Windows 8 Sales are actually Amazing - 40 million sold


Recommended Posts

Sure, but then the same people would start complaining that basically nothing changed and it's a lot of money for a 'Service Pack'

Not if they used Service Packs to bring real changes and not use them as glorified bug fixes.

Not if they used Service Packs to bring real changes and not use them as glorified bug fixes.

Do you know *why* Service Packs are all about bug fixes?

Because the first two times Microsoft added major features via a Service Pack (Windows NT Service Pack 4 and Windows 95's first Service Pack), the protests were long AND loud over it - in fact, Microsoft was accused by all and sundry of massive over-reach, and especially with NT Service Pack 4. It would be a LONG time after that before Microsoft would add major features via a Service Pack entirely BECAUSE of that hullabaloo.

Shh...don't bring in facts (which I've done before) as it won't be well received.

The next comment will be something along the lines of...well that was just a single source, most actually were very receptive.

You'll ask for a source, and they will instead get huffy and get ****ed off.

However since I've now posted that the next thing they'll do will be an attempt to ridicule me instead for having posted this...under the guise of hating me for being 'all-knowing' and such a 'braggart'.

However since I've posted that....well I'll let that response be a surprise. ;)

I think we've come around in a fitting circle; back in the XP, Vista, and Windows 7 days, people were all about Docks, Samurize, and Rainmeter, and wrote little programs to remove the Start button.

http://www.trickyways.com/2009/05/remove-start-button-in-windows-7-vista-xp-with-start-killer/

Now that the Start menu is gone and we've got Live tiles for real-time info, everyone's itching to get things back to the way they were because no one wants those sort of things.

i don't think you can judge this by how many are sold... for example, i bet gloves with 4 fingers and a thumb is the #1 seller at a glove store. when its basically your only choice, it will sell.

These are purchased upgrades, not licenses sold with computers. This means people are choosing (omg!) to install Windows 8 on PCs they already own. Amazing.

These are purchased upgrades, not licenses sold with computers. This means people are choosing (omg!) to install Windows 8 on PCs they already own. Amazing.

Can someone verify this to be 100% accurate from a non-biased source?

These are purchased upgrades, not licenses sold with computers. This means people are choosing (omg!) to install Windows 8 on PCs they already own. Amazing.

i missed the amazing part... what do you mean?

These are purchased upgrades, not licenses sold with computers. This means people are choosing (omg!) to install Windows 8 on PCs they already own. Amazing.

I can't find it anywhere to link it, but this includes ALL computers sold at stores that offers the FREE (in some cases $14.99) upgrade to windows 8 WHEN it was for general release. So in essence,it is still basically OEM sales, just with an upgrade option that gets counted.

Never has any Windows OS become more reliable on what the user has to install to enable or disable functionality, as Windows 8 does, by using third-party software.

Stardock, and all the other third-party app makers, must be laughing (all the way to the bank, probably) lol.

Can someone verify this to be 100% accurate from a non-biased source?

The only source is Microsoft, which you will trust when it's Windows 7, Vista, or earlier, but they must be lying if it's 8.
I can't find it anywhere to link it, but this includes ALL computers sold at stores that offers the FREE (in some cases $14.99) upgrade to windows 8 WHEN it was for general release. So in essence,it is still basically OEM sales, just with an upgrade option that gets counted.

So what if it does? That means that people are choosing Windows 8 on their newly purchased computer over what they'd had installed before. When Windows 7 had the same promotion, it was actually free, not $14.99.

But why the hell am I wasting my time typing this? You're going to twist this in your own warped little mind trying to make it look bad for Windows 8. Microsoft is the one laughing all the way to the bank. Can't wait for the next earnings call.

That means that people are choosing Windows 8 on their newly purchased computer over what they'd had installed before. When Windows 7 had the same promotion, it was actually free, not $14.99.

Hmm, I think not. :)

The only source is Microsoft, which you will trust when it's Windows 7, Vista, or earlier, but they must be lying if it's 8.

So what if it does? That means that people are choosing Windows 8 on their newly purchased computer over what they'd had installed before. When Windows 7 had the same promotion, it was actually free, not $14.99.

But why the hell am I wasting my time typing this? You're going to twist this in your own warped little mind trying to make it look bad for Windows 8. Microsoft is the one laughing all the way to the bank. Can't wait for the next earnings call.

you could be mistaking me for someone else, i have never dissed Windows 8. But having just said that i can say that i don't prefer it. The only thing i was mentioning is that the 40 million sold upgrades we mostly "sold" before launch. It doesn't actually say 40 million copies INSTALLED, only sold which 1/2 could still be not claimed by the purchaser. Sounds honestly like you seem to be offended at the comment. Are you selling trying windows 8 or something?

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/29/research-firm-says-windows-8-had-a-rocky-start/

The relevant bits...

Microsoft?s 40 million figure, in contrast, represents copies of Windows that Microsoft sells to all of its customers. That includes some consumers but more often it reflects sales to the hardware makers that install Windows on their machines, some of which have not yet been bought by consumers.

Basically, if the Dells and HPs of the world buy 40m licenses of Windows for new PCs, it is reported the same by Microsoft regardless of whether those 40m PCs are actually sold or are still languishing on shelves.

Unit sales of Windows PCs in retail stores in the United States fell 21 percent in the four-week period spanning Oct. 21 to Nov. 17, compared to the same period the previous year, according to the firm.

[...]

At the time, NPD said that unit sales of Windows PCs rose 49 percent during the first week Windows 7 was on sale, compared to the same period the previous year.

Never has any Windows OS become more reliable on what the user has to install to enable or disable functionality, as Windows 8 does, by using third-party software.

Stardock, and all the other third-party app makers, must be laughing (all the way to the bank, probably) lol.

Windows 8 isn't reliable on any app to run. I use it the same as I use Windows 7, and am just as productive, if not more now.

Windows 8 isn't reliable on any app to run. I use it the same as I use Windows 7, and am just as productive, if not more now.

Um yes it is, for a lot of us. How is Windows 8 more productive than Windows 7?

To me, this OS is the first OS that frustrates me to hell. Oh and it has been over a month so I did give it the "one month of use" rule you guys seem to require. In order to make this OS bearable, I need to resort to registry tweaks or a third party program like Start8 in order to get rid of those stupid stupid stupid invisible bars and menus. I am on the damn desktop, let me use the entire screen like I did before. Windows 8 Desktop mode does not work just like Windows 7 like you guys seem to say, or am I just imagining these bars? I had somebody complain that whenever they use Chrome, they always activate the Top - Left hot corner and wanted Windows 7 again. I said this in another thread, but when a client was over and we were working on photoshop, she activated them constantly. Do you realize how embarrassing it is when you are trying to work with a client and the OS keeps on being annoying? I activate them dozens of times throughout the day when I am working.

With the way things are, I do not see businesses moving to a new Windows OS ever after 7.

Again.....just give us some damn options.

  • Like 1

Windows 8 isn't reliable on any app to run. I use it the same as I use Windows 7, and am just as productive, if not more now.

Dot, until now, tablet-type applications were niche applications on niche devices - now, they are not only no longer niche applications, but aren't restricted to tablets; thus not so dismissable.

That's the REAL anger out in the general marketplace among the technical set - tablets are influencing the rest of computing, and they would rather it didn't.

Um yes it is, for a lot of us. How is Windows 8 more productive than Windows 7?

To me, this OS is the first OS that frustrates me to hell. Oh and it has been over a month so I did give it the "one month of use" rule you guys seem to require. In order to make this OS bearable, I need to resort to registry tweaks or a third party program like Start8 in order to get rid of those stupid stupid stupid invisible bars and menus. I am on the damn desktop, let me use the entire screen like I did before. Windows 8 Desktop mode does not work just like Windows 7 like you guys seem to say, or am I just imagining these bars? I had somebody complain that whenever they use Chrome, they always activate the Top - Left hot corner and wanted Windows 7 again. I said this in another thread, but when a client was over and we were working on photoshop, she activated them constantly. Do you realize how embarrassing it is when you are trying to work with a client and the OS keeps on being annoying? I activate them dozens of times throughout the day when I am working.

With the way things are, I do not see businesses moving to a new Windows OS ever after 7.

Again.....just give us some damn options.

Would you just listen to yourself here?

You knew (and knew cold) that Windows 8 was radically different than Windows 7, and especially in terms of the UX/UI - not a single person that uses (and likes) Windows 8 hid that.

Yet you insist on using it the exact same way you used Windows 7, even though you knew it was highly improbable if not impossible.

Why?

Dot, until now, tablet-type applications were niche applications on niche devices - now, they are not only no longer niche applications, but aren't restricted to tablets; thus not so dismissable.

That's the REAL anger out in the general marketplace among the technical set - tablets are influencing the rest of computing, and they would rather it didn't.

Would you just listen to yourself here?

You knew (and knew cold) that Windows 8 was radically different than Windows 7, and especially in terms of the UX/UI - not a single person that uses (and likes) Windows 8 hid that.

Yet you insist on using it the exact same way you used Windows 7, even though you knew it was highly improbable if not impossible.

Why?

No, I am saying that to Dot. When somebody complains like I do, he has said MANY MANY times "Windows 8 is used JUST LIKE Windows 7". And I am saying to everyone else that says "Give it a month and you will LOVE it".

I am sorry I am trying to use my computer the same way I have been for more than a decade. Unless Microsoft brings some things back, most businesses will feel the same. I already know a few businesses that have said that to me.

Um yes it is, for a lot of us. How is Windows 8 more productive than Windows 7?

What's changed in Windows 8, compared to Windows 7, that makes it unusable? I still have an app launcher, I still have apps, and I still have a file explorer. I still use Windows 8 with many of my old habits. Windows 8 did not require me to change a thing, and I still use it they way it was out of the box.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!