Thursday, February 1st 2018

Windows 10 Finally Surpasses Windows 7 in Global Market Share - StatCounter

According to web analytics company StatCounter, January 2018 was the year of the OS world's "flippening" - where Windows 10 finally surpassed the old, trusty Windows 7 in users' systems. According to the firm, Windows 10 in January was present in 42.78% of the worldwide desktop market share, just a hair above Windows 7's 41.86%. Windows 8.1 stands as the ugly duckling, with only 8.72 percent of the market still holding on to that OS.

Now, granted, one analytics company does not a trend make; there are a myriad of factors that might explain discrepancies between different companies' estimates. however, the fact remains that this is the first time Windows 10 is reported to have surpassed Windows 7 in terms of pure number of live systems. Also to take into account is that even in analytics firms that don't display these results, Windows 10 is clearly gaining traction against Windows 7 - one needs only look at the trendlines for both OSes on NetMarketShare, for instance, to see that there's a clear, positive momentum for WIndows 10 when compared to Windows 7. It's only a matter of time until all firms report the same, really. Still, this news comes years later than what Microsoft had hoped for with Windows 10; adoption of the OS hasn't been quite as predicted by the company. Still, Microsoft's ongoing work on the software, clear roadmap and support efforts seem to be paying off.
Sources: Stat Counter, NetMarketShare, via TechSpot
Add your own comment

62 Comments on Windows 10 Finally Surpasses Windows 7 in Global Market Share - StatCounter

Semi-Retired Folder
navair2 said:
The argument I have is with their business model. It leads by the nose, and we're all supposed to just go along with it. :respect:
I can't certainly agree with that, and a large part of their ability to get away with the "this is how it is, if you don't like it too bad" method of doing business is the fact that there is no real competition. I mean, OSX is the next most likely competitor, but the way Apple does business is worse than Microsoft...

navair2 said:
With Win 8 or 8.1, I saw no real advancements over 7 in terms of usability ( quite the contrary ), only a corporation trying an experiment with their customer base. With Win 10, I see them trying to backpedal on some of the features and functionality that said customer base balked at, and then offering them something "new" as a compromise...but STILL designed to get my money before I am convinced they should get it. ;)
There were definitely advancements in Windows 8/8.1. After using them for an extended period of time, going back to Windows 7 really made Windows 7 feel outdated. Very similar to going back to XP after using 7 for a long while. The biggest issue with 8/8.1 was the start screen, and it was terrible. This was during their "we wan't every platform to look uniform" phase. Where they were betting big on Windows phones(which failed hard) and Windows Tablets(which didn't fail but didn't exactly explode in popularity either) really taking off. Luckily they came to their senses with Windows 10 and introduces a tablet mode instead. But even still, the option was there in 8/8.1 to use the Windows 7, Windows XP, or Windows 98 start menus if you wanted. It takes all of about a minute to switch over(maybe a little longer if you have shit internet).

Now the biggest gripe I have with Windows 10 is the split settings/control panel. They need to use one or the other, not put half the system settings in one and half in the other. I understand why this is the case, as the new Settings area is evolving and each update more things get moved there, until eventually everything will be there. But it is annoying, and definitely annoying to have to figure out which settings have been switched over to the new interface after each major build release. But that's really a minor issue, that doesn't really kill day to day use. I'm not in changing system settings every day. Most are set once and never mess with them again.

And it isn't like Windows 7 wasn't guilty of similar crap. I remember going from XP to Vista then Windows 7 and absolutely hating the fact that they added the Network and Sharing Center. 99% of the time I'm going in there, it is to adjust or check the network adapter settings. In XP, you used to be able to get to these setting directly from right clicking the network icon in the tray. With Vista/7 you now have to go to network and sharing center first, then go to the network adapter settings. It was, and still is, so annoying.

But, you get used to it, just like you get used to the new Settings menu in Windows 10.

navair2 said:
Would I upgrade from Win 7 to something new? Maybe...but give me something with the flexibility and options I grew used to with 98SE, Xp, and 7 instead of limiting me from doing the "power user" stuff I got used to doing. Just navigating the interface is a frustrating enough learning curve.
I'm not sure what you mean here. I haven't really found anything in Windows 10 that makes it less flexible than 7. I also haven't found any "power user" stuff that I was able to do in 7 that I can't do in 10. Maybe with the exception being turning off automatic windows updates. But even then, they've implemented several options for updates that definitely make things better.

I'm intersted in what "power user" things aren't you able to do in 10 that you could in 7?
Posted on Reply
navair2 <------ Read the comments section...interesting stuff.

Again, not to beat this to death, but I'm sure there are plenty of reasons I should stick to Win 7 when it comes to a Microsoft OS. Things that were not there in Win 7, are automatically there in Win 10. Features that have to be disabled in 10, were never there or did not have to be disabled, in 7.

I don't take kindly to having a corporation spy on me, either:

Do a search for all the bad things in Win 10 that Microsoft "slipped in" and when confronted by them, MS backpedaled yet again and took them out by default. I'm sure some of the articles are still floating around on the net somewhere.

As for what "power user" things I can do that Win 10 doesn't allow me to do, for now I don't have a comprehensive list and will have to do some research on things I used to use that are now gone or are restricted / limited by default. Too many articles in the past for me to remember. Please keep in mind that I never bought or had much occasion to use Win 10 ( and undoubtedly this will get me comments like, "don't bash what you don't know" , etc. ) , as what little experience with it frustrated me to no end, just trying to get things done that were a "natural" for me to do in 7.

As it stands, I can tell that you like ( and are used to ) 10, but I'll stay out of it as long as I can. I like what I have, and I'm tired of MS putting me on a forced learning curve every time they want me to upgrade. They seem to have most everyone convinced that their OS is the best, and I fell off that train ages ago. Yes, Windows is a convenient standard, but I want options other than running to MS whenever I want something. I'm done drinking their "kool-aid".

Please keep in mind: I'm not invalidating anything you've stated, and I'm definitely NOT arguing that Win 7 didn't have its "growing pains" either. But it's the first OS since Win 95 that I actually loved, right out of the box, and I'm not letting it go just because the entire rest of the world is finally convinced that Win 10 is better than that junk they called Win 8. It looks the same to me. :D

With respect, further discussion of this seems unproductive, at least in my estimation. If and when I decide to upgrade to yet another Microsoft OS, I will. Until then, there's no reason ( yet ) for me to leave Win 7...and all the threats of cutting off future support only prove ( from my perspective ) that Micro$oft is leading everyone around by the nose and they always have. As I see it, they get people dependent on them, and then use that dependency to further it. I've stood back and watched them do it for 3 decades now, and I'm tired of it.

From now on, I vote with my wallet. ;)

At the end of all this discussion, the point I'm trying to get across ( and seem to be failing at ) is that Microsoft has been making billions off people with a careful strategy of leading them into using their products, and then using them as guinea pigs to further experiments that unsuspecting people don't realize is under the hood when they install them. If that isn't reason enough to put your own personal brakes on with respect to purchasing new software from them, I'm not sure how to convince people that they ultimately cannot be trusted with their devices.

I want an OS that doesn't try to spy on me by default. I want features that make my user experience "better" ( in whose estimation? I'll decide that, thank ) that I have to enable, not disable. I want Microsoft to stop gathering intel on me, whether its for advertising, or for the government. I want to do business with a company that gives me what I want ( and doesn't use their market leverage to try and force me to use their products, and only their products ), not a company that chides me for not jumping on their "bandwagon". I want Microsoft to stop being a near-monopoly and getting away with it. I hope this is clear enough, good sir. :)

Best wishes, and may God bless you.
Posted on Reply
John Naylor
moob said:
Not only is it just Steam so it should be taken with a truckload of salt, but it's Steam as a result of the influx of Chinese players from PUBG.
Given the title "Windows 10 Finally Surpasses Windows 7 in Global Market Share", why is an influx of Chinese players in any way significant ?
Posted on Reply
Need to start using xubuntu or something else in flash drive or 3rd os win7 is better there are not installed these untrusty updates. or some refurbished pc whit windows 7.
Posted on Reply
Tomorrow said:
What exactly is preventing new hardware from running Win7 ?
Not much technically, they do it artificially (purposelly), it could all be supported, only with some specific new features not available.
Posted on Reply
RuskiSnajper said:
Not much technically, they do it artificially (purposelly), it could all be supported, only with some specific new features not available.
+1 agreed in full.:cool:

"What exactly is preventing new hardware from running Win7 ?"

Nothing. Zip, zilch, nada, rien. MS does it to keep you riding their "train", as I see it.

By comparison, I know from experience ( because I use it occasionally ) that Linux Mint supports everything, or at least tries to. Why? Because its written by people who want it to work on everything, IMO. The main problem with Linux ( and anything outside the Windows OS platform ), is software support. A little history as I understand it ( for those who were not "there"...I learned this in college during the '90's from my then-60+ year old instructor who worked for companies like Hewlett Packard and Motorola ):

1) During the early '80's, IBM built the IBM PC in response to Apple's business inroads.
2) MS partnered with IBM to license DOS on every machine they sold.
3) IBM's PC used mostly off-the-shelf components to build it, AND they published some, most or all of the schematics for it in the first few issues of PC Magazine ( unconfirmed ).
4) " Taiwan Joe" ( that was my instructor's nickname for the electronics manufacturing sector in Taiwan ( Formosa )) got hold of the schematics and mass produced the "IBM compatible", and everyone jumped on board...making Microsoft millions by the end of the decade.
5) Competition was fierce, especially in the late 80's and early 90's, between all the IBM compatible makers starting up...Magnavox, Compaq, Dell, Gateway, Tandy ( Radio Shack ) and countless local shops all getting their components from the same group of manufacturers.
6) During the 90's, the home PC market literally exploded...but there was only one established and reliable source for operating systems: Microsoft. Oh, there were others...Digital Research hung in there as best they could, and Apple always made money from their machines. But there were few others who tried and succeeded. This made Microsoft even more money, because the vast number of "IBM Clones" all needed ( or worked best with ) their OS. They stayed on top of things, and I admire them for cornering the market. To me, they established a standard when one was really needed.
7) Up until 1995, Windows was always a "shell" that loaded on top of DOS in memory as a user interface ( I think they got their idea from Apple, because I remember seeing "windows" on the Macintosh Plus in 1988-ish ). After Win95, it became a full-fledged operating system...sort of. :confused: I won't get into it, because I'm not sure if I know all the relevant facts. :fear:
8) Now we find ourselves where we are after almost 3 decades of Windows dominance ( and well over 3 decades if you include MS-DOS ), and nobody has come along to seriously challenge it in look and "feel" except Linux Mint ( at least in my mind ) and Apple's OS variations. If there is anything else outside of the Unix-based Linux kernel and Apple's OSX and variants in the consumer market, I'm not really aware of them.

So, after that long-winded bit of nostalgia and partial editorial ( whew! ), I'm not surprised that it has taken this long for Win 10 ( which was released to much fanfare by MS, and little to no real enthusiasm on the part of mainstream PC users...especially enthusiasts and power users, my impression of it at least ) has finally garnered enough user base to bump up to it's place among the OS's.

Why am I not surprised? :shadedshu:

Because like any of Microsoft's previous OS's, they gradually phased out the older ones and very nearly forced new computer buyers to adopt their newer edition(s) of their OS; and Win 10 is just the latest in a long line that started with Win95, IMO.


Here's the real problem from my point of view:

Unlike older OS's, Win 8 was even less popular than Xp on release...umm, maybe, and we're not talking about Vista :rolleyes:. Because of this, MS then backpedaled and introduced 8.1 to smooth over the upset customer base, all the while developing Win 10 as a compromise between 7 and 8. Next, in order to keep the daisy chain going, they very nearly forced their next OS upon millions of computers to overcome the built-in resistance of people who inherently want to keep that which they are used to, or like and don't want to change, and almost succeeded in soft-hijacking the lot of us.

What they don't want is for people to settle in for a long winter's nap of game playing and software use, only to stop buying OS's every 3 years or so. <---- Again, opinion, but I think I have historical weight on my side with my observations.

There it is. My "two cents" and my impressions of Microsoft's business model for the past 3.5 decades. Dear reader, there's a reason MS went from a small suite ( or was it a, that was Apple ) in the early 80's to a campus with satellite locations's called marketplace dominance, and buying / forcing out your competition along the way. It also doesn't hurt to establish ones' self as THE defacto standard in all things home PC. :D

Ya gotta love capitalism! :laugh:
Posted on Reply
I guess it's too optimistic to hope for true competition. However i do see one alternative: a software company could buy massive number of licenes from MS with the only requirement being that they have to use windows kernel and windows tools to build their customized version of it. Hell i would even pay for it if it did happen and someone build a better OS from ground up aimed at power users/gamers without telemetry, no UWP apps, no Store, no Cortana and no additional bloat. As apposed to "free" version of Win10.
Posted on Reply
10 is ok on a tablet for reading pdf, watching videos and calculator is at last good.
But hawing loots off software problems from transferring from 8.1 bing.
Also no trust in ms.
Posted on Reply
this is a joke right? LOL
it would be 1% if they were not bundling it.
Microsoft simply does not get it.
Posted on Reply
newtekie1 said:
Yep, I've installed Windows 7 on few Kaby Lake systems. There is an easy hack to bypass the Windows Update block, and another to let you install the necessary video drivers to use the Intel iGPU(since these were business systems and had no need for a dedicated GPU).
I've done this with about half of the Ryzen systems I've built. Microsoft's silly notions and fear-mongering are not stopping people from using their preferred OS. What's it's doing is pissing people off and making them seem sneaky, underhanded and untrustworthy. Way to go Microsoft.

Tomorrow said:
The only Win10 edition that comes close is Enterprise LTSC.
You mean LTSB(Long Term Service Branch)?
Posted on Reply
lexluthermiester said:
You mean LTSB(Long Term Service Branch)?
No. They use both LTSC and LTSB to describe it. Not sure wich one is the preffered.
Posted on Reply
Tomorrow said:
No. They use both LTSC and LTSB to describe it. Not sure which one is the preferred.
Ah, another product name change. Wish they'd quit acting like kids with ADD. I have an LTSB build ISO though. Been playing around with it. If it'll run the way I want it too, I might run it full time. Not there yet though.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment