Windows 8 adoption rate almost at a standstill, far behind Windows 7

[MorganX]

I do not remember having hot corners in Windows 7 with dual screens......

Hot corners are to accommodate the Charms Bar and App Bar which were not in Windows 7. Windows 8 has these to accommodate tablets. The desktop OS has them, because Windows 8 has them to accommodate tablets and MS has chosen to shoehorn all tablet design elements into the desktop OS. I have no problem with that, I have a problem with them doing it without compromise or options taking how people work on a desktop in to consideration.

These were just bad decisions which is why Sinofsky is gone, and IMO, Ballmer should be. He's a great guy for Shareholders, but not as a visionary of a technology company. He's no Bill Gates in that area.

I don't think for one minute Microsoft believes desktop computing is dead. It's their foundation they just let bad leaders drive them into a mess. Office is still the most profitable unit for MS and subsidizes all the other things MS does, including Xbox. Very little is actually "profitable" in and of itself.

They just followed a bad plan to attack the tablet market. They have a slim chance to recover. If Windows 9 is the same, from an app and interoperability standpoint, they're done there.

Keep in mind, both Surface's main selling point is how cool they turn in to a portable desktop with neat kickstand and keyboard cover.

[Dot Matrix]

They just followed a bad plan to attack the tablet market. They have a slim chance to recover. If Windows 9 is the same, from an app and interoperability standpoint, they're done there.

Keep in mind, both Surface's main selling point is how cool they turn in to a portable desktop with neat kickstand and keyboard cover.

There's nothing "bad" about, they just need to work on improving it. Which is exactly what you'll see in Windows 9.

[MorganX]

There's nothing "bad" about,

That is subjective.

One could say the intense and unrelenting negativity would make it bad, the consumer failure of the Surface RT thus far, would make it bad, not clearly positioning the Surface RT (is it for consumers, or business, a tablet, a hybrid) as bad.

Bad does not mean failure, that remains to be seen. But given Microsoft's resources, "I" call it bad. Things should have gone much smoother, and been much more transparent, and elicited much more consumer feedback as to what they wanted.

[Andre S. Veteran]

There is no more long term viability in the point and click desktop. None.

I would agree if Microsoft was providing a replacement for it, but the Modern UI cannot replace the desktop. It does not run the plethora of applications for desktop on which the world currently relies, and it is not designed to support productivity applications either. Microsoft's own major applications, on which they themselves rely to build their own products, i.e. Office and Visual Studio, are desktop applications designed for a keyboard and a mouse.

That Microsoft would drop the desktop is a ludicrous idea; they would have to drop support for their own products and they could not even develop their own software anymore, unless using previous versions of Windows.

There's a need for a touch-oriented mobile UI, designed for casual use and information consumption, and there's a need for a productivity UI with high-precision, high-performance input devices. I don't really care that this UI be identical to the Windows 7 desktop or not, but "Modern UI" doesn't fit the bill at all.

[Order_66]

these are not facts.these are stats from webpages this company tracks. they are still tracking sites that are irrelevant today that were popular years ago

They only seem to be called "irrelevant" when someones pride is at stake.

[+Fahim S. MVC]

Maybe too many users believe forums, blogs and Websites, today? I can't remember that Vista or Win 7 got this Kind of bad advertisement.

About the price. 40$ + 200$ =240$/2=120$, in my opinion MS would sell more OS for 120$ over the complete sell cycle.

(I upgraded to Win 8, because of a new PC that require a 64 bit OS, my old win 7 was 32bit. I am an "isolated case" ;) )

Windows 7 not but Vista got a real bad press even if it did run well on a decently specced machine. And Vista didn't change anything (in fact it introduced a few things that people prefer Windows 7 over their equivalents in Windows 8 - such as the Aero Glass UI).

On another note, I got to spend some time with a few Microsoft folk this week, admittedly from the Server group, but they really liked Windows 8, and even went as far ass saying some design decisions seemed odd with Mouse & Keyboard but made a whole lot of sense with touch. What I got from this (although it is not what they said) was they see the majority of users on hybrid portable devices (not necessarily tablets) and to a degree they are right - the majority of users today are laptop users and us desktop power users are only a small part of the pie. But then even MacOSX works better with a touchpad these days than a mouse.

[TheLegendOfMart]

Give it a few years, and you'll see why Microsoft changed. It takes more time than 5 months. There is no more long term viability in the point and click desktop. None. To *not* change would have been the more insane idea, especially after the kickback Microsoft got from Windows 7 powered tablets and devices, or are you forgetting that?

There was nothing stopping them having a Windows 8 Tablet Edition but no they went full retard and merged it with their desktop OS just so they can claim to have parity between phone, tablet and desktop.

[+Fahim S. MVC]

There was nothing stopping them having a Windows 8 Tablet Edition but no they went full retard and merged it with their desktop OS just so they can claim to have parity between phone, tablet and desktop.

Were they supposed to release a version for every in between form-factor?

Windows 8 desktop edition

Windows 8 tablet edition

Windows 8 desktop with touch screen edition

Windows 8 dockable tablet edition

Windows 8 convertible laptop edition

Windows 8 traditional laptop edition

And on it goes.... It just wouldn't work! And hence their strategy is to merge these into one and take the pain now- a very deliberate strategy on their part.

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

they see the majority of users on hybrid portable devices (not necessarily tablets) and to a degree they are right - the majority of users today are laptop users and us desktop power users are only a small part of the pie. But then even MacOSX works better with a touchpad these days than a mouse.

Touchpads still demand a different UI than touchscreens. In my experience W8(Metro) actually works far better with a mouse than with a touchpad due to the increased distances that the mouse cursor has to travel.

[+Fahim S. MVC]

Touchpads still demand a different UI than touchscreens. In my experience W8(Metro) actually works far better with a mouse than with a touchpad due to the increased distances that the mouse cursor has to travel.

That wasn't really my point. My point being while power users like us use desktop PCs, the majority of "normal people" use a laptop as their primary computing experience. Over time more of these will include touch capable hardware and therefore those people whose primary computing experience is on a traditional desktop machine will be the outliers.

[webeagle12]

There was nothing stopping them having a Windows 8 Tablet Edition but no they went full retard and merged it with their desktop OS just so they can claim to have parity between phone, tablet and desktop.

best answer ever :)

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

That wasn't really my point. My point being while power users like us use desktop PCs, the majority of "normal people" use a laptop as their primary computing experience. Over time more of these will include touch capable hardware and therefore those people whose primary computing experience is on a traditional desktop machine will be the outliers.

Now I understand what you're saying. Thanks for the explanation! :)

[MorganX]

Were they supposed to release a version for every in between form-factor?

Windows 8 desktop edition

Windows 8 tablet edition

Windows 8 desktop with touch screen edition

Windows 8 dockable tablet edition

Windows 8 convertible laptop edition

Windows 8 traditional laptop edition

And on it goes.... It just wouldn't work! And hence their strategy is to merge these into one and take the pain now- a very deliberate strategy on their part.

lol, have you ever seen all the VL Editions? Seriously through, they would only need touch and non-touch. I actually think that would be a bad idea though. Modern UI is throughout control panels, though not all. I think an option to boot to desktop, and maybe, maybe and GPO to enable the start button, and everybody would be happy. I would only enable the Start Menu to avoid Modern UI search, but honestly, I prefer Start8 to the Windows 7 desktop. I like the Metroness of it and it's options.

[TheLegendOfMart]

Were they supposed to release a version for every in between form-factor?

Windows 8 desktop edition

Windows 8 tablet edition

Windows 8 desktop with touch screen edition

Windows 8 dockable tablet edition

Windows 8 convertible laptop edition

Windows 8 traditional laptop edition

And on it goes.... It just wouldn't work! And hence their strategy is to merge these into one and take the pain now- a very deliberate strategy on their part.

Wat?

All they needed is a Windows 8 Tablet Edition to cover ALL TYPES OF TOUCH SCREENS alongside their Windows 8, 8 Pro and 8 Enterprise Editions.

Tablets will never take over from Desktops, with a Desktop you can buy cheap parts, Tablets with everything integrated are stupid expensive, so I'm not sure why it is smart to sacrifice their traditional desktop users.

[MorganX]

That wasn't really my point. My point being while power users like us use desktop PCs, the majority of "normal people" use a laptop as their primary computing experience. Over time more of these will include touch capable hardware and therefore those people whose primary computing experience is on a traditional desktop machine will be the outliers.

I just think this is further off that MS believes. There's the physical aspects. People don't like carrying things around. They'd rather sit at home and work, and carry much lighter devices on move. Most workers, sit. It's a small percentage that are allocated laptops, tablets, and even smartphones.

It's good they're preparing for that eventuality whenever it occurs. They really should have been more transparent as to pre-warning their direction, I think taken more end user input, and provided bridging options (GPO for Start Page, and possibly Start Menu).

As it is today, the Modern UI's inability to manage long lists and in-place context actions will prevent it from ever supplanting corporate desktop IMO. These things aren't that difficult to overcome, it'll be interesting to see what Blue and 9 bring.

[ATLien_0]

The problem is that Windows 7 is too good of an OS right now, from a consumer (not us Neowin users) there is very little reason to upgrade unless you are running a touch based system. Not saying Win 8 doesn't have great new features, but people resist change at all costs

[Andre S. Veteran]

As it is today, the Modern UI's inability to manage long lists and in-place context actions will prevent it from ever supplanting corporate desktop IMO. These things aren't that difficult to overcome, it'll be interesting to see what Blue and 9 bring.

It's more fundamental than that. Low information density, support for only a few visible apps at a time, abstracting away the file system, propensity to hide information (i.e. charms), use of off-screen area, poor integration with the desktop + no support for desktop apps, this is all great for a mobile touch-UI device and terrible for productivity and corporate use.

My best theory for Windows 8 is that they never expected the business to use it anyway, since Windows 7 was so good, so they took this calculated risk to make a ridiculously consumer-oriented Windows. I'm not sure what they intend to do with Windows 9 but unless they come back to their senses it's going to be a disaster for the entire industry, nevermind Microsoft.

[ctrl_alt_delete]

Hot corners are to accommodate the Charms Bar and App Bar which were not in Windows 7. Windows 8 has these to accommodate tablets. The desktop OS has them, because Windows 8 has them to accommodate tablets and MS has chosen to shoehorn all tablet design elements into the desktop OS. I have no problem with that, I have a problem with them doing it without compromise or options taking how people work on a desktop in to consideration.

These were just bad decisions which is why Sinofsky is gone, and IMO, Ballmer should be. He's a great guy for Shareholders, but not as a visionary of a technology company. He's no Bill Gates in that area.

I don't think for one minute Microsoft believes desktop computing is dead. It's their foundation they just let bad leaders drive them into a mess. Office is still the most profitable unit for MS and subsidizes all the other things MS does, including Xbox. Very little is actually "profitable" in and of itself.

They just followed a bad plan to attack the tablet market. They have a slim chance to recover. If Windows 9 is the same, from an app and interoperability standpoint, they're done there.

Keep in mind, both Surface's main selling point is how cool they turn in to a portable desktop with neat kickstand and keyboard cover.

you are very wrong about the financials side of things. almost unit/department in Microsoft are practically self sufficient (aside from the online division). Microsoft is not like google who makes about 90% of their profits from advertising, and their not like apple who makes roughly 60-70% of their profits from iphones and ipads.

office division makes huge profits

windows division makes huge profits too

but you should also know that server and tools make huge profits too

Microsoft Entertainment and devices division is also self sufficient making profits maybe not as much as the other divisions but they're making profits.

what i'm saying is their profits are more diversified throughout the Microsoft unlike other company's out there. so no, office doesn't subsidize the rest of the company.

[notchinese]

Comparing growth rate to Vista is idiotic. Comparing hard numbers would be a better comparison

[siah1214]

I guess everyone missed the fact that there are millions more computers on the market now than there were when Vista came out, or Windows 7. Yes, the adoption rate of Windows 8 may be slower than 7. 7 was an awesome OS and most people just bought computers in the last few years and don't feel the need to get new ones, however I'm betting there's more 8 computers in the wild now, than there Vista computers 5 months after release.

The % uptake may be slower, but that's irrelevant to the actual number of PCs running the OS.

Anyway, there's lies, damned lies, and statistics.

[Vinny4]

*BIG YAWN* to this topic.

[Arceles]

I guess everyone missed the fact that there are millions more computers on the market now than there were when Vista came out, or Windows 7. Yes, the adoption rate of Windows 8 may be slower than 7. 7 was an awesome OS and most people just bought computers in the last few years and don't feel the need to get new ones, however I'm betting there's more 8 computers in the wild now, than there Vista computers 5 months after release.

The % uptake may be slower, but that's irrelevant to the actual number of PCs running the OS.

Anyway, there's lies, damned lies, and statistics.

I guess everyone missed the fact that there are millions more computers on the market now than there were when Vista came out, or Windows 7. Yes, the adoption rate of Windows 8 may be slower than 7. 7 was an awesome OS and most people just bought computers in the last few years and don't feel the need to get new ones, however I'm betting there's more 8 computers in the wild now, than there Vista computers 5 months after release.

The % uptake may be slower, but that's irrelevant to the actual number of PCs running the OS.

Anyway, there's lies, damned lies, and statistics.

Nop, what has been growing in the way you are thinking are mobile devices, not computers, hence microsoft releasing a "mobile" OS. Computers unfortunately haven't grown much lately due many handheld devices, with android, BB OS and iOS taking almost all the Pie (and microsoft wants money from this pie)

[f0rk_b0mb]

You can't really correct anything with Windows 9 because this was completely wrong IDEA on how to move Windows forward and it's now too late..

Now they have to push Metro and everything they imagined because it's the only thing they can do.. so I don't see how Windows 9 can fix anything..

Actually they are saying these days that Windows 9 might completely remove desktop.. now that would be even more insane idea.

Having the tablet and desktop OS in one is terrible idea that was executed even worse. There's a reason why Balmer himself said "This was the riskiest move Microsoft made pretty much ever".. Well, it has failed. The whole strategy is beyond stupid.

They should have pushed Metro OS/Surface separately, desktop Windows improved and not completely turned upside down.

But I can't say I care too much about them.. Microsoft has become largely irrelevant in the future of computing and is growing more so with every passing month.

Agreed. I can't see myself using Windows 20-30 years from now.

[Coolicer]

and microsoft wants money from this pie

I would say, the investors want Microsoft to head into the tablet space. They don't care at all how well Microsoft is doing in the Server/Desktop market,

they see people with iPads and Android ... erm Tabs/Nexuses and then ask why Microsoft doesn't go there, because somehow you're irrelevant if you're

not in that market (once again disregarding the other, strong, markets).

So Microsoft tried to do something new by giving people tablets with "real"* ** operating systems on them. And now they only get flak for it.

* - Yes, Windows RT isn't very much a full OS experience, but it is a "real" OS.

** - Real as in it has a Desktop and is something a lot of people use daily.

Oh and I really like Windows 8 even though a lot of things are quite rough, not buggy but not usable enough.

[MorganX]

you are very wrong about the financials side of things. almost unit/department in Microsoft are practically self sufficient (aside from the online division). Microsoft is not like google who makes about 90% of their profits from advertising, and their not like apple who makes roughly 60-70% of their profits from iphones and ipads.

office division makes huge profits

windows division makes huge profits too

but you should also know that server and tools make huge profits too

Microsoft Entertainment and devices division is also self sufficient making profits maybe not as much as the other divisions but they're making profits.

what i'm saying is their profits are more diversified throughout the Microsoft unlike other company's out there. so no, office doesn't subsidize the rest of the company.

I hear what you're saying about being self-sufficient. That doesn't necessarily mean profitable. You can ruin a large company with billions in sales simply by eroding the true profit margin.

I'll wait for the latest financials, but I don't think the Entertainment division is actually in the black anymore. Could be wrong. But Office is still the cash cow. In fact, for Enterprise Agreements, the cost of the OS licenses is negligible. For an organization with a few thousand users Windows licenses can be counted in tens to hundreds of thousands. Enterprise Cals (which allow access to all those great servers and apps which is what actually makes them profitable) hundreds of thousands. Office, can get into the millions.

That's about 2-3k users. Now apply that to large organizations and Federal Government where you're looking at 50k+ users. You're probably right if you throw in the Cals. But I stand by everything pales in comparison to Office, and I don't know how thin the profit margins are in the other groups.

The notion of killing off the enterprise desktop and Office profit as well as Enterprise CALs is a silly one. The tablet initiative is for the parallel emerging market of mobility.