Microsoft sold 180 millions Windows Vista licenses

[clevin]

http://www.engadget.com/2008/07/19/microsoft-nets-60b-sells-180m-vista-licenses-since-launch/.

in 18m period, which result in a 10million/month sale (actually very close to 10m/m when reading the past pres, not alot "odd month")

this is "licenses sold". no further information available.

However, according to onestat.com, Vista has 13.24% global user share at end of March, which does match the 10 million/month number.

 

[pranavss11]

I believe it also counts the PC's that already come pre-installed with Vista and do not count downgrades etc. So yeah that really is not that big if you look at the bigger picture. On another note APPLE > MICROSOFT!

 

[adrianr]

On another note APPLE > MICROSOFT!

Was that really needed? Your comment was fine (ish) up untill then.. I Don't see why pre-installed versions should be discounted, most copies of OSX are sold pre-installed as you can only get it on one type of pre-built computer..

In the bigger picture, Vistas market share is still bigger than OSX's, downgrades, preinstalled, flying pigs and all.. You don't need to reassure yourself that Apple is >>>>>>!!!!11one than Microsoft

 

[pranavss11]

What I was saying that looking at the market share Microsoft has with its software, it is not that much and was expected. The only reason OSX market share is low is because it comes with Apple Hardware and some people prefer to get cheaper laptops/computers..

 

[MisterMe]

... most copies of OSX are sold pre-installed as you can only get it on one type of pre-built computer..

...

Do you have any data to support this assertion?

 

[mkrishnan]

Does anyone have a comparison take rate (taking into account the smaller number of PCs on the market back then), of adoption rates for XP at 18 mos? Kind of like the 40% take rate for Tiger that Apple was touting in... 2005?

 

[zelmo]

It'd be interesting to know what percentage of those 180M were pre-installed and, of that number, how many licenses of XP were purchased to downgrade the OS.

 

[cube]

Sold or shove?

 

[Killyp]

Was that really needed? Your comment was fine (ish) up untill then.. I Don't see why pre-installed versions should be discounted, most copies of OSX are sold pre-installed as you can only get it on one type of pre-built computer..

In the bigger picture, Vistas market share is still bigger than OSX's, downgrades, preinstalled, flying pigs and all.. You don't need to reassure yourself that Apple is >>>>>>!!!!11one than Microsoft

Well durr, OS X can only be installed on a Mac, which leaves Microsoft's market potential far higher.

A better comparison would be to compare Windows' marketshare within the non-Apple Mac (PC) market with that of OS X's marketshare within the Apple Mac market, bearing in mind that most PCs come with Windows installed, and I suspect that the people who run Linux on their machine would do the same if they had a Mac.

 

[clevin]

A better comparison would be to compare Windows' marketshare within the non-Apple Mac (PC) market with that of OS X's marketshare within the Apple Mac market.

i doubt thats "better" comparison. Mac users do generally have higher incomes, or they tend to be ok with spending more $$$ on computers. they also do have the tradition of updating OS more frequently since apple releases them more frequently. While windows has large amount of business users that has the tradition of resisting any update.

any comparison is not solid right now since there is very limited data available to warrant any practical comparison.

Just to be informed that Vista sold 180m licenses in 18 months, and probably has 18% market share.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Try as we might, I don't see how much sense can be made of this number. After a date decreed by Microsoft, every PC sold by the OEMs will have Vista installed on it. This isn't really news.

 

[Techguy172]

There is nothing wrong with Vista anymore, so there really is no reason not to run it on a new computer unless your software is only compatible with XP.
Leopard isn't that much better than vista in my opinion.

 

[weg]

Do you have any data to support this assertion?

This is a very reasonable assumption. Whoever buys a non-preinstalled license of OS X certainly intends to install it on a Mac. Every Mac that you buy comes with OS X preinstalled. Not everybody upgrades his Mac to the latest version of OS X (for instance, I don't)...

 

[adrianr]

This is a very reasonable assumption. Whoever buys a non-preinstalled license of OS X certainly intends to install it on a Mac. Every Mac that you buy comes with OS X preinstalled. Not everybody upgrades his Mac to the latest version of OS X (for instance, I don't)...

Quite, data needed to support this assumption isn't nessecary, as there will never be more numbers of Osx sold than there are apple computers to run it.. You can't exactly count hackintoshes as most people will be using a crack copy anyway, even if they all brought legit copies it's not exactly massive chunk.

 

[MisterMe]

Quite, data needed to support this assumption isn't nessecary, as there will never be more numbers of Osx sold than there are apple computers to run it...

Nonsense. I will take myself as an example. In 2003, I bought a 2 GHz dual PowerMac G5. It was bundled with MacOS X 10.2.7. Since then, I have purchased MacOS X 10.3, 10.4, and 10.5. One Mac, four purchases of the OS. I think that there are a lot of Mac users like me. In fact, PPC-based Mac owners are angry that we will not be able to use MacOS X 10.6 on our current machines.

In the Windows community, OTOH, many users upgrade their OSes by replacing their computers. One PC, one OS for the majority of the user base. This is why I demand data to support your assertion. Absent supporting data, it should be dismissed as a wild a$$ guess.

 

[DJJONES]

There is nothing wrong with Vista anymore, so there really is no reason not to run it on a new computer unless your software is only compatible with XP.
Leopard isn't that much better than vista in my opinion.

leopard is far more stable then vista is.
im no longer using vista i upgraded to xp.

 

[Rivix]

Give credit where credit is due. Congrats Microsoft.

 

[Michael CM1]

There is nothing wrong with Vista anymore, so there really is no reason not to run it on a new computer unless your software is only compatible with XP.
Leopard isn't that much better than vista in my opinion.

Vista has worked OK on my mom's new computer. Haven't noticed any bugs, but it's still made like, well, Windows. That "Easy" transfer assistant? Ha, right. Spent an hour trying to get data from an old computer to a new one. Not so much.

It looks like maybe it's an improvement over XP now, although it does look like they put a coat of paint on it and said, "Hey, what's Apple got on that new OS of theirs that we can put on here? 'Widgets?' OK, but let's call them 'gadgets' and make them not work as well."

The only nod I give Vista over Leopard is, well, Blu-ray support. I may end up buying a BD-ROM drive for that computer so I can rip my darn BDs like I do DVDs.

 

[adrianr]

Nonsense. I will take myself as an example. In 2003, I bought a 2 GHz dual PowerMac G5. It was bundled with MacOS X 10.2.7. Since then, I have purchased MacOS X 10.3, 10.4, and 10.5. One Mac, four purchases of the OS. I think that there are a lot of Mac users like me. In fact, PPC-based Mac owners are angry that we will not be able to use MacOS X 10.6 on our current machines.

In the Windows community, OTOH, many users upgrade their OSes by replacing their computers. One PC, one OS for the majority of the user base. This is why I demand data to support your assertion. Absent supporting data, it should be dismissed as a wild a$$ guess.

I would be quite happy in assuming (Weather you like assumptions or not) that you are not in the majority in all of your OS upgrades.. To be frank 2ghz PowerMac G5s are pretty dire machines by todays standards, and i'de bet (Or at least hope) people have moved with the times by now..

It also seems you're happy to say Mac users upgrade their OS frequently, but PC users don't.. To be honest, due to the market of custom build PC's alone, it allows far more people to buy a machine with nothing installed (Or something cheap installed), and pick and chose how they please.. Where as if you buy a mac, it WILL have OSX installed on it..

The argument for Vista sales being null and void in "the bigger picture" because they come preinstalled is still daft, because that argument holds more true for Macs than any other computer platform.. you can't buy them with anything else!

Oh and lets now not forget Bootcamp - So mac users are contributing to the figures too

You really dont need figures to back up common sense.. There are more things capable of running Vista - It's really not as bad as the internet bandwagon makes out - It shouldn't matter if the figure includes pre-installed sales or not - It sold far more - You really dont always have to be pedantic on the Internet to justify your Mac Purchase.

 

[Techguy172]

Vista has worked OK on my mom's new computer. Haven't noticed any bugs, but it's still made like, well, Windows. That "Easy" transfer assistant? Ha, right. Spent an hour trying to get data from an old computer to a new one. Not so much.

It looks like maybe it's an improvement over XP now, although it does look like they put a coat of paint on it and said, "Hey, what's Apple got on that new OS of theirs that we can put on here? 'Widgets?' OK, but let's call them 'gadgets' and make them not work as well."

The only nod I give Vista over Leopard is, well, Blu-ray support. I may end up buying a BD-ROM drive for that computer so I can rip my darn BDs like I do DVDs.

That is true only in some cases, vista's networking is superior in so many ways compared to leopard's I had many problems with networking on My MacBook and vista connected instantly and without a single problem.

It also has decent media center, Front Row is crap all they did there is slap some new paint on and call it a day.

I think we all need to give them some credit. Everyone says it's bad and downgraded to XP and it was the same thing with my dad he said he would never get Vista, we he got it again and now he loves it.

 

[Shadow]

Sad thing is that Windows fanboys will be cramming this figure down peoples throats although soon every PC not sold by Apple and a few select others will have Vista installed. A much better figure would be satisfaction rates, or % downgrade to XP etc etc.

vista's networking is superior in so many ways compared to leopard's

I disagree. Try bridging connections on Vista -- absolute nightmare.

 

[clevin]

Sad thing is that Windows fanboys will be cramming this figure down peoples throats although soon every PC not sold by Apple and a few select others will have Vista installed. A much better figure would be satisfaction rates, or % downgrade to XP etc etc.

if you take a look at global market share of Vista, you would realize the "downgrade to XP" % is near zero in the big picture.

Satisfaction rates, IDK, I do found windows users are more critical to the OS, while Mac users are quite forgiving.

 

[IJ Reilly]

The argument for Vista sales being null and void in "the bigger picture" because they come preinstalled is still daft, because that argument holds more true for Macs than any other computer platform.. you can't buy them with anything else!

Did anyone claim the numbers were "null and void?" If so, I didn't notice that remark. The fact remains that the number of Vista licenses was bound to take off the moment Microsoft prevented the OEMs from selling PCs with the previous version of Windows. This happens every time Microsoft releases a new version of Windows, which is why I say it is not news, even if Microsoft uses the number to trumpet the "success" of Vista. Even more importantly, this number should not be confused with the number of people who've elected to upgrade to Vista.

 

[JNB]

if you take a look at global market share of Vista, you would realize the "downgrade to XP" % is near zero in the big picture.

Satisfaction rates, IDK, I do found windows users are more critical to the OS, while Mac users are quite forgiving.

Preinstalled consumer machines are not sales from a demand perspective, only from a shipping perspective. Granted, MS pretty much can count them as "sales" if they want, but it's not as if 180M licenses were actually sought out by anyone.

More telling is the institutional take rate. In the 18 months since release, I have encountered no corporate or edu's among my clients that have chosen Vista, other than one or two workstations for evaluation & testing. Most of them went through bulk purchase cycles in that time and have steadfastly chosen to purchase XP preinstalled, or have forgone a hardware upgrade altogether, choosing instead to wait until they can actually not lose productivity fighting a NRFPT OS.

For me, there's no compelling improvement in Vista, as essentially the entire list of major framework improvements were all tossed long before release. I have greater hope for Windows7, I really do.

 

[rasmasyean]

try 226 million instead...

Instead of speculating stuff about installations, etc. Just calculate it yourself. You can calculate OSX, etc. too easily to get estimates. I get 226 million Vista users. In anything, the investors should be pissed off because people are stealing their products. Nothing new regarding Windows.

OK here’s some rough calculations:

16.14% of internet users are Vista
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=11

1.4 billion internet users
http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm

Assuming the usage rate is consistent around the world…
1.4 billion * 16.14% = 226 million Vista internet users

The only way the user base would be significantly less than this number is if for some reason, Vista users surf the internet WAY MORE than all other OS's to skew the percentage up to 16.14%. I highly doubt this. And it’s probably more likely that that some Vista users don’t use the internet much because it’s for work mostly. Hence more likely there are more than 226 million Vista users.

Chances are that Vista adoption in the “rich” (and more regulated) hitslink logged nations is held back a little by the expense of Vista. So that could mean that other “poorer” (Gov’t don’t give a crap) nations have a much greater than 16.14% Vista market penetration since you can like buy it at the local fruit shop for like $1, etc.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_sof_pir_rat-crime-software-piracy-rate

Hey, if you include ALL of Asia? 500 million Vista users???