Microsoft Has Sold 300 Million Windows 7 Licences

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
no body buys the software people dont spend ~$200 to upgrade their OS they just get a new computer which is the smarter thing to do cause you get upgraded hardware my sis just bought a HP for $300 w win 7 and it has a superior intel processor compared to the HP I bought for $1500 a few years ago.
 
I dont think I've ever seen a BSOD in the year I've used win 7, but in fairness, win 7 is basically Vista + a service pack, and they've had years to iron out the problems with Vista, and driver writers have had years to write stable drivers for the newish OS.
 
Can't wait to get a new build and Win 7 . Don't get me wrong, this XP thing is awesome, it's served me well over the years, but maybe it's finally time to get on with times.
 
[citation][nom]endgadget[/nom]I must admit, I loved it when lazy oems released Vista desktops with 512Mb back in the day and... MS got the flack "Vista runs really slow".. could be due to lack of ram! "Vista uses all my memory".. Yeah, that could be due to CACHING and using it instead of it sitting there doing nothing"Vista takes ages".. Could be due to the 5400rpm laptop drive and 74 services, 6 from iTunes alone.Ahhh, Microsoft, being blamed for others stupidity for years P.s. Still can't post with Opera[/citation]
While some (much) of it can be blamed on the OEMs, Vista was a dog. Even with 3GB RAM, and a 2.2GHz C2D, and Aero disabled, a Vista laptop could be painfully unresponsive. Yes, the OEM can be blamed for using an Intel 3100 IGP and a 5400 PRM HD. However, Win7 on the same hardware is much more responsive, and uses about 1/2 the RAM (judged by RAM in use, ~480MB vs ~1GB with Vista, immediately after login, no apps running, same software installed), so clearly Vista itself was a major part of the problem.
 
Windows 7 is total crap! Once I switched to a Mac I realized this. The Mac is far more optimized for the heavy multi-tasking user. Try launching a slow loading app and do something else on Windows. You know what happens - the app pops up and steals focus away from you - it so f'ing stupid. Macs are smarter, they know that you have switched onto another task, and bring the program up in the background - way better. The Mac also has a great multiple desktop feature - indispensable to the heavy multi-tasker. Windows doesn't have anything like it and probably never will. Why can't Microsoft get these simple things right - Apple did! Nobody every talks about this stuff. Switch to the Mac, learn how to use it (the keyboard shortcuts are awesome!), and see for yourself, Windows is for kids!
 
[citation][nom]zybch[/nom]11% in the US ONLY. Worldwide it still is hovering between 4% and 5%.[/citation]
Wow. Well, to be honest it has been a few months since I read that report. I didn't realize it was that low in the global market.
 
[citation][nom]V8VENOM[/nom]300 million is piss in the ocean compared to what Apple sales numbers across their product lines ... given that Microsoft is dead in the water when it comes to hardware.Tom's just refuses to publish the quarterly revenue of Apple vs. Microsoft ... I know it hurts Tom's to see Apple crushing Microsoft financially.[/citation]
considering apple only holds 2% mrkt share this just means itunes is the only thing propping them up
@2% i beleive that is being just as generous as the democrats were being to homosexuals percentage of the population.

here we are just talking about just one of their successful products. or have you forgotten about office and the other products as well?
what's pretty sad is there are still windows95 users who out number all apple products combined and yes i am counting icr@p too.
 
@ TEAMSWITCHER
Sorry to say, but Windows 7 is a better OS than Mac's. I work for a school district so I'm neck-high in apple products (iPads, Macbooks, iMacs, eMacs, iBooks, iPhones, Xserves, etc). I know the keyboard shortcuts and use spaces on my Mac(s). (I'll admit spaces is nice).
But know what? I still bootcamp into W7 on my Mac Pro and Macbook. I know the shortcuts for windows there as well. I can get things done faster running W7 than I can on Mac.

And please, someone explain to me why whenever iTunes or QuickTime releaes an update... I have to download the entire program again?
 
[citation][nom]V8VENOM[/nom]300 million is piss in the ocean compared to what Apple sales numbers across their product lines ... given that Microsoft is dead in the water when it comes to hardware.Tom's just refuses to publish the quarterly revenue of Apple vs. Microsoft ... I know it hurts Tom's to see Apple crushing Microsoft financially.[/citation]
Do you even read this site? Tom's is all about Apple. There's usually 5-6 trivial and pointless Apple articles (aka Advertisements) on the front page and usually very negative articles about MS.
 
@ TEAMSWITCHER
Im in the same postion as tsz42, I have owned Apple computers since 86 and have worked in the educational IT field since 1995. sorry to say it but even XP was nicer than OSX. small things like being able to CUT and paste files in finder would be nice .... its been in Windows and Linux distros for 15 years and makes anyone who does any serious file management cringe.

and please dont get me started on the complete lack of " PRO " options and hardware. come on wouldn't a single laptop or Mac pro ( out of box )with a worktation GPU be nice. Apple has gone to the model of gucci and Nike.... make it fashonable not always functional or efficeint.
 
[citation][nom]V8VENOM[/nom]300 million is piss in the ocean compared to what Apple sales numbers across their product lines ... given that Microsoft is dead in the water when it comes to hardware.Tom's just refuses to publish the quarterly revenue of Apple vs. Microsoft ... I know it hurts Tom's to see Apple crushing Microsoft financially.[/citation]

Oh, and you're comparing all of Apple's product lines to a single Microsoft product line? How does that make any sense.
 
Why does Microsoft sell 300 million? Because it is good? Come on....you know the real reason! PC's are dirt cheap. To compare unit sales of Windows and Macs is equating a $300 black friday notebook with a $1500 MacBook Pro. An idiot could tell you which is the better business to be in. High profit margins have never been an indicator for low quality. I'm not saying there are not good deals on PCs, cause there are. It's just that Windows has never been about quality, its a quantity business.
 
[citation][nom]TEAMSWITCHER[/nom]Why does Microsoft sell 300 million? Because it is good? Come on....you know the real reason! PC's are dirt cheap. To compare unit sales of Windows and Macs is equating a $300 black friday notebook with a $1500 MacBook Pro. An idiot could tell you which is the better business to be in. High profit margins have never been an indicator for low quality. I'm not saying there are not good deals on PCs, cause there are. It's just that Windows has never been about quality, its a quantity business.[/citation]
The problem is that I can find an $800 laptop that outperforms a $1500 macbook pro ANY DAY OF THE WEEK.
 
The vast majority of users never update their operating system. Even someone like me who specs out his own custom PC. On my current machine, which was built for me in Nov 2009, I had them load Win7 cause that was the new OS, and it will probably stay in it till I retire this one in a few years.

The interesting calculation is that around 300 million new PCs are sold each year. Since Windows 7 has sold 300 million licenses and it has been out 15 months, that means it has sold enough copies to be installed in 80% of the new PCs over that interval. I call that successful.
 
Nexus52085
"The problem is that I can find an $800 laptop that outperforms a $1500 macbook pro ANY DAY OF THE WEEK."

for gaming maybe yes, for anything else...in your dream, dude.
 
@benjamin pearcy

Honestly IF I were to buy a laptop, it would need some serious balls, I just priced an Asus ROG Laptop @ ~1700, to get a Macbook Pro with similar specs.....$2,949.00 and it only comes with a GT 330M vs the GTX 460M in the ROG. OH and its also just a Dual Core(i7 620m), vs the ROG's i7 740QM.

See I'm a desktop kind of guy, and a gamer, so I'd need at least a 17" model or else feel like I'm using my old computer from the late 90's with 15" CRT.

I don't care what the thing looks like, black is fine. A little on the heavy side? That's fine too, it comes with a backpack. Shorter battery life? A cord and an external battery rectify that while still coming in wayyyy below the Mac. And with the Quad Core it would best the Mac in general performance as well.

Unless you have a serious issue with Windows and HATE it, I cannot see why anyone who wants a powerful laptop would buy a Mac given great models by Asus that totally outspec the over $1000 more expensive Mac.
 
to all you apple fanboys saying pcs are dirt cheap and apples are better cause they cost more, get your head out of your ass like an ostrich in the sand. i have been building pc's for 25 years, and i can state for a fact that i can take any mac desktop and buy the exact same parts (except the case) and build a pc for 1/4 the cost. especially since macs ussually use mostly last gen parts. and funny how if you want to add a high end video card for your mac it costs like 800 dollars when the exact same card in specs (just not made to work in macs strict hitler controls) for pc is about 500. it just proves mac users are brainless lemmings! hopefully steve jobs will die and the people will come to their senses.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom