What Percentage of Personal Computers Use Windows?

2048Megabytes

2048Megabytes

Active Member
What is the estimated percentage of personal computers using the Microsoft Windows operating system? I was reading an old article in 2008 that claims about 89 percent of personal computers are using Windows, about 9 percent are Macintosh and the remaining two percent are Linux.
 
Interesting information you posted. I can't believe even an estimated 0.17 percent of computers are using Windows NT. It was the worst operating system Microsoft ever released from what I read.

I like using Linux Ubuntu 9.04 for the Internet to resist malicious software. But I am also dual-booting with Windows Vista 32-bit.
 
2048Megabytes said:
Interesting information you posted. I can't believe even an estimated 0.17 percent of computers are using Windows NT. It was the worst operating system Microsoft ever released from what I read.

I like using Linux Ubuntu 9.04 for the Internet to resist malicious software. But I am also dual-booting with Windows Vista 32-bit.
Click to expand...

Well, to be fair, everything from windows 2000 & XP up to windows 7 is based off of NT.
 
mep916 said:
Aggregated, about 91% according to this site. I'm sure the numbers vary between 85% to 90ish%
Click to expand...

That is estimated world market share, not consumer market share. The OP stated personal computers, which puts apple in about the 24% range for house hold computers.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-9831586-17.html

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2008/04/01/analyst-apples-us-consumer-market-share-now-21-percent/

http://community.winsupersite.com/b...u-s-consumer-market-share-now-21-percent.aspx

You got to realize though that the consumer market share only makes up a portion of the total market share.
 
bomberboysk said:
Well, to be fair, everything from windows 2000 & XP up to windows 7 is based off of NT.
Click to expand...

I know Windows 2000 was was an improvement on Windows NT but Windows NT was still a horrible operating system full of problems. Instead of fixing it Microsoft released Windows 2000.
 
2048Megabytes said:
I know Windows 2000 was was an improvement on Windows NT but Windows NT was still a horrible operating system full of problems. Instead of fixing it Microsoft released Windows 2000.
Click to expand...

Windows 9x was horrible, windows 2000 had near no multimedia support and wasn't solid until SP6. XP was pretty good but not solid until SP2, and Vista was just an outright joke, and 7 is Vista 2.0.

Microsoft has lost sight of what their product should be in my opinion.
 
tlarkin said:
Windows 9x was horrible, windows 2000 had near no multimedia support and wasn't solid until SP6. XP was pretty good but not solid until SP2, and Vista was just an outright joke, and 7 is Vista 2.0.

Microsoft has lost sight of what their product should be in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Microsoft are just making things look flashy. They told XP users to upgrade to Vista because WOW ITS TRANSPARENT AND NEW LOOKING BUY IT NOW IT EVEN HAS GADGETS!!! And users fell for it but when they got vista they realised how much Microsoft is slipping. Also Vista was a no no for many users as it uses much more RAM on idle and on load forcing you to upgrade.
 
Ayrton said:
Microsoft are just making things look flashy. They told XP users to upgrade to Vista because WOW ITS TRANSPARENT AND NEW LOOKING BUY IT NOW IT EVEN HAS GADGETS!!! And users fell for it but when they got vista they realised how much Microsoft is slipping. Also Vista was a no no for many users as it uses much more RAM on idle and on load forcing you to upgrade.
Click to expand...

Actually, MS added a lot of under-the-hood tech that involved security that end users won't see or use. They also added more powerful and robust diagnostics apps, allowing users to figure out better why their computer crashes, but the bulk of their features added the end users would use are rip off of OS X. While, I am not an elitist and don't care who made what technology first, MS just copied it, they did not innovate with it in any way shape or form to improve it from their competition.

Windows 7 still eats up more RAM than any other OS, well besides Vista that is.
 
tlarkin said:
Actually, MS added a lot of under-the-hood tech that involved security that end users won't see or use. They also added more powerful and robust diagnostics apps, allowing users to figure out better why their computer crashes, but the bulk of their features added the end users would use are rip off of OS X. While, I am not an elitist and don't care who made what technology first, MS just copied it, they did not innovate with it in any way shape or form to improve it from their competition.

Windows 7 still eats up more RAM than any other OS, well besides Vista that is.
Click to expand...

Indeed they did as it was once articled that vista/7 had a security barrier in their operating systems to protect against certain malware and viruses that usually in XP, regardless of a Anti-Virus, would absorb them. It was just a shame on how Microsoft executed vista. It would of been a brilliant OS if it didn't have as many problems as it did. And the automatic driver installer in Windows 7 was a brilliant feature as you do not have to rummage for them all driver CDs, just a shame that in order to get that you have to have such a RAM eater along with it.
 
Ayrton said:
Indeed they did as it was once articled that vista/7 had a security barrier in their operating systems to protect against certain malware and viruses that usually in XP, regardless of a Anti-Virus, would absorb them. It was just a shame on how Microsoft executed vista. It would of been a brilliant OS if it didn't have as many problems as it did. And the automatic driver installer in Windows 7 was a brilliant feature as you do not have to rummage for them all driver CDs, just a shame that in order to get that you have to have such a RAM eater along with it.
Click to expand...

Well they need to drop their legacy support for one. It bloats the OS. They need to also get rid of a single point of failure, aka the registry. They still allow kernel hooks though via driver access in Windows vista and 7, which is a HUGE security risk.

However, in Vista they shifted all the user data to \Users and each user now has their home folder in there. So they are slowly changing their OS to a more Unix-like approach I think. They are just taking baby steps to migrate their product.
 
tlarkin said:
Well they need to drop their legacy support for one. It bloats the OS. They need to also get rid of a single point of failure, aka the registry. They still allow kernel hooks though via driver access in Windows vista and 7, which is a HUGE security risk.

However, in Vista they shifted all the user data to \Users and each user now has their home folder in there. So they are slowly changing their OS to a more Unix-like approach I think. They are just taking baby steps to migrate their product.
Click to expand...

I think Microsoft are taking ideas from other OS and incorporating them in a way they think best. And the registry is a accident waiting to happen especially with the amount of errors and problems that stem from it. Just hopefully they will learn from the mistakes and defiantly need to drop some of the old and outdated things in their OS.
 
Ayrton said:
It was just a shame on how Microsoft executed vista. It would of been a brilliant operating system if it didn't have as many problems as it did.
Click to expand...

One of the biggest problems Vista had in my experience was the operating system would fragment on a hard disk drive and slow it down. The disk defragmenter Microsoft had for Vista was just awful. An easy fix is to download "Auslogics Disk Defragmenter" and use it once a day. It only takes about two to six minutes and the operating system runs much better.
 
2048Megabytes said:
One of the biggest problems Vista had in my experience was the operating system would fragment on a hard disk drive and slow it down. The disk defragmenter Microsoft had for Vista was just awful. An easy fix is to download "Auslogics Disk Defragmenter" and use it once a day. It only takes about two to six minutes and the operating system runs much better.
Click to expand...

NTFS is not suppose to fragment and it is also suppose to 'self heal' on the fly. I am still running vista on one of my boxes and I don't really have a disk fragmentation problem and I have 2TB of drive space in it, with 1.3 TB full.
 
Ayrton said:
I thought many more people then that used Linux... Guess I'm wrong :P
Click to expand...

You are also not taking into account what servers are using Linux. There are a lot of servers using some type of Linux Operating System. What estimated percentage of servers are using Linux I'm not sure.
 
2048Megabytes said:
You are also not taking into account what servers are using Linux. There are a lot of servers using some type of Linux Operating System. What estimated percentage of servers are using Linux I'm not sure.
Click to expand...

Linux and Unix run all the DNS systems servers and Internet provider servers. If you are talking about domain controller servers for a business Microsoft still runs that market.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top