Windows 10: Win 7 and XP are the biggest losers with Windows 10's rapid growth

Windows 7 and XP are the biggest losers with Windows 10's rapid growth - US Government

Read more: http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-7...-us-government

ZDNet: http://www.zdnet.com/article/us-gove...tag=RSSbaffb68

:)

 

Cant buy from marketplace.

The authors need to submit their apps to the new Marketplaces and it might take a little while for them to fill up. You should see a rapid growth though.

 

Windows 10 and Intel(R) Rapid Storage Technology Version 12.9.0.1001

I installed Windows 10 on 7/29/16 from Windows 7. My computer has two operating systems XP and 7. Windows 10 updated Windows 7 system and I still have access to the XP side. The Intel Rapid storage is still on the XP side and running. Nothing in Windows
10. Checking in control Panel I can see the program said it was installed on 7/29/16, but under size there is nothing. I ran search.msc but there is nothing listed.

Please advise. Thank you.

 

While I never used either of them (XP through September for me), I'm surprised that Vista continues to have a larger share than W8. I suppose it confirms how much people disliked W8!

 

XP seems to be installed on a lot of embedded devices like instant tellers. And running legacy programs on systems with no internet access. Programs that won't run on any newer OS. It could take ages to kill off XP. Windows 2000 was my all time favorite OS for a long time. I eventually moved to XP but wouldn't actually say it was better. 7 just seemed to be more of the same. I didn't like 8.0 all that much. 8.1 IMHO was a big improvement and had me wanting to run it. A lot of people that hated 8 likely never bothered to even try 8.1 or 10. I'm running 10. Some things I like some I don't. The I like out weigh the I don't so it's a keeper. I much prefer the Windows 8.1 Start Screen/All Apps Screen versus the Windows 10 Start Screen/All Apps menu. I can live with it but IMHO it's a step backward and awkward to use.

 

IMHO instead of releasing 8.0, MS should have waited until 8.1 was ready to be released.

 

Just change it back in ten, then: Start Full-screen - Turn On or Off in Windows 10 - Windows 10 Forums

No, not really. Win 8.1 came out for free, so people probably just upgraded to it:

 

IMHO, Windows 8 is okay when one keeps in mind it's best with a touch-screen display, seems the aim of Microsoft was to bring it into line with the other touch-screen things like cars, smartphones, household appliances, etc. I think they did not take into consideration the adverse feedback from folks that have been using computers for some time, didn't want their 'apple-cart' upset. Windows 8.1 was a step in the right direction to assuage those folks and Windows 10 is more a blend of Windows 7 and Windows 8.1. Touch-screen seems to be better on Notebooks that typically are used closer to a person's eyes while a Desktop monitor is frequently beyond a comfortable reach for one's fingers.

As with nearly every new version of an Operating System there are 'legacy' devices that won't work, have seen it since starting with MS-DOS 5.0 and Windows 3.1 back in '92.

A lot of things not working is support for older devices require programmers to write the drivers but they need to be paid and if those older devices have been out of the marketing/supply channels too long there's no sales of them therefore there's no money to pay the programmers. Sure, it's a shame but also simply a matter of economics. There's a number of devices that have drivers included in Windows but they may not always be exactly correct for what a person has, does cause problems but it's up to what is supplied to Microsoft as to whether they work.

 

I guess Windows 7 had to be the biggest causality, it being the market leader.

Also Windows 7 is not appearing on new computers unless specifically asked for and only then with custom PC makers, whereas Windows 10 is. Windows 8.1 is still on many laptops and desktops I see for sale, which may account for its relatively slow decline (which will accelerate as retailers sell out of pre loaded Windows 8.1 machines)

Windows 10 can ONLY increase it's market share being the new O.S. I suppose it could loose some market share but almost impossible, it's more likely to see reduction in up graders.

 

I am not surprised to see this. I was a Vista person for several years. I have had my share of time with windows xp and previous versions of windows. I did not really get much time with 8.1 before I switched this almost 1 year old pc to windows 10. As things get better with 10 I'm sure that's where people will go in the next few years.

 

Pretty much agree, other than Windows 10, I doubt I will ever use it, or by the time I try it will no longer be Windows 10.

I still believe if Windows 8, would have kept the Windows 7 style menu, Windows 10 would never have happened. Unfortunate, as I much prefer the Windows 8 metro interface over 10's.

 

My mom called me up today and told me she was on Windows 10 now and wanted to know if that was ok... lol

These numbers aren't really surprising when MS is forcing the upgrades... nor do they reflect, sometimes, that people even wanted the upgrade. In my mom's case she didn't even know what was going on.

 

That doesn't actually make it like Windows 8.1. It will make the Start Screen full screen, but you still have a Start Menu instead of the All Apps Screen. You actually have two different Menu's depending on whether you click the bottom File Icon or the top hamburger button. I'd rather have the full screen All Apps screen that 8.1 has than the Windows 7 like Start Meneu.

 

When these stats are gathered, I wonder how the raw data is analysed and updated over time. A few considerations: if their source data shows a W7 or W8 upgrade to W10 - from a stats gathering point of view, that is a minus for the previous OS and a plus for the new, but what if the user rolls back to the previous OS, do the stats get updated (if that is even possible)? What if the user dual boots - do the stats still show a minus for the previous OS ? If an OS is not internet connected, e.g. running XP under Linux, is that an XP minus even though the OS is still being used? What about pirated copies - are they counted in these numbers or not? As W10 is a multi-platform OS (phone, tablet, PC, other), whereas W7 and W8 are not - are the stats a fair representation of user preference of one OS over another? When are manufacturer copies of an OS counted, e.g., pre-installed and available for sale or when sold? I am not questioning the validity of the stats, but the anomalies that happen in real world computing may not (or can not) be accurately reflected in hard numbers such the example given.

 

That people dislike W8 is more because they didn't give W8 a chance.
For some it isn't easy to get used to how W8 works, for others it is, but both just don't give it a shot.