Vista on track to become fastest-adopted Windows

Sales of Windows Vista in the month of February have actually surpassed those of Windows XP in the two months after its release, according to a report by eWeek. Microsoft Windows client group director Kevin Kurtz told the site that more than 20 million copies of the new operating system were sold worldwide in February alone. This makes Vista more successful than XP, which only sold 17 million copies globally within the two months after its October 25, 2001 launch. According to Kurtz, Vista is “on track” to become the fastest-adopted version of Windows ever.

The figures quoted by Kurtz come despite a report posted by market research firm NPD in February. NPD’s report said retail sales of Vista during the first week after launch were 59% lower than sales of its predecessor in the week following October 25, 2001. NPD did also state that PC sales in the week after the Vista release were up 67%, though, which could account for the new operating system’s purported sales success.

Comments closed
    • Coup
    • 13 years ago

    Looking at the socket poll I know I’m not alone. Both my main boxes currently are nForce2 chipset based (Abit NF7-S Ver.2 to be precise). Thanks to Nvidia’s refusal to release ANY chipset drivers for motherboards which were still current production a scant 20 months ago, I can safely ignore Vista. I am told the early RC candidates included basic drivers. As it stands drivers included with Vista will make basic sound ‘sorta work’ (forget Soundstream), there are no IDE drivers (that’s OK the Nvidia drivers were buggy for some), there are Sil Image SATA drivers that can be made to sorta work, but the basic GART driver, while it lets you get video running will do nothing but crash during gaming or anything else complex.

    I have seen no evidence that anyone has been able to hack/slipstream the RC drivers into the shipping product and they were also, I’m told, limited in functionality.

    Yes, this is 99% Nvidia’s fault, in this day and age we can’t expect any mb maker to craft their own drivers and it has made me vow to never buy ANY Nvidia product again.. ever. MS has the clout to lean on these companies and in the past they did make sure that all reasonable current hardware got supported. This time they don’t seem to care and the sheer greed of these companies is making them dare to see just how much of their existing base they can ‘obsolete’ without a severe backlash.

    We build lots of boxes every year, none will EVER contain anything made by Nvidia ever again…

    • Fighterpilot
    • 13 years ago

    One of the key points in the Vista development program early on was the decision to drop the vast amounts of legacy code required for backwards compatibility with everything(and avoid howls of”Its so bloated”)and move to a new more efficient code base.
    Why is it so hard to understand that some software wont run on it?
    Many software companies have just hoped MS would do all the work for them…take Saitek for example.Months after Vista’s release and they still havent managed to come up with the programming software to enable their joysticks to work correctly…even tho its not much more than enabling the ability to re map keyboard strokes.Their answer to the thousands of customers who bought joysticks that now wont work…”We are working on it”…it will be soon blah blah blah.Just substitute their name for plenty of other companies who just folded and walked away when it became obvious that they would have to actually spend some money and time to adapt to Vista.
    Imagine designing a new,clean and efficient Hydrogen car then getting slammed by everyone because it wont run on gasoline…

      • a_non_moose
      • 13 years ago

      At least Saitek is trying and my reply would just be this:

      Sidewinder under XP (or was it 2K)…Microsoft hardware left unsupported under its own OS.

      ’nuff said of that brilliant strategy…not that they couldn’t, just did not care, IIRC.

    • Fighterpilot
    • 13 years ago

    It really is a waste of effort trying to argue with these brain dead lemmings that keep on parroting the “Vista is crap” FUD.
    They are all waiting for the “tone” at TR to shift to a “Hey Vista is actually really good” before they all follow like an avalanche.

      • Snake
      • 13 years ago

      “y[

      • wierdo
      • 13 years ago

      To each his own sheeple. But I’m perfectly fine with Windows 2000 down here, the shiny eye candy of Vista – and even xp – doesn’t impress me personally, if you have Win2k or WinXP, then imho Vista is an exercise in wasting money.

        • Krogoth
        • 13 years ago

        W2K has some inheirt limits with SMP platforms, no x86-64 and support for newer software. To be brunt, W2K is not so hot at handling multi-threaded programs compaired to Linux, XP and Vista.

        W2K is still an excellent choice to use on older pre-dual core/x86-64 rigs.

    • wierdo
    • 13 years ago
    • Shining Arcanine
    • 13 years ago

    Vista is actually selling slower than Windows XP when a proportion is taken to adjust the size of the market. 51 million PCs were sold in 2002, compared to a projected 96 million PCs this year:

    §[<http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdot/~3/104587604/article.pl<]§

    • LookngIntheVoid
    • 13 years ago

    The question are “sales” or “giveaways”. Because the “free” Vista upgrades are used in sales numbers.
    For most companies is waste of resources to jump on the Vista wagon get.

    Simply because:
    No service pack1 released yet
    No large scales production tests done yet (read stress tests)
    No driver support (aka. zero fallback to W2k drivers)
    Increased hardware costs (large scale RAM upgrades etc.)
    Broken application support (upgraded software are required, or new programs must be brought to replace old ones)
    Vista interface is pointless and unneeded in a Citrix Client
    Large scale purcase of new licences for new programs are required.
    Clearcut separation of user and administrator accounts is not there in Vista
    There can be security risks in Vista that is not published yet.
    DRM build into the OS (which can be “refurbished” as Microsoft wishes)
    Eula is changed for Vista, which states ownership is by Microsoft and you only brought usage rights (Xp eula states ownership is held by consumer)

    Benefits for company:
    new shiny for users
    adaptive Tcp/ip stack (ok, this is quite nice)
    selective roaming profile (which can done by hand in W2k3 distributed file structure also)
    NAP / CAP protocols from Cisco & Microsoft (available as an upgrade to Xp later)

    Go figure why people are Anti-DRM and anti-Vista

      • SGT Lindy
      • 13 years ago

      The question are “sales” or “giveaways”. Because the “free” Vista upgrades are used in sales numbers.
      For most companies is waste of resources to jump on the Vista wagon get.

      Simply because:
      No service pack1 released yet
      Honestly the SP1 deal is like saying “don’t do that it will make you go blind” it’s a urban myth these days.

      No large scales production tests done yet (read stress tests)
      Really….how is 70,000 users at one company? There are several large corporations moving to it.

      No driver support (aka. zero fallback to W2k drivers)
      More drivers with Vista than XP had when it came out. This is of less concern for corporations that are smart. They consolidated their hardware long ago if they are smart. They should have a limited number of hardware platforms in production.

      Increased hardware costs (large scale RAM upgrades etc.)
      Our standard corporate build comes with 1gig and has for over a year because the price is right. We are not going to run Aero, Vista basic is all you need for a company and is almost everything Aero is minus the see through crap and 3dflip stuff….both not needed while in Word or Outlook all day.

      Broken application support (upgraded software are required, or new programs must be brought to replace old ones)
      This is the most logical point you make. However a corporation that is smart, will have a locked down environment with only the applications they need. So it really depends if some of your allowed applications are having problems….Java apps seem the most problematic. Lean of your software vendors for a FREE patch or tell them you will find a new replacement. In the corporate world you have the power.

      Vista interface is pointless and unneeded in a Citrix Client
      Umm what is your point? When using a Citrix or Terminal Server client….you will get what the serer gives you. You could have SATAN’s OS complete with flames shooting out of your PC but once you launch one of these clients you wont see it. Vista does not affect them either way.

      Large scale purcase of new licences for new programs are required.
      Unless as a corporation you have purchased an Enterprise or software insurance agreement in which case Vista is FREE.

      Clearcut separation of user and administrator accounts is not there in Vista.

      Ummmm its WAY better than XP….as in WAAAAAAAAYYYYY better. Also some applications refused to run in anything less than “administrator” under XP. Vista forces all apps to run in less than administrator. This goes a very long way in helping users to NOT FRAQ up their PC’s when they can NOT install anything.

      There can be security risks in Vista that is not published yet.
      You could die on the way to work today…..you just never know. Every piece of software has a potential to have security risks.

      DRM build into the OS (which can be “refurbished” as Microsoft wishes)
      Why would a corporation care? Are the employees trying swap music or videos at work? If so I want to work there.

      Eula is changed for Vista, which states ownership is by Microsoft and you only brought usage rights (Xp eula states ownership is held by consumer)
      Are you sure? So much hype around this…and honestly with corporate lenience’s does a corporation care?

      Benefits for company:
      new shiny for users…..ONLY IF USED
      adaptive Tcp/ip stack (ok, this is quite nice)
      Totally easier to deploy with its new image process built in with out the need for third party software.
      New GPO’s and users run in “user” mode so way less chance of them installing the likes of HOTBAR and other crap…..hence reducing the famous Windows “rebuild” to fix the problem which saves $$$$$$$$$$$.

      selective roaming profile (which can done by hand in W2k3 distributed file structure also)
      NAP / CAP protocols from Cisco & Microsoft (available as an upgrade to Xp later)

        • Snake
        • 13 years ago

        r[

        • Delphis
        • 13 years ago

        /[

    • BobbinThreadbare
    • 13 years ago

    Why does everyone say Vista gets a month + 3 days compared to Windows XP’s 2 months, when XP was released on the 25th? Seems to me Windows XP only has a few days on Vista. Unless they are counting Nov and Dec.

      • TheTechReporter
      • 13 years ago

      What, can’t you read?

      “Sales of Windows Vista in the month of February have actually surpassed those of Windows XP in the two months after its release”

      “… XP, which only sold 17 million copies globally within the two months after its October 25, 2001 launch.”

      Remember kiddies, it’s read THEN post, not the other way around.

      Also, Vista launched on January 30th, so it’s not 1 month and 3 days.

      I thought I’d also comment about Microsoft ever claiming it’s “losing money” to piracy. For computer software (and lots of other things like concerts, movies, etc.) what determines how much money you make is how many “licenses” (or tickets, etc.) you sell. Heck, this is the way _everything_ works to an extent (greater # of sales = greater profit).

      Trust me, 20 million sales in 1 month = gigantic profit. Period. End of discussion. If you factor in the price (up to $399 per copy), it just makes the profit seem more obscene. Unless MS spent about $4 Billion or more on creating Vista alone, chances are they’ve already made a net profit after just 1 month.

    • albundy
    • 13 years ago

    with virutally minimal to no driver support for even 2006 hardware, its the best OS out there according to the idiots at PC magazine!

      • Usacomp2k3
      • 13 years ago

      All of my hardware on both my systems are support. My laptop 100%, the desktop has all the drivers, just missing a few fancies (such as the DirectSound issue).

      • SGT Lindy
      • 13 years ago

      Actually Vista shipped with more drivers than XP did.

      §[<http://www.overclockers.com/tips01113/<]§ Who is the idiot? The driver argument is old....the same shit happened when XP came out. You have basically got some @$$ wipe software and hardware vendors out to make a buck. Some software that does not work with Vista....will get a patch.....and other vendors will charge you for an upgrade. I have a 8 month old $350 HP multifunction device. It works with Vista but none of the scanning software and other stuff it came with will work. HP's site says they are looking into it. Translation buy a new MF device from them. They just got the last of my money....I did the same dance with them back with XP from 98.

    • ew
    • 13 years ago

    20 million apples vs 17 million oranges and people are trying to draw conclusions. It’s just marketing.

    • Reldey
    • 13 years ago

    While the sales look good, the overall functionality is sorta poor, from what ive heard.

    For me windows xp was no reason to uograde my computer from windows 98, at least untill the service pack was released.

      • axeman
      • 13 years ago

      What, you don’t want to upgrade so you can start making good use of that RAM you were just wasting before on stupid things like applications and get the awesome new eyeball straining taskbar ?

        • Usacomp2k3
        • 13 years ago

        You clearly have no idea what you are talking about, oh, and you forgot the <sarcasm> tag.

    • NotParker
    • 13 years ago

    r[

    • Snake
    • 13 years ago

    b[http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/vista/stacking_vista_licenses_too_high.html<]§ Microsoft is counting in the "20 million" in sales _[

      • Entroper
      • 13 years ago

      I wanted to bump this because people seem to be completely ignoring it in their arguments, but also to say:

      MS may not actually be “selling” more copies of Vista than they did XP, once you take the free upgrade coupons into account. However, whether customers are buying new computers with Vista, buying Vista to install, getting a free upgrade to Vista because of a coupon, or getting Vista as a free upgrade in a student software license agreement (like myself), the fact is that people are *[

        • hmmm
        • 13 years ago

        Ignoring the backlog of coupons and assuming all 20 million are real new adoptions, then that is still only proportionately equal to that of XP. There are twice as many computers sold now than there were in 2002. So it only makes sense that Vista’s numbers would be roughly twice that of XP (especially considering how dependent Vista is on new hardware).

    • Gandhi
    • 13 years ago

    This should put things in perspective a bit (see quote from Gartner analyst):

    §[<http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/1700ap_microsoft_vista_sales.html<]§

      • blastdoor
      • 13 years ago

      I like this quote:

      y[<"Microsoft should have more TV ads selling Vista than Apple has criticizing Vista," he said, referring to a popular series of Apple Inc. commercials that, among other things, portray the Vista upgrade as a grave surgical procedure.<]y It's entirely possible that MS does have /[

    • blastdoor
    • 13 years ago

    Two things:

    1. If PC sales grew at 10% per year, then you’d expect OS sales today to be 1.1^6 = 1.77 times what they were 6 years ago. 17*1.77 = 30. 30/2 = 15. So, by this crude calculation, Vista sales are higher by 33%. That sounds pretty good.

    Except for….

    2. When XP was introduced back in 2001, it was on the heels of Windows 2000 having come out about a year earlier. The company that I’m working for is *still* running win2k (never bothered upgrading to XP). The Vista analogy would have been if Vista Business were released one year and Vista Home the next year. In other words, comparing Vista to XP is nowhere near a clean comparison.

    I think the right comparison here is to look at marketshare over the next few years. If MS prevents competitors from gaining marketshare, then Vista will be a success. If Mac and/or Linux marketshare goes up, then Vista is a failure.

    • flip-mode
    • 13 years ago

    Is that faster by the percentage of PCs running the OS or faster by the number of sales? Edit: Um yeah, so what if I asked the same question everyone else has.

    • lithven
    • 13 years ago

    Why is everyone so negative?

    By their numbers they had 20 million copies sold of Vista in one month. This compares with ~17 million of XP in two months. One of the complaints seems to be the market has grown since then. Yes it has, but has it grown at nearly 20% per year over the last 5 years so that the increased sales can be strictly attributed to market growth? I some how doubt that, but I don’t have the numbers.

    The other complaint is that Vista being pre-installed doesn’t count. It does! They are comparing it to XP, the actual numbers are pretty meaningless for that comparison. Unless you’re going to say something has changed since then and corporations were swarming to use XP when it was released but are being more reluctant with Vista, then the comaprison is valid.

    • dgiik
    • 13 years ago

    It’s pretty clear to everyone that they are using the raw numbers to make things look good, but the actual case is the opposite.
    20 million is only 17.6 percent more than 17 million. I’d bet money than the actual number of PCs purchased in that time period is much much greater than 17.6% compared to when Windows XP was released.

    Anyone know were I could find statistics for the number of PCs sold by monthf for the last few years?

      • NotParker
      • 13 years ago

      20 million in *[<1<]* month is way better than 17 million in *[<2<]* months.

    • magila
    • 13 years ago

    These numbers mean nothing if they include copies shipped pre-installed on systems, which they surely do. A great many of those systems go to businesses where they are promptly wiped by IT and replaced with a standard image. And I’m betting not too many of those images involve Vista.

      • Logdan
      • 13 years ago

      y[

        • Usacomp2k3
        • 13 years ago

        BDD does look pretty interesting.

    • Gerbil Jedidiah
    • 13 years ago

    It’s 20 million versus 17 million, but what is the difference in customer base? I’d be more interested to know what percentage of PC users acquired Vista more so than just the number 20 million. Alone that number doesn’t mean too much. It’s like Geico saying 4 million people switched to them. What they don’t say is that 3.8 million went elsewhere.

      • bluetoo
      • 13 years ago

      Read carefully. The 17 million is over 2 months. The 20 million is over one month.

        • Usacomp2k3
        • 13 years ago

        The 20 million is just february…but Vista launched with like 3 days left in January? So for all intents and purposes, February is almost all of it.

    • sigher
    • 13 years ago

    people in 2007 are idiots, we know this, why keep bringing evidence of this?

      • Fighterpilot
      • 13 years ago

      Presumably the TR adoption of Vista gives them a pass on the “idiots” status?
      Get real…..Vista is a good OS……its fun to use and works well.

      • ew
      • 13 years ago

      Why limit it to 2007. People have always been idiots. Microsoft just gave them a big opportunity to exercise their idiocy in 2007.

      Flame on!!!

      • ScythedBlade
      • 13 years ago

      Or, by percentage-wise it may be a bit less considering that computers are more important in 2007 than in 2001.

      • wierdo
      • 13 years ago

      Indeed too many idiots, wave any shiny piece of eye candy and they flock to it, wouldn’t matter if it’s just candy-wrapped feces lol.

      Ooo look, shineyy! haha.

        • axeman
        • 13 years ago

        the term “polished turd” comes to mind…

        but I will qualify that with another observation that the hardware vendors need their asses kicked.. Vista was about the most delayed OS of all time, yet somehow they still got caught with their pants down when it was released ? Did they expect it was just going to be delayed indefinately, or were they too busy programming new and improved bloatware for XP? HP Printer drivers, I’m looking at you…

      • Krogoth
      • 13 years ago

      Why are you bitching about Vista of all things?

      Vista is just a better OS than XP! XP and W2K were more raw at their launch and it took a while for drives and software to mature and catch-up.

      EULA may be draconian, but practically all major software developers want users to simply own the “rights” to use the software not own its contents. It used to be just too cumbersome and difficult to setup such a scheme. Mainstream broadband solutions is what made this business model a reality.

      If you don’t like it, then vote with your dollars and use alternatives like Linux. Just don’t complain on how annoying it is to recompile the OS every time you do a security update, load new core drivers etc.

        • Snake
        • 13 years ago

        y[

          • Krogoth
          • 13 years ago

          Businesses take “don’t fix it if it isn’t broken” approach to upgrading terminals.

          The only reason to upgrade for them to upgrade to Vista is when XP’s support sunshines which is still a while yet.

            • Snake
            • 13 years ago

            y[<"Businesses take "don't fix it if it isn't broken" approach to upgrading terminals.<]y" That is a good point, but - you may think I am off base here - shouldn't everyone be thinking that way? This is the OS. This is not a single application nor a system patch. This change affects the very way your computer operates; it affects ALL applications, it affects every action. Therefore the people who are "railing" against Vista are doing so for a point: ----------------------------------------- /[

            • Krogoth
            • 13 years ago

            Vista has some sigificant core improvements with memory managment and threading over XP.

            Vista is a lot more snappy with multitasking and handling several high-demanding apps.

            The main problem with Vista is just having immature drivers and lack of leagcy support. Why would you even want to install Vista on hardware that is over 3 years old?

        • rxc6
        • 13 years ago

        q[

    • BiffStroganoffsky
    • 13 years ago

    Yep, my friend bought Vista standard or some such for $50 when buying some peripherals. I guess people have to buy Vista because it is so much harder to pirate, eh matey? I wonder if they are going to use that stat to ‘prove’ that they were/are losing revenue because of rampant piracy of their previous software releases.?. 20 million sales in one month doesn’t leave much market for pirates. I hope they don’t starve.

      • wierdo
      • 13 years ago

      Pirates are not stupid, they only trade in good products 😀

      But seriously, getting cracked Vista shouldn’t be a big deal if you wanna go that route, the inconveniences of the retail product don’t affect those who pirate, it’s only a hassle for legit customers.

      • hmmm
      • 13 years ago

      Uh, I could provide you with FTP and HTTP links to at least four different working pirated releases of Vista Ultimate right now. They all work without the annoyance of the legit versions. I’m not encouraging anyone to pirate software, but to believe it isn’t just as easy to do it with Vista is just ignorant. Don’t overestimate how hard it was to crack. It was done instantly. At any rate, people don’t seem to be too interested in downloading and using it. I’m happy with my XP. In fact, Vista might be a great antipiracy measure in that regard. 🙂

      • ToeBot
      • 13 years ago

      This board could use one of those “Sarcasm” tags, it being such a hard thing to convey in words alone.

    • blitzy
    • 13 years ago

    sales of computers are probably + too..

    that said, im on vista here so some people must be buying.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This