Windows 10 Adoption Will Be Faster Than Windows 7

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Hey, did you guys know that the professional guessers out there seem to believe the adoption rate of Windows Free will be faster than all those other version of Windows you had to pay for. ASTOUNDING! :D

Half of all organisations will have commenced their Windows 10 rollout by January 2017, putting it on track to be the most widely installed version of Windows ever, according to Gartner. "For businesses, we expect that implementation will be significantly more rapid than that seen with Windows 7 six years ago."
 
You don't say.

Aside from some serious privacy concerns, and the constant attempt to try and trick/force people into upgrading that don't want to, it's a good OS. And it's freeeeee!
 
Steve said:
Hey, did you guys know that the professional guessers out there seem to believe the adoption rate of Windows Free will be faster than all those other version of Windows you had to pay for. ASTOUNDING! :D

Half of all organisations will have commenced their Windows 10 rollout by January 2017, putting it on track to be the most widely installed version of Windows ever, according to Gartner. "For businesses, we expect that implementation will be significantly more rapid than that seen with Windows 7 six years ago."
Click to expand...

The free consumer upgrade has little to do business and enterprise adoption. Whatever the debate in threads like this I know my employer is looking to start widespread deployments of 10 starting in 2Q next year.
 
Oh, gosh! I need to get in sync with the herd! I'd better get out there and buy a... I mean, download a... I mean install a... Oh, is that Win 10 on my system? How did...?
 
Businesses would need to relatively quickly adopt Windows 10 to match the rate of Windows 7 adoption, which did have quick business adoption. That doesn't seem to be happening so far for Windows 10.
 
I know a few people at work (non techies) that installed Windows 10 on their home systems because they thought it was an update. Since they where running Window 8, it was probably an improvement.

As for Windows 10 in the office, I may consider it in the 2nd or 3rd quarter next year. It all depends on if we get ride of an old application that won't run under anything newer than Windows 7 (and even then it has some issues).
 
heatlesssun said:
The free consumer upgrade has little to do business and enterprise adoption. Whatever the debate in threads like this I know my employer is looking to start widespread deployments of 10 starting in 2Q next year.
Click to expand...
The company I work for is looking to do the same, probably nearer the end of Q2 though.

I wonder if the way most handled Windows XP is a factor. It seemed some found themselves very close to end of support for Windows XP and were scrambling (gave themselves less time to upgrade than they would have liked, not actually scrambling) to move to Windows 7.

My company decided that beginning at a certain point going forward, new computers (hardware replacement due to warranty expiration) were getting Windows 7. At this point, it seems like the plan is to move everyone to Windows 10.
 
ccman said:
I wonder if the way most handled Windows XP is a factor. It seemed some found themselves very close to end of support for Windows XP and were scrambling (gave themselves less time to upgrade than they would have liked, not actually scrambling) to move to Windows 7.
Click to expand...

This. The plan I'm hearing is a much more gradual update process over three years compared to the rush that we had going from XP to 7.
 
If it wasn't such a shitty product to begin with you would not have a problem people upgrading to a new version of windows but all they get is window dressing rather then anything substantial.

Internet Exploder is dead long live new Internet Edgeploder , progress innovation and sheer Microsoft genius at work to bring you the best they can, maybe that is why MS fails so badly.

When mediocre user interface options are touted as progress your company really has no base to exist but then again if you are a monopoly then you will get away with it...
 
heatlesssun said:
This. The plan I'm hearing is a much more gradual update process over three years compared to the rush that we had going from XP to 7.
Click to expand...
That and like many have said, Windows 7 is looking a bit long in the tooth comparatively, particularly in certain areas. Compared to Windows 7, there were definite kernel improvements. Windows boots appreciably faster. There were DPI and multiple monitor improvements. File transfers got quicker. I get the impression that they made improvements on adding asynchronous processing. If Enterprises spend the time, they can customize Windows to minimize the amount of retraining. Even for those not using Enterprise, BitLocker and VPN Access are available in Pro. There were further improvements in the video and printer driver model. Against Windows 8.1, the comparison is not as stark, but if Windows 8/8.1 was skipped, the decision is pretty convincing.
 
Galvin said:
Not surprised it practically installs its self for you.
Click to expand...

Which makes its adoption slowdown every month since launch even more surprising. It's been losing steam, and in another week we'll see the November number - and I'd lay money that it will once again be lower than the previous month.

With Microsoft hitting unsuspecting Windows 7 and 8 users over the head with the GWX trojan nagware every time they log in, and no "No thanks" option - only a "Upgrade" or "Nag me later" button, you'd think adoption would be accelerating, or at least sustaining month to month.

The takeaway here is that it'll take 5-10 years for 10 to displace 7 and the current adoption rate, unless MS gets desperate and just starts auto-installing 10 without user intervention.

Anyone that believes the privacy issues are just a "vocal minority" is kidding themselves, and a lot of these people are the same ones that just presumed complaints about the forced fullscreen Metro in Windows 8 was "no big deal" and "just a small minority" complaining.
 
odditory said:
Which makes its adoption slowdown every month since launch even more surprising. It's been losing steam, and in another week we'll see the November number - and I'd lay money that it will once again be lower than the previous month.
Click to expand...

The current growth is pretty much all from consumer upgrades. The August number was clearly unstainable. The last two months according to Netmarketshare were at 1.4 and 1.3 percent for September and October which is still very solid growth primarily from consumer upgrades which before now hasn't been a huge source of Windows distribution since the 9x days.

We should still see Windows 10 hit 10% but the end of the year which I think is a very solid start for 5 months. The bigger sustainable growth isn't going to occur without business adoption which was never going to start this soon.


odditory said:
The takeaway here is that it'll take 5-10 years for 10 to displace 7 and the current adoption rate, unless MS gets desperate and just starts auto-installing 10 without user intervention.
Click to expand...

It'll be much sooner than that, probably sometime by the end of 2017.
 
Ha! My organization just moved to Windows 7 THIS YEAR! We won't be on Windows 10 for a long, long time.
 
Steve said:
Hey, did you guys know that the professional guessers out there seem to believe the adoption rate of Windows Free will be faster than all those other version of Windows you had to pay for. ASTOUNDING! :D

Half of all organisations will have commenced their Windows 10 rollout by January 2017, putting it on track to be the most widely installed version of Windows ever, according to Gartner. "For businesses, we expect that implementation will be significantly more rapid than that seen with Windows 7 six years ago."
Click to expand...

That businesses are doing so, is surprising, but I suspect it has very little to do with it being free, since they typically get upgrades included in thear license fee.

Article won't load, but if it says, I suspect it's because it's not that different from Windows 7 and unlike half of [H] users, business users probably moved on from the Windows 95 menu a decade ago.
 
odditory said:
Which makes its adoption slowdown every month since launch even more surprising. It's been losing steam, and in another week we'll see the November number - and I'd lay money that it will once again be lower than the previous month.

With Microsoft hitting unsuspecting Windows 7 and 8 users over the head with the GWX trojan nagware every time they log in, and no "No thanks" option - only a "Upgrade" or "Nag me later" button, you'd think adoption would be accelerating, or at least sustaining month to month.

The takeaway here is that it'll take 5-10 years for 10 to displace 7 and the current adoption rate, unless MS gets desperate and just starts auto-installing 10 without user intervention.

Anyone that believes the privacy issues are just a "vocal minority" is kidding themselves, and a lot of these people are the same ones that just presumed complaints about the forced fullscreen Metro in Windows 8 was "no big deal" and "just a small minority" complaining.
Click to expand...

Then why is the adoption rate on Steam roughly the same as it was for 7?
 
nilepez said:
Then why is the adoption rate on Steam roughly the same as it was for 7?
Click to expand...

Because a lot of enthusiastic gamers foolishly bought the marketing line and assumed there would be DX12 games on day one.

Steam stats are a smaller subset of global marketshare, and doesn't change what I said. And if you look at the stats, month-to-month adoption rate of 10 on Steam has been progressively decreasing too.
 
Darksword said:
Ha! My organization just moved to Windows 7 THIS YEAR! We won't be on Windows 10 for a long, long time.
Click to expand...

The reality is most Enterprise orgs are staying put on 7. Why not, it's supported until 2020, and 10 offers nothing new or must-have feature for most businesses.
 
Privacy issues aside, my reaction to Windows 10 has been a definite "meh".

Personally, I find the UI really just fugly, but that is just nitpicking.

The new PC Settings screen continues to irritate me, as does the lengths they have gone to to hide the classic Control Panel -- which is still MUCH easier to use for 99% of things, especially if you turn off the "Guided" menu and just go to the Classic/Icon view.

Edge basically sucks and is totally useless for everything that I need -- no plugin support kills it totally, especially for use with EMR's, etc.

The forced updates are irritating, but can be disabled/worked around (i.e. stop the service and/or start it selectively on a timer after using a script to bash the Update catalog to think that the updates I don't want are already installed).

I also just dislike the new Start Menu -- which Classic Shell solves, but it also solves the same problem in Windows 8.1 too, which I like MUCH better.

This brings me to my biggest gripe -- while Windows 10 may be a MARGINAL improvement over 8.1 in a desktop environment for someone who is too lacking in PC knowledge to install ClassicShell/StartIsBack/etc -- when used on a tablet or in a touch screen environment, the new Windows 10 "tablet mode" basically sucks. They "fixed" desktop mode, but screwed up tablet mode. On a tablet, the Windows 8.1 UI works *very* well -- and the Windows 8.1 version of IE is much better in a touch environment than Edge is. Why is Microsoft so dense that they cannot realize that you really need two completely different, separate UI styles for desktop/laptop vs tablet/touch? Instead they keep trying to come up with either a "one size, fits all" (8.1) or a back-tracked hybrid, that crippled some of their earlier tablet functionality.
 
mdburkey said:
On a tablet, the Windows 8.1 UI works *very* well -- and the Windows 8.1 version of IE is much better in a touch environment than Edge is. Why is Microsoft so dense that they cannot realize that you really need two completely different, separate UI styles for desktop/laptop vs tablet/touch? Instead they keep trying to come up with either a "one size, fits all" (8.1) or a back-tracked hybrid, that crippled some of their earlier tablet functionality.
Click to expand...

It can be argued that 8.1 is a better tablet UI but I think it's a stretch to say that 10 sucks with touch. Edge isn't as touch friendly as IE 11 modern I would agree but it's not really much different than Chrome or Safari on tablets.

At this point now that the deed is done, there's no going back anytime soon with the hybrid UI. There's simply too many new and expensive Windows devices like the Surface line that people bought because of their hybrid nature. Windows 7 would be useless IMO on a Surface Pro or Book. And we all saw what happened when Microsoft launched it's tablet only Windows RT OS. Nobody wanted it over something that combined Win32 and tablet capabilities.

In any case I don't really see anything that Windows 8.1 has over Windows 10 when it comes to tablets. The big problem isn't the UI, it's touch and tablet apps, or the lack thereof. This is a situation that really must improve.
 
heatlesssun said:
...there's no going back anytime soon with the hybrid UI.....
Click to expand...

Didn't you say the same thing about Win 8.x ? And the Xbox One ? And...

In any case I don't really see anything that Windows 8.1 has over Windows 10 when it comes to tablets.
Click to expand...

I've got a very nice little screen brightness slider that's easily accessible that your Windows 10 doesn't...


yes thats one thing. But its one thing i know of without having fucked up my patience and SP3 and installed it on to test. I've just got to much on atm to be able to give MS any free beta testing and given they're getting a ton of telemetry to "enhance my experience" then they should be sweet and fix shit anyway! :D
 
HoffY said:
Didn't you say the same thing about Win 8.x ? And the Xbox One ? And...
Click to expand...

Just installed 1511 on an 8" tablet so not sure what your point is. And I've never owned an Xbox or care much about it. Two things I said from early on about Windows 8, it needed a resizable Start Screen and windowed modern apps. I think sometimes people will call others shills and not realize that they do have criticisms. It's just that the criticisms tend to be much more specific. "It sucks" doesn't really mean much.

HoffY said:
I've got a very nice little screen brightness slider that's easily accessible that your Windows 10 doesn't...
Click to expand...

And I know it well. The volume and brightness controls in the Charms area were nice, not as well done in Windows 10 but plenty workable with touch.
 
nilepez said:
Then why is the adoption rate on Steam roughly the same as it was for 7?
Click to expand...

So a free update that's pushed on you on every opportunity. Shows the same adoption rate among gaming enthusiasts as an OS that you had to willfully and decidedly upgrade to with paying money.

I wouldn't put that statistic in my resume if I was called Windows 10 Joe.
 
mdburkey said:
Privacy issues aside, my reaction to Windows 10 has been a definite "meh".

Personally, I find the UI really just fugly, but that is just nitpicking.

...


The forced updates are irritating, but can be disabled/worked around (i.e. stop the service and/or start it selectively on a timer after using a script to bash the Update catalog to think that the updates I don't want are already installed).
Click to expand...

And those are my greatest issues with W10, that's keeping me from it. Whoever thinks that everyone who's not adopting W10 is only a tin foil hat privacy advocate must think twice.

Yes privacy is somewhere on the list of gripes with W10, but that alone wouldn't keep me from using it at least on some of my laptops.
 
If I was a very big business I would be looking to adopt a better, bigger IT team, linux, and less-internet connections. It might be cheaper.
 
"Free" is my second favorite 4-letter "F" word.

(anyone who's seen a photo of me knows "food" is my first)
 
odditory said:
Because a lot of enthusiastic gamers foolishly bought the marketing line and assumed there would be DX12 games on day one.

Steam stats are a smaller subset of global marketshare, and doesn't change what I said. And if you look at the stats, month-to-month adoption rate of 10 on Steam has been progressively decreasing too.
Click to expand...

Need a source on that, because it sounds like BS. And FYI, it's always going to decrease. Do they have to have 15% Month one followed by 30% month 2 for it to be a success? When has that EVER happened? Do you think that XP adoption was that fast?
 
M76 said:
So a free update that's pushed on you on every opportunity. Shows the same adoption rate among gaming enthusiasts as an OS that you had to willfully and decidedly upgrade to with paying money.

I wouldn't put that statistic in my resume if I was called Windows 10 Joe.
Click to expand...

yeah, well comments like yours were hurled at 7 too. Back then, XP was teh GOD of operating systems. It always was and always would be the greatest OS of all time. The Start menu on 7 sucked (some complaints never change).

My parents haven't upgraded yet. You know why? Because I'm holding them back until I have time to be around just in case there are some questions, but my Dad really wants to upgrade yesterday.

I can promise you this OS will be heavily adopted. I'm surprised about the fast business adoption, but that makes 10s fast success assured.
 
Uvaman said:
If I was a very big business I would be looking to adopt a better, bigger IT team, linux, and less-internet connections. It might be cheaper.
Click to expand...

Businesses use linux, but not on the desktop. Some devs here use Linux, but nobody outside of devs do and I have some friends who use Linux at home who gave up on it at work, because they got tired of wireless driver issues. I'm sure eventually the issues were resolved, but who has time to wait a few months to use their laptop and who wants to set it up again 6 months later? Not me.
 
I don't understand why everyone takes issue with the forced updates.

IMHO security updates SHOULD be forced on ALL platforms to help combat the formation of botnets.

I would even design it such that it is much more difficult to circumvent.

Have it check in every patch tuesday. If there are no new security patches, check in next patch tuesday. If a security patch is missed, automatically disable the network stack only allowing acccess to Windows Update until the security patch is installed.

Once the operating system no longer receives security patches, permanently disable the network stack.

Non-security patches, and driver updates need to be optional though.

If people won't take security seriously on their own accord, they have to be forced into it for the good of everyone on the internet.
 
nilepez said:
Businesses use linux, but not on the desktop. Some devs here use Linux, but nobody outside of devs do and I have some friends who use Linux at home who gave up on it at work, because they got tired of wireless driver issues. I'm sure eventually the issues were resolved, but who has time to wait a few months to use their laptop and who wants to set it up again 6 months later? Not me.
Click to expand...

I am a huge Linux fan and I use it on my desktop at home, and I'd use it at work as well if they'd let me (but instead i have a Windows 7 machine, disk encrypted, and locked down so I only have user privileges, and can't even change !@$#^ cleartype settings), but I agree, this is one of the biggest problem with Linux.

The lack of launch day support for all hardware.

It's better than it used to be 15 years ago, when you had to carefully select your hardware based on what would work in Linux, but still hardware support comes WAAAY too slowly.

The only exception seems to be Geforce drivers, which are out on launch, just like they are for Windows (though it takes a while for them to flow downstream to actual distribution releases, so you might have to install them manually)

My Haswell Celeron in my HTPC was launched in 2013, and STILL doesn't ahve full support for all Intel's hardware video decoding and deinterlacing options, and some of the ones that are available are unstable.

I could get it to work perfectly if I got a Nvidia GPU, but that eliminates the NUC/Chromebox type systems I prefer for HTPC.

Stuff like this is a problem because it stops people who otherwise want to run Linux, and prefer it to windows from running it.

There are other big problems preventing mass adoption (like the relative lack of native versions of big brand name closed source software that people expect to use and are available for Windows and OSX) but the hardware support is the most frustrating.

Again, better than it used to be. MOST of the time most hardware just works, especially if its a year or two old, but you still have these annoyances.
 
Zarathustra[H];1041990972 said:
I don't understand why everyone takes issue with the forced updates.

IMHO security updates SHOULD be forced on ALL platforms to help combat the formation of botnets.

I would even design it such that it is much more difficult to circumvent.

Have it check in every patch tuesday. If there are no new security patches, check in next patch tuesday. If a security patch is missed, automatically disable the network stack only allowing acccess to Windows Update until the security patch is installed.

Once the operating system no longer receives security patches, permanently disable the network stack.

Non-security patches, and driver updates need to be optional though.

If people won't take security seriously on their own accord, they have to be forced into it for the good of everyone on the internet.
Click to expand...

I actually agree with this. I do feel there should be a measure in place for a rollback in the cases where updates have caused larger problems before this could ever be. Herd immunity would certainly help the internet, so much is bot traffic that could be cut down a lot.

so do 'anti-vaxxers' also refuse to update their pc?
 
Darunion said:
I actually agree with this. I do feel there should be a measure in place for a rollback in the cases where updates have caused larger problems before this could ever be. Herd immunity would certainly help the internet, so much is bot traffic that could be cut down a lot.

so do 'anti-vaxxers' also refuse to update their pc?
Click to expand...

Lol. I never actually thought of it in vaccine terms, but that is an apt analogy.

Those who refuse to patch their OS:es are online anti-vaxxers :p
 
Zarathustra[H];1041990972 said:
IMHO security updates SHOULD be forced on ALL platforms to help combat the formation of botnets.
Click to expand...

Because they're pushing things that are blatantly NOT security updates as if they were.
 
Zarathustra[H];1041991002 said:
I am a huge Linux fan and I use it on my desktop at home, and I'd use it at work as well if they'd let me (but instead i have a Windows 7 machine, disk encrypted, and locked down so I only have user privileges, and can't even change !@$#^ cleartype settings), but I agree, this is one of the biggest problem with Linux.

The lack of launch day support for all hardware.

It's better than it used to be 15 years ago, when you had to carefully select your hardware based on what would work in Linux, but still hardware support comes WAAAY too slowly.

The only exception seems to be Geforce drivers, which are out on launch, just like they are for Windows (though it takes a while for them to flow downstream to actual distribution releases, so you might have to install them manually)

My Haswell Celeron in my HTPC was launched in 2013, and STILL doesn't ahve full support for all Intel's hardware video decoding and deinterlacing options, and some of the ones that are available are unstable.

I could get it to work perfectly if I got a Nvidia GPU, but that eliminates the NUC/Chromebox type systems I prefer for HTPC.

Stuff like this is a problem because it stops people who otherwise want to run Linux, and prefer it to windows from running it.

There are other big problems preventing mass adoption (like the relative lack of native versions of big brand name closed source software that people expect to use and are available for Windows and OSX) but the hardware support is the most frustrating.

Again, better than it used to be. MOST of the time most hardware just works, especially if its a year or two old, but you still have these annoyances.
Click to expand...

You are WRONG. Its stil true today that you must very carefully pick your hardware for linux use. Newly launched graphics as recently as the last 5 years have had major compatibility issues under linux.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top