Microsoft catches up to Apple

The current numbers being quoted is that Vista is on about 5% of desktops.
That is about the size of the Apple installed base.
Like Apple, Vista has no significant market share outside the U.S.
Like Apple, the Vista OS is not usable for most buisnesses (Apple because it
is Apple and Vista because it is not compatible with the custom data base
programs many businesses run on).
Like the Apple OS Vista does not stably scale across large networks.
Just as there is no rational basis to choose an Apple computer there is no
rational basis to choose a computer running Vista.
Microsoft has finally done it!

Haha, I agree. I had Vista Ultimate installed and after a few weeks I went
back to XP Pro. I left Vista intact and dual-boot to XP. Hopefully after
Vista SP1 comes out it will be more usable. I will give it another shot
then.

--
Regards,

Martin X.
Microsoft Certified Systems Administrator: Messaging
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

"flambe" <> wrote in message
news:uu%Yi.2246$...
The current numbers being quoted is that Vista is on about 5% of desktops.
That is about the size of the Apple installed base.
Like Apple, Vista has no significant market share outside the U.S.
Like Apple, the Vista OS is not usable for most buisnesses (Apple because it
is Apple and Vista because it is not compatible with the custom data base
programs many businesses run on).
Like the Apple OS Vista does not stably scale across large networks.
Just as there is no rational basis to choose an Apple computer there is no
rational basis to choose a computer running Vista.
Microsoft has finally done it!

Windows Vista is on 90 million systems
Mac OS X is on 25 million systems
Mac OS X Leopard is on 2 million systems
Windows is on 1 billion systems
--
Andre
Blog: http://adacosta.spaces.live.com
My Vista Quickstart Guide:
http://adacosta.spaces.live.com/blog...3DB!9709.entry
"flambe" <> wrote in message
news:uu%Yi.2246$...
> The current numbers being quoted is that Vista is on about 5% of desktops.
> That is about the size of the Apple installed base.
> Like Apple, Vista has no significant market share outside the U.S.
> Like Apple, the Vista OS is not usable for most buisnesses (Apple because
> it is Apple and Vista because it is not compatible with the custom data
> base programs many businesses run on).
> Like the Apple OS Vista does not stably scale across large networks.
> Just as there is no rational basis to choose an Apple computer there is no
> rational basis to choose a computer running Vista.
> Microsoft has finally done it!
>
>

the latest statisticS i've seen marks vista in more than 25% of computers
worldwide, xp in about 55%, other windows 10% (mostly servers), the rest
linux and macs, and winning linux over macs (though basically the same),
where do you get that 5%????? cause what i know through my environment match
those numbers above pretty well (except for macs, i'm outside the US)

and yes, business do migrate to vista if they need to do so, "need" is
important, there are business running in MS-DOS still because there is no
need to upgrade
this you can research yourself, a typical company will update its computing
environment in the range of each 5-10 years, win2000 was a pretty fine
improvement so most companies updated in those years, leaving xp only to
recently created companies (mostly small ones, without a complex network,
like stores and such), the large companies of course didn't upgrade to xp
due to costs (well you cannot upgrade every 2 years), now is the time for
some, some others will wait a bit more, basically all of them will upgrade
the hardware and don't care about which windows is there for use as long as
the programs works (either with or without the need to update the programs,
or another program to substitute the incompatible one), and even then, many
times there are only 2 or 3 "mandatory" programs and the rest is the workers
own decision

my own has 50-50 vista vs xp right now, expecting to get more vistas in
january-freburary due to renewal of some pcs, and pretty happy with it up
until now

oh well it's not usual i write this much and even less in these terms,
please don't fell offended, just expressing my own experience through time

just curious where did you get those numbers, no more (i'm working/making a
statistics related project right now so it interests me somewhat)

"Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin]" <> wrote in news:
#:

> Windows Vista is on 90 million systems

MS has SOLD 90 million licenses. How that compares to actual users, I
don't know.

How many months of backlog is that for OEMS does that include ? I don't
know.

I just read an article that chronicles the history of the PC for last 15
years. It seems as though that throughout this history, each successive
version of Windows sold more and more than it's predecessor. (Except for
Me.)

So the logical reason for growth is NOT that Vista is so great or
desirable, but in fact, the demand for PC's gas been ever increasing and
MS just happened to be the OS maker that was able to hook into the OEM's
back in the late 80's, early 90's. We all know BG was the one to come up
with selling people 'licenses' and not selling them s/w, and that was
being hailed as brilliant.

THAT is the reason for MS success, not any specific OS, and to argue that
they have the top numbers when it comes to OS's for any other reason is
not a valid argurment.

If history was different, if it was IBM that got the OEM deal, this could
be the IBM.public.OS2.general newsgroup, and not
MS.public.windows.vista.general, and people could be arguing that the
current release of OS2 was the best, and that at a 5% market share, MS
Windows blows, and you got ripped off for paying the $25 for it.

Technical merits may or may not mean anything to the success of any
product, and the best doesn't always win.

Shall I bring up the BetaMax.....superior to VHS in several
ways...smaller tapes, better picture quality....but, BetaMax went the way
of Windows Millenium.

Now the big context is HD-DVD vs BluRay DVD. Who knows who will win. BUT,
this is a little different, at least you have a choice, at this point. Of
course that will ultimately be decided by Hollywood. They will decide
which format they want the world to use, as all it takes is for them to
decide on a format to use and stop releasing DVD's using the other.

Hmmmmm. Sounds like the PC-OEMS.

"Jume" <> wrote in
news::

> the latest statisticS i've seen marks vista in more than 25% of
> computers worldwide, xp in about 55%, other windows 10% (mostly
> servers), the rest linux and macs, and winning linux over macs (though
> basically the same), where do you get that 5%????? cause what i know
> through my environment match those numbers above pretty well (except
> for macs, i'm outside the US)

25% !!!!!!! Where do _yooouuu_ get _yooouuuurrrr_ statistics
from...Microsoft ?

Or more importantly, where do you get what you're smoking from ?

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp

So far, I know 1 person that has Vista....and he hates it... but that is
what came on the PC.

Additionally, I called a former co-worker last night, who now works for a
local wireless ISP. He's a field guy that constantly is going to customers
sites, and the ISP he works for also offers IT services for clients that
don't have a dedicated IT department. Ironically, he was at his upstairs
neighbors, trying to get their new PC working properly with Vista. So we
had a conversation about it. In his daily business dealings, he has seen
one Vista machine in the 50 or so businesses that the ISP serves.

Dont expect too much with SP1, even microsoft says its only a collection of
all the fixes that you can find via automatic update...


"Martin X." <> wrote in message
news:eE$...
> Haha, I agree. I had Vista Ultimate installed and after a few weeks I went
> back to XP Pro. I left Vista intact and dual-boot to XP. Hopefully after
> Vista SP1 comes out it will be more usable. I will give it another shot
> then.
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Martin X.
> Microsoft Certified Systems Administrator: Messaging
> Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
>
> "flambe" <> wrote in message
> news:uu%Yi.2246$...
> The current numbers being quoted is that Vista is on about 5% of desktops.
> That is about the size of the Apple installed base.
> Like Apple, Vista has no significant market share outside the U.S.
> Like Apple, the Vista OS is not usable for most buisnesses (Apple because
> it
> is Apple and Vista because it is not compatible with the custom data base
> programs many businesses run on).
> Like the Apple OS Vista does not stably scale across large networks.
> Just as there is no rational basis to choose an Apple computer there is no
> rational basis to choose a computer running Vista.
> Microsoft has finally done it!
>
>
>

MS has SOLD 90 million licenses. How that compares to actual users, I
don't know.

How many months of backlog is that for OEMS does that include ? I don't
know.

> Well, I guess same scenario would apply to Apple too, since all systems
> sold between October 1st and December 31st, will receive a free upgrade to
> Leopard (know as a CPU drop in for Mac users). So Apple is pretty much is
> doing the same procedure that Microsoft applied to OEMs for free upgrades
> to Vista during period PCs were sold with XP over the December 2006
> holidays. Only difference is, that backlog has been cleared out since
> March and Vista has sold millions upon millions on its own merit.
--
Andre
Blog: http://adacosta.spaces.live.com
My Vista Quickstart Guide:
http://adacosta.spaces.live.com/blog...3DB!9709.entry
"DanS" <> wrote in message
news:Xns99E38309CD8F3thisnthatadelphianet@216.196. 97.142...
> "Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin]" <> wrote in news:
> #:
>
>> Windows Vista is on 90 million systems
>
> MS has SOLD 90 million licenses. How that compares to actual users, I
> don't know.
>
> How many months of backlog is that for OEMS does that include ? I don't
> know.
>
> I just read an article that chronicles the history of the PC for last 15
> years. It seems as though that throughout this history, each successive
> version of Windows sold more and more than it's predecessor. (Except for
> Me.)
>
> So the logical reason for growth is NOT that Vista is so great or
> desirable, but in fact, the demand for PC's gas been ever increasing and
> MS just happened to be the OS maker that was able to hook into the OEM's
> back in the late 80's, early 90's. We all know BG was the one to come up
> with selling people 'licenses' and not selling them s/w, and that was
> being hailed as brilliant.
>
> THAT is the reason for MS success, not any specific OS, and to argue that
> they have the top numbers when it comes to OS's for any other reason is
> not a valid argurment.
>
> If history was different, if it was IBM that got the OEM deal, this could
> be the IBM.public.OS2.general newsgroup, and not
> MS.public.windows.vista.general, and people could be arguing that the
> current release of OS2 was the best, and that at a 5% market share, MS
> Windows blows, and you got ripped off for paying the $25 for it.
>
> Technical merits may or may not mean anything to the success of any
> product, and the best doesn't always win.
>
> Shall I bring up the BetaMax.....superior to VHS in several
> ways...smaller tapes, better picture quality....but, BetaMax went the way
> of Windows Millenium.
>
> Now the big context is HD-DVD vs BluRay DVD. Who knows who will win. BUT,
> this is a little different, at least you have a choice, at this point. Of
> course that will ultimately be decided by Hollywood. They will decide
> which format they want the world to use, as all it takes is for them to
> decide on a format to use and stop releasing DVD's using the other.
>
> Hmmmmm. Sounds like the PC-OEMS.

i'm extracting from several sources i won't post here (sorry about that),
that said, the greatest percentage being around 26% the highest and 7-8% the
lower (which is still higher than 5%)

maybe i should've put a more average percentage, but as i said i was writing
not in a good mood (well i'm still are), mainly cause local work
relationships/issues mixed with the fact that i'm beginning to be pretty
tired of the crap people puts here and there about what they "know" about
OSs among other things, i truly hate how the disinformation spreads through
a medium like internet, and hating more everyday it passes, though maybe
what i do hate is how people tend to believe false info instead of the real
(per secula seculorum :-p)

as i said i won't put my sources here (in fact i should not), but as for
yours it does not validate as source (for me at least) cause its sources are
coming from only 1 site, not to mention that though internet is widely
spread, many work computers do not touch it too much thus they are out of
that statistic as well (the same goes for other systems), and we are talking
about the global percentage, not about the percentage that visits e.g.
google or msn

now if you want to believe me or not is obviously up to you, i know what i
know and you know what you know, i'm not forcing you or anyone to believe
anything as i only wanted to know the source of that 5%, cause i simply
thought "it is too low", if you want to call me liar or bash me or insult
me, go on i don't care, not a bit

as i said, i'm not in a good mood which is making me write quite more than i
usually do, as i posted before also, if you feel offended, sorry about that

"Jume" <> wrote in
news::

> i'm extracting from several sources i won't post here (sorry about
> that), that said, the greatest percentage being around 26% the highest
> and 7-8% the lower (which is still higher than 5%)

> as i said i won't put my sources here (in fact i should not),

Why not ?

> but as
> for yours it does not validate as source (for me at least) cause its
> sources are coming from only 1 site, not to mention that though
> internet is widely spread, many work computers do not touch it too
> much thus they are out of that statistic as well (the same goes for
> other systems), and we are talking about the global percentage, not
> about the percentage that visits e.g. google or msn

That is just one site. Others show similar.

There's not much that can be done to actually count how many PC's are
using each operating system. So you choose what stats you want to
believe.

And yes, many work computer's never touch the internet, but it would seem
to be a reasonable thing that the business user's that do have PC's with
Vista loaded on them would be the one's that need to access the internet
for work purposes. To use e-mail, and send & receive documents, as well
as researching on the web, like fancy notebooks issued to salesman.

The PC's that don't access the internet are 'utility' PC's. Tech
companies engineering department's have loads of them. The PC's just used
as a file server, or just to host a couple/few printers. The small
company I work for has 15 of them in the lab. They're all used, not
everyday, but they all have a use.

None of 'those' PC's are newer than NT4, and as a matter of fact, they
all have whatever the MS OS d'jour was at the time they were purchased
and will never be upgraded.

> now if you want to believe me or not is obviously up to you, i know
> what i know and you know what you know, i'm not forcing you or anyone
> to believe anything as i only wanted to know the source of that 5%,
> cause i simply thought "it is too low", if you want to call me liar or
> bash me or insult me, go on i don't care, not a bit

No name-calling, bashing, or insulting. I just think the 25% number is
outlandish and the 'real' number is significantly lower.