June 2, 2014

Windows 9 Looms on the Horizon

Filed under: Main — Tags: , , — admin @ 12:01 am

I just checked the stats for Windows 8. Things don’t look good.

Assuming that Wikipedia is an accurate source of information (stop laughing when convenient), I pulled the latest Windows usage statistics as of March 2014. The Excel pie chart I made is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Various versions of Windows and how much they're in use today.

Figure 1. Various versions of Windows and how much they’re in use today.

As you can see, things don’t bode well for Windows 8. In fact, if you include both releases of Windows 8 (the original was well as version 8.1), you get only 12 percent of the Windows users out there using an operating system that’s nearly 2 years old.

Compare that with Windows XP, which is over 12 years old, and it retains a 31 percent of the Windows market share. That’s huge.

Obviously, Microsoft is aware of the dismal Windows 8 sales figures. How could they not be? Even if Wikipedia’s data is a complete fabrication generated by seething Linux fanatics, I know from the real world and from the emails I get that few people use Windows 8.

I don’t have a Windows 8 book, other than the one I published myself, Windows 8 Sucks. For my other books, I begged the publisher not to label any of them as the “Windows 8 Version.” That would have sunk sales quicker than the iceberg sank the Titanic.

And that thought brings me to Windows 9.

No one knows whether or not Microsoft will dub the next version of Windows as “nien” or not. They may call it Windows Sunflower for all I know.

And the rumor mills are quite vague on the topic; apparently Microsoft’s normal leaky channels are pretty tight when it comes to Windows 9.

What is generally known is this:

• Microsoft definitely doesn’t want to screw up Windows 9. If they do, they realize that Windows is dead as an operating system. Users will rally around XP or Win 7 and use them exclusively (imagine the black market) or they’ll migrate to Linux or OS X.

• No word on whether Microsoft will kill the Metro interface. I hope they do; a PC is not a tablet. Apple understands this fact.

• This is odd: The Wikipedia entry for Windows 9 is dreadfully bare. It’s almost like some major corporation is ensuring that nothing is written on that page.

• Apparently the release day is ventured to be April of 2015, which is less than a year away. My guess: It slips to the fall of 2015.

• Already they’re talking about Office 2015. Microsoft have recently tied the release of Office to that of Windows.

So there you have it: That’s about all I know regarding Windows 9. I suppose it’s wait-and-see for the time being. But do keep your ears peeled for a certain sucking sound.

4 Comments

  1. What I want to know is why Windows 2000 is still on that chart.

    I realize you write your posts in advance but during //BUILD/ this year, they previewed an update to Windows 8.1 that would bring back the Windows 7 Start Menu (albeit with a non-removable mini-Metro launcher literally tacked onto the side; supposedly you don’t have to pin tiles to it) but just today the various tipsters are reporting that the return of the Start Menu is coming in 2015, supposedly around the same time as Windows 9. For reference, here’s the picture of the “new” Start Menu as shown at //BUILD/: http://blogs.windows.com/cfs-file.ashx/__key/communityserver-blogs-components-weblogfiles/00-00-00-59-23-metablogapi/Windows_2D00_8_2D00_1_2D00_update_2D00_1_2D00_screen_2D00_for_2D00_media_2D00_UPDATED_5F00_6E6977C2.jpg

    As far as the normal leak channels being quiet this time around, a couple of well-known leakers were arrested not too long ago and that’s caused a quiet in the leak scene, likely nobody else wants to risk getting arrested just yet.

    Comment by linuxlove — June 2, 2014 @ 7:11 am

  2. Destroying the Start button menu was removing nearly 20 years of training for all Windows users. It was just a dumb move by a company that has consistently proven that it doesn’t understand its customers.

    I don’t know why Wikipedia lists Windows 2000 in their stats. Remember, Win2K was a “business” model for Windows, and so some small businesses may still be using it. Odd.

    Comment by admin — June 2, 2014 @ 7:30 am

  3. One poss reason for Windows 2000 (the reason I still have a Win200 box) is it was the most stable version of Windows for certain Embedded application (AVR studio and the like) and there are still machines (not networked) that are used as only certain application will run on it. Also it is the civilian version of Windows for Warships (or what ever the proper name is!) so there is going to be some people running it. Sadly .NET 2.0 is the highest version to run on it.

    Comment by glennp — June 7, 2014 @ 1:48 pm

  4. “Civilian Version of Windows for Warships.” Yeah, I’d buy that version!

    Comment by admin — June 7, 2014 @ 4:22 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Powered by WordPress