Tidal joined them in fighting AI slop. Can't stand such takes as Spotify's: "Spotify's CEO recently pushed back against listeners who call AI music "slop," urging people to stop using the term and instead embrace the creative potential of AI music."
    • “Could” … in the IS the healthcare is run by insurance companies that make indecent profits denying basic treatments to people that are paying money for nothing. Besides, where are all the Trump epigones who were stating that the tariffs were going to paid by foreign companies and not the US citizens? …
    • Microsoft Teams gets smarter at spotting sneaky meeting bots by Usama Jawad Microsoft Teams is set to receive a couple of new features soon, including a dedicated Recap app and a rather controversial location tracking functionality. The Redmond tech giant has also explained how it has made online communication and collaboration a lot more performant this year. Now, the company has detailed more secure bot admission mechanisms, as first reported by us in March 2026, and now available in Teams. As the use of AI has expanded across enterprise environments, Microsoft has begun allowing users to integrate bots into their meetings for various tasks, such as note-taking. While this has a tangible productivity benefit for users, Microsoft has highlighted how misconfiguration has allowed bots to join meetings that they shouldn't. This has created security and privacy risks, which Microsoft is now combating using a new Teams admin policy that allows organizers to control how external bots access meetings. Admins can leverage a policy called Manage external bots and their access to meetings. The default configuration is "When detected, require approval before joining", which places detected bots in a lobby before they are explicitly admitted into the meeting. The other option disables the experience. Microsoft has also requested admins to only allow organizers and co-organizers to manage access to a meeting, so that other people don't randomly allow bots into meetings. Teams will now be able to leverage infrastructure signals to intelligently detect and distinguish between bots and humans. Microsoft will soon also trial a registration experience for independent software vendors (ISVs) to build a system that registers a bot with Microsoft, so it is marked as a "known" bot. Teams will also categorize bots as trusted and suspected threats so that organizers can quickly identify which bots they want to allow into a meeting. Additional safeguards to block accidental admission of a bot into a meeting include: No one-click Admit option for identified bots Confirmation prompts when admitting participants that include bots Warnings when organizers choose Admit all, and bots are included Microsoft has begun rolling out this experience, and it will be retiring the current CAPTCHA verification implementation. In the future, the company plans to roll out new capabilities like allow-lists, organization-wide policies, admin reports, audit logs, and more granular controls.
    • With the current hardware prices Microsoft should lift the restriction. Then if you have the correct TPM then allow you to use X feature, if you don't have the correct TPM then don't but still actually let you run windows. 11. With a disclaimer during install that X features would be unavailable.
    • It's good for recycling of course. But commence inflation of a second hand RAM bubble and price gouging on DDR 4 inventory in 3... 2... 1...
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      538
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      266
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      98
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!