MS Says Vista Selling At Twice XP's Pace

Several readers made us aware that Microsoft said today that it sold more than 20 million Windows Vista licenses in the first month after the OS's general debut on January 30. This compares to 17 million licenses of XP sold in the first two months after its release. (Just a coincidence the announcement came out a day after this community's speculation, surely.) Most of the coverage of this story, picked up from Reuters, looks like it follows an MS press release. The Associated Press dug deeper, noting that since XP's release the overall PC market has grown by almost a factor of 2, so it would be a surprise if Vista didn't do twice as well: "...51 million PCs were sold to consumers worldwide in 2002; this year... 96 million consumers will buy a computer." Also, Microsoft's 20 million figure includes the backlog of upgrade coupons bundled with XP computers sold since last October.

Misleading

But given that the personal computer market has nearly doubled since XP launched, Vista sales "probably should be more," said Michael Silver, vice president of research at Gartner, a technology research group.

In summary: computer sales up; consumers forced to adopt Vista. Microsoft chuckles gleefully.

Re:Misleading

Consumers don't have to rationalize buying Vista. If they're buying a new computer, they don't have a choice. A telling quote from the article:

Microsoft declined to break out the number of Vista copies sold at retail, though it has said in the past that 80 percent of Windows revenue comes from sales to PC makers.

Eventually we'll all (those of us running Windows) upgrade, but my sense of things right now is that most XP users are waiting until software availability forces the upgrade.

Re:Misleading

Yes, my point was simply that there are people out there who are willingly upgrading and some of them are even geeks.

Re:Misleading

Consumers don't have to rationalize buying Vista. If they're buying a new computer, they don't have a choice. A telling quote from the article:

"Microsoft declined to break out the number of Vista copies sold at retail, though it has said in the past that 80 percent of Windows revenue comes from sales to PC makers."

What's more is that the figures suggest that 20 million copies of Vista are currenty being used, rather than having been shipped to OEMs and sitting on shelves. I would suspect that the actual number of Vista licenses in the wild are substantially lower, to the point of embarassment for Microsoft.

Personally, I've bought my last Microsoft license. At the same time I realize that Business runs on Microsoft, Business accounts for the lion's share of Microsoft licenses, and I've yet to see Business in general, or any single business in particular, leaping towards Vista. Most, including the one I work for, are waiting until it is absolutely necessary (certainly not before SP1) before even contemplating a widespread rollout.

The numbers are nonsense and reflective only of PCs in the pipeline (or whatever other figures can be found in Redmond-area proctological exams), not in deployment. In 12 months, Vista will be unavoidable but for now it is a non factor. As far as Business goes, it's still more important to make sure your widget works with MS Windows 2000 than with Vista.

Re:Misleading

In 12 months, Vista will be unavoidable but for now it is a non factor.

I wouldn't even give them that. Personally, I don't plan on upgrading any of the computers I administer until at least 18 months out. I've got a test machine running Vista Ultimate, and while I'm actually a fan of the features Vista introduces, it will be an absolute nightmare to roll this out to my users, especially since (currently) Vista and Server 2003 don't always see eye-to-eye. Microsoft is just trying to convince people that Vista is doing well, and I understand that, but any business that tries to upgrade any time soon is asking for a world of hurt.

Re:Misleading

I agree. I absolutely do not believe Microsoft's numbers. I remember quite clearly the rollout of XP and the major organizations that upgraded pretty quickly, plus the general interest in the enthusiast community. Neither is the case with XP. Maybe a lot of those numbers are like me, who got a copy of Vista Home Premium with a new computer, and after a few hours of frustrated wrestling with it, simply formatted the hard disk and installed my trusty copy of XP Pro SP2. I imagine that since I paid for an OEM copy of Vista, they can count me as a purchaser, although I won't touch it at least until Service Pack 2 AND Microsoft announces they are taking all the DRM out of Vista. Until then, I will not use it or recommend it.

Re:Misleading

>Consumers don't have to rationalize buying Vista. If they're buying a new computer, they don't have a choice.

Well... a week ago, an acquaintance said she was finally upgrading her computer (from one running Windows 98, with 64 Mbytes of RAM!), and wanted some advice, because she'd heard bad things about Vista. She'd heard of Linux, but had bought the line that one had to be a "nerd" to use it, so she was hoping to buy a computer with Windows XP; I didn't try to convince her otherwise. I did tell her that now that Vista has been released for the general public, basically any computer running Windows she buys now will have Vista on it. Based on that, she said a Macintosh was looking better and better, so I expect that's what she'll end up with.

Of course, that's a lousy sample size, but I'm heartened somewhat that an average computer user is leery of moving to Vista.

Re:Misleading

And exactly what features would that be? Seriously.

I've been using Vista for a few weeks now, came with my new laptop. There's been a single thing where I've thought "Hey, that's new, and really useful". And that's the search in the start menu. Everything else is just meh, or just a new face on an old item.

The taskbar preview is a perfect example. I move my mouse down to the taskbar to click on a folder, and a little thumbnail appears. A *useless* thumbnail. It doesn't do anything, or provide any more info than the folder icon and it's name did. It's just miscellaneous fluff. Same thing for the flip 3d thing. I don't even use it, just alt-tab the same as I've always done. Oooh, the start menu, that's different, it's now a circle instead of an elongated oval. Woohoo. Except it no longer scrolls in a useful manner. Until I turn off the new appearance, which makes the one useful thing disappear (the search). The sidebar? It's the same old stuff just on the side, instead of down at the bottom in the tray. A couple of new games.

And in exchange for these few new things, I get UAC that harasses me 20 times a day every time I do anything like open a folder or install a program. There's really nothing here, it's the emperors new clothes. The same old XP in a new face to hide it.

Literally, I have *zero* desire to install it on my other computer that came with XP.

Re:Misleading

The taskbar preview is a perfect example. I move my mouse down to the taskbar to click on a folder, and a little thumbnail appears. A *useless* thumbnail. It doesn't do anything

I disagree, did you see that it's not just a thumbnail but the actual live window ? (try it with a video...) It can be usefull for those tasks you want to keep an eye on. For example say you're burning a cd and copying some files. With the preview you just need to hover your mouse on the taskbar icon to see how the progress is going, instead of maximizing the window, checking, and reminimize... A little detail yes but vista is full of those little neat things. But i agree about flip3d, they could have make something really more useful if they took the time to.

Re:Misleading

Not quite... computer sales up, lots of Vista freebie coupons lying around and still only 20 million copies? Vista is not going well and as far as I can tell Microsoft is doing everything it can to prop up the numbers. Two different discount programs, now this misleading press release. I don't think Microsoft has much reason to be chuckling at all...

MS has to show good sales figures to shareholders

Anybody that didn't buy a Vista license would, most likely, have bought an XP license if Vista dis not exist. In other words, Vista has not really increased MS revenues.

The big sell is to MS shareholders. Somehow MS must convince the shareholders that the $5bn spent on Vista is going to be a worthwhile investment.

I'm looking for an XP computer

I am looking to buy a MS-based computer for development (I normally use Linux). I'm looking for an XP computer, not a Vista one. The reason: The Microsoft software I want to run does not run on Vista, only on XP!

Spelling..

MS Says Vista Selling At Twice XP's Price

There. Fixed that for you.

Huh? Of course they are!

this year... 96 million consumers will buy a computer.

Of course they are! People are fed up with cleaning spyware off their machines, to the point of buying a new one when the old one crashes. It's only in the very recent past (actually, mostly within XP's lifetime) that spyware's become such a menace, after all.

Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

Well we Had 95, 98 (in 1995, 1998 respectfully) 2000 / ME in 1999,2000 or so. Then XP in 2001, Then Vista in 2007. Well I would expect that people would be wanting a new version. People with 2000 or ME are at a point now they really need an upgrade. With 95 and 98 no longer supported people may be looking for a new version now.

When XP was released People had Windows 2000 and to a lesser extent ME that is good enough. So no need to upgrade. But with the long time for upgrades people with XP when they got a system in 2001 are now due for an upgrade.

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

Wait a minute. Did you just say Me was "good enough"?! Are you nuts?

XP was a pretty big improvement over what was available prior to it. Most home users were running 98 or Me. The jump from 98/Me to XP was much greater than XP to Vista in my mind.

Re:Well Long Upgrade Cycle.

People with 2000 or ME are at a point now they really need an upgrade. With 95 and 98 no longer supported people may be looking for a new version now.

And I'm really glad someone showed me Ubuntu. 2 Windows 98 machines and 1 Windows 2000 machine are now running Ubuntu. It's a major upgrade. No more hunting for drivers to make a thumb drive work. Power Point presentations display properly. There is lots of neat desktop toys. DVD support is better. CD ripping and burning is better. Photo editing and video editing is easy without buying any new software. The SIP phone which will also work with MS Netmeeting is a nice touch. The chat program which can use several services without an ad window is great.

Since I've found the new upgrade, I've been sharing it and showing it off. The new 3d desktop toys are lots of fun. Some people assumed I was running Vista, and wanted to see the new OS, so I let them.. Lots of fun.

In short, It's the applications stupid. A general lack of malware goes a long way.

Re:I would buy vista if...

If you buy Vista Business, or Ultimate - you have downgrade rights to install XP Pro... This is what I am doing at my office. Every new PC that comes in with Vista - wiped and XP installed. Call up MS licensing, and they generate a key for you when you tell them you are downgrading. Perfectly legal and in the eula. This way, when we finally HAVE to go to vista, the licenses are ready and waiting, since the PCs came with them.

well

If Windows sales have doubled because the PC market has doubled. Should Linux and Mac sales have also doubled?

Re:well

Should Linux and Mac sales have also doubled?

Um they have, but in the last couple months, not over 6 years ago sales figures..

Mac sales... From the financual page..
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=AAPL&annual [yahoo.com]

Income Sept 30 2006 19,315,000 All numbers in thousands.
Income Sept 24 2005 13,931,000
Income Sept 25 2004 8,279,000

In two years from 2004 to 2006 the income went from 8 Billion to 19 Billion. It's not all iPod and iTunes sales.

Picking just one Lunux distro which is popular..
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=2276320 [ubuntuforums.org]

Since there isn't any real sales figures, I thought I would go to see if the online chatter is increasing. The Ubuntu forum is growing rapidly. "We register over 14,000 new accounts each month"

If you want a pretty graph of Linux installed base from 2000-2006, take a look here.
http://linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/reports/6065/1/ screenshot3524/ [linuxplanet.com]

A casual glance seems to indicate more than a doubling of the 2000 installed base figure.

Here is what a market analist has to say;
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS2014 7206 [idc.com]

"IDC offers the following recommendations for services providers:

Open source will become business as usual in two to three years, so act today and create direct open source services offerings and embed open source in your solutions where you can"

and

"The study also reveals that open source is moving up on the investment agenda of companies worldwide, as services providers (mostly services arms of technology companies) have formalized support, training, and certification services to encourage adoption of open source (principally Linux) on their products. As open source software goes mainstream, IDC finds that services vendors must further develop open source capabilities in order to meet their clients' needs and attract new customers."

20 million - 2

Two brand new Dell Dimension Workstations ($1200 each) came into our office last week. One remimaged to XP (SP2) because office user said Vista (Pro) was slower than crap. The other was regulated to the lab for dual-boot Redhat/SuSE client testing. Vista wiped clean off it.

What Microsofts Marketing Machine states and what users do are two different things.

Enjoy,

Re:20 million - 2

What Microsofts Marketing Machine states and what users do are two different things.

Not really. The announcement Microsoft sent out regards to sales, not the amount of users compared to XP to a given date.

While I'm sure a lot of people remove Vista, a lot of people did when they first got hold of XP too.

Tag: Bullshit

The telling comment is here:

20 million figure includes the backlog of upgrade coupons bundled with XP computers sold since last October.

So Microsoft isn't quoting figures for sales spanning two months, but rather for more than five months, including at least three months of "pre-sales" in the form of coupons which likely may never be redeemed. If the coupon is never redeemed, then it can't be counted as a Vista sale, since Vista was never installed.

More FUD from the masters. Which frankly doesn't surprise me. Without apps irrevocably tied to Vista, there's no impetus to "upgrade," and people will stay with XP. Microsoft is clearly desperate to make Vista appear to have a larger installed base than it does so that ISVs will commit to it.

Schwab

$79 more for XP with a new system, VISTA = FREE

Of course they are selling more. If you want XP with a new system from one of the PC manufacturers like DELL, it will cost you $79 for XP or you can have VISTA for FREE!

I don't know anyone in my circle that has purchased VISTA. Personally, I am holding off for about (3) years until all the DRM and hardware issues are all worked out. I can't see any compelling reason to move to VISTA and if I do buy a new system with it pre-loaded for FREE, I will move that system to dual boot Linux/XP.

Want to know how they are doing this??

I guarantee you that this was planned, and they are stuffing their product chain to provide these numbers. Basically for anyone who does not understand the process, it simply means that when they stock vendors, they are counting these items as "sold". This is a very common tactic, and was exactly what they did with the Zune... Meaning they have a history of using this manipulation tactic...

Seeing as they did not say they were NOT doing this, I can assure you that they are. Dont believe me? Well, lets see when their quarterly report comes out... I will bet almost anything that it will be uneventful... :-)

Why Upgrade when you can take the Souped-Up XP?

My Dad's new 'Vista-Ready' machine came with XP, and we're KEEPING it on XP precisely because this this thing is a graphical dream on it. It's got an nVidia card, sweet processors, ability to support two 22" widescreen monitors... all for under $1000, because it's 'merely' an XP machine, albeit a Vista-capable one.

If this is their idea of 'Vista-Capable', why would I want to go to an operating system where these awesome specs are merely ADEQUATE?

Bundling Vista with ALL new PCs is ridiculous

Not all new PCs are capable of running Vista with anything even remotely close to decent performance.

A couple of weeks ago I got my mum a fairly low-end notebook (1.73GHz, 512MB RAM, 40GB HD). Since she's not exactly much of a power user and only wanted to browse the web, extract pics from her camera and occasionally check her email, her needs were easy to satisfy with a cheaper computer. Only problem was, this notebook (like EVERY SINGLE ONE in the store) was pre-installed with Vista. I figured, hey, if they're running Vista on a brand-new PC then surely the manufacturer had chosen a decent configuration to ensure decent performance. Damn I was so naive.

It was slow to boot, slow to shutdown/hibernate, slow to run programs on, full of useless pre-installed crap (e.g. Norton with 30-day subscription). After Vista did some weird shit that caused this new PC to hang with massive non-stop disk accessing, I decided to blow Vista entirely away and stick an old copy of XP with Service Pack 2 on instead. Now, the system is faster to start, faster to shutdown/hibernate, faster to launch software, it has only the software it needs with no crap lying around after an uninstall, much more responsive, plus I freed about 8 GB of a hidden recovery partition. All in all, it was a win for us with absolutely no disadvantages and a shitload of positives. In the future I might even be tempted to install Ubuntu instead, but I won't push my luck just yet. :)

This shouldn't be particularly surprising I suppose, but I mention it because I was totally shocked how quickly and ruthlessly the manufacturers were in totally abandoning a perfectly-working OS like XP, and sticking Vista as their default setup on hardware that shouldn't have been running it to begin with. It really astounded me just how useful the system was... *without* Vista.

What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

Can it open ODF, Lotus, WordPerfect, etc. formats natively within its own OS or office applications?

No

Does it support writing to PDF natively?

No

Can it natively play all of my media audio and video formats, including FLAC, Ogg Vorbis, Theora and others?

No

Does it support onboard IM clients using standards-compliant protocols (Jabber? irc? Others?)

No

Can I use freely available tools to build software on it, and do those tools come with the OS itself?

No

Can I read multiple filesystems at the same time on multiple different external and internal media? Linux, Solaris, Mac OS X and other filesystems?

No

Can I mount NFS shares to other non-Vista resources with existing, included applications/tools?

No

Remind me again what Vista does that my Linux box can't? Oh wait... purty jellybean graphics and melted-crayon menus and icons. Right.

No thanks, Linux does more, on less resources, at less cost, and is more extensible, secure and updates are MUCH easier to manage.. oh, and I KNOW what's running under the covers, and if I don't, I can go look and see for myself.

Re:What can Vista do that my Linux box can't?

"Uh, you can also use Linux without needing to know how to use those things"

Well lets see - I had to:
1. Compile my LAN card driver
2. VI my X11Config settings to get my monitor to work properly
3. Manually RPM remove some packages in a circular version loop
4. Yum update my Printer stuff
5. Manually set up my network cards using vi /etc/sysconfig/networking

All this because:
1. I have a combo printer/fax/scanner
2. On board lan
3. Dual DVD monitors of differing resolutions

So - no, none of the machines I've used linux on in the last 5 years have ever been install and use.

80% of the universe wants install and use... Linux doesn't provide that.

I am one of those

I bought a Toshiba laptop late November, which came with XP on it, with a free upgrade to Vista (with $25 for shipping).

The disk was immediately resized, and Kubuntu 6.10 Edgy Eft [baheyeldin.com] was installed on it. Windows XP was never even booted, but kept there "just in case it is needed".

For the free upgrade, I did all the paperwork for it, paid the shipping fee, and have not received it yet. I don't intend to boot it either, but I ordered it "just in case".

So, I am counted as an XP user and a Vista user, while I am neither.

vista wellness vs reality

The Associated Press dug deeper, noting that since XP's release the overall PC market has grown by almost a factor of 2, so it would be a surprise if Vista didn't do twice as well:

Why split hairs about comparative "wellness". Regardless, Microsoft is making a financial killing. If they've sold twice as much Vista then they've sold twice as much Vista no matter what's happening with the PC market. The money is in their pockets and they will continue to be the largest software company because they can keep doing that.

approx 100% of are cannibalized from XP sales

I would say that almost all of those sales are to people who would have bought XP if it was available to them. To create the illusion of demand for Vista Microsoft's had to use their pricing agreements with manufacturers to cut off XP as nearly as completely as possible. If I was buying a new computer running Windows today, a hard requirement for it would be that it include XP rather than Vista, and I'm not confident that I could find one.

By comparison, we were able to buy laptops running 2000 Pro rather than XP for years after XP came out, and XP was still selling better, percentage-wise, than 2000. That's because XP had a reason for existing... it was the retail release of NT5 and replaced the appalling Windows 9x-based Windows Me. People were going out in large numbers and buying XP for computers they already had... not simply getting it as "whatever came with my new computer".

So, no, Microsoft isn't "making a financial killing". They're selling almost the same number of copies of Windows as they would have if Vista had never shipped.

Look at the browser stats, wow!

Vista release date Nov 8, 2006:    XP release date Oct 25, 2001:
Vista at < 0.5% Dec 2006           XP at 4%, Nov 2001
Vista at 0.6% Jan 2007             XP at 6.5%, Dec 2001
Vista at 1.2% Feb 2007             XP at 9%, Jan 2002

Can't wait till the Q1 SEC reports come out, ouch!

sources:
Google zeitgeist, w3schools, wikipedia

No wonder

... I've been trying to buy a copy of Windows XP here [Brisbane, Australia] for weeks now. Pretty much every single software retail vendor that I've been to just tells me its not possible to buy it any more - they just try to foist a copy of Vista on to me.

There's a few places I can still get OEM (and a few places that seem to have old copies lying around here and there), but if you're Random McRandalot and listen to what sales people are pitching, you can't get XP any more - so why not try Vista?

Re:I thought it was....

It certainly is exaggerated and is being used for stock speculation. They are telling the world they are selling twice as good to get that stock up. It'll go up and then fall back down as the real numbers rear their heads. I've done my part and continue to do so in telling customers about the spying and the other DRM/CRM implemented into Vista and how Microsoft is now hostile towards its customers. I describe it as an example with Walmart entering your home to search your belongings to ensure that you have not stolen anything from their store. Most people understand that their computer is an extension of their homes and that they certainly would not let the government enter without warrant and when I then tell them that they would certainly not allow a private entity to enter they agree wholeheartedly.

Sheesh, what does it take to understand that Microsoft is doing the equivalent of searching your home when they enter your computer and search. No, they don't have the right to enter my computer or home to search for any reason. If they feel I have stolen from them let them hit the courts and sue/arrest me. They'll find I am above board. But the sentiment stays. Hit the courts and do it legally. Even the police can't keep entering your home over and over to search. If they do it is harassment. The problem is that people don't know that or don't initially understand it as a search and seizure procedure.

Let me repeat. They have no right to enter my home/computer/business to do anything unless I give them permission even if it is to protect their IP. If they think I am stealing they can hit the courts up and to through due process to convict. I say this even though I am 100% legit on all copies of Windows. You would not let Walmart enter your home or business to search for goods that might be stolen and hence you would not let, should not let, Microsoft do the same.

Re:I thought it was....

By reading this, you agree that you are my bitch. Bend over.

It's a binding agreement. Do it.

Re:I thought it was....

Everything I have been reading about Microsoft in Redmond and about products surrounding them give me the eerie feeling that Microsoft is struggling desperately. Why else would they put out such false number!?! I think they are desperate to get their stock value up. There are a lot of reasons for this, not solely the fact that their employee's equity in the company is declining and there's no bright future there for new top of the line employees. Give them good value in stock incentives and you can keep them, but if your stock is down and dwindling you do everything you can to make it appear high.

The below article describes nicely how Microsoft is fudging the numbers to make it appear that sales were higher than they actually are. Essentially the conclusion is that sales of Vista are weak. It's just sad that a company like Microsoft has to fib in such a way in order to artificially inflate their stock value.

http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/vista/stack ing_vista_licenses_too_high.html [microsoft-watch.com]