NEWS CATEGORIES:



NEWS ARCHIVE >>
SOFTPEDIA REVIEWS >>
MEET THE EDITORS >>
Home > News > Microsoft > Windows

Windows


XP Dies Again, Vista Turns 2, Win 7 Is Live

Windows moves forward

By Marius Oiaga, Technology News Editor

January 31st, 2009, 12:11 GMT

Adjust text size:


Windows Logos
Enlarge picture
In a sense, January 2009 is a month in which key-events starring Windows XP, Windows Vista and Windows 7 have converged. A month which marks yet another nail in the Windows XP coffin, the celebration of the two-year anniversary on the market for Windows Vista and the availability of the first public Beta of Windows 7. And the debut of a year signaling more questions than answers for the Windows client division. Questions that Microsoft is not ready to answer publicly.


 

At the end of January 2009, XP died again


 

January 31, 2009 is the official cut-off date for System Builder license availability, after Microsoft discontinued sales of Vista's successor through the direct OEM and retail licenses as of June 30, 2008. Yet, reacting to pressure from partners and consumers, Microsoft is simply pseudo-killing Windows XP, managing to find channels, modalities and excuses to keep an operating system that was launched in 2001 around, almost eight years later, at the same time, acknowledging Windows Vista's failure to respond to the complex array of needs of not only PC makers and the hardware market, but also to the evolving taste and preferences of consumers.


 

The January 31, 2009 availability cut-off date is still up, as far as Microsoft is concerned, but fact is that the Redmond company announced in early December 2008 that system builders would be able to take advantage of a flexible inventory program. In a move which confirmed the ongoing resistance to Windows Vista, even after the availability of Service Pack 1, Microsoft indicated that it was ready to continue offering XP licenses even after January 31, 2009.


 

The software giant worked with distributors and system builders in order to asses the demand forecasts of XP licenses for 2009, and permitted orders of new copies of XP to be submitted until January 31. However, the company is not forcing partners to buy all XP licenses ordered at once, and is ready to distribute them until no later than May 30, 2009.


 

But at the same time, XP licenses will continue to be available, well after the second half of 2009, and even into 2010. “As of April 2008, Microsoft is extending availability of Windows XP Home Edition for OEMs to install on Ultra Low-Cost PCs. The new OEM end date will be the later of either June 30, 2010, or one year after the general availability of the next version of Windows,” Microsoft reveals via its Windows Lifecycle policy website.


 

Still no. 1


 

At the start of 2009, Windows XP was still the indisputable leader of the operating system market. According to statistics delivered by Net Applications, XP owned a market share three times the size of Vista's. With a 65.22% usage share, XP dwarfs the installed bases of rival operating system, almost two years after Windows Vista's general availability. Yet the operating system was undoubtedly hurt by its successor. Back in January 2007, Windows XP accounted for a share of 85.02% of the market. And in this regard, Vista only managed to catalyze a 20% drop in share for XP, a scenario that contributed further to labeling Vista's performance in terms of adoption mediocre at best, but far from any notion of success.


 

Windows XP will continue to live well into the next decade, and only a perfectly “calibrated” Windows 7 will be able to erode its market share to the point where the operating system would no longer own the lion's share of the market. However, XP's evolution has already come to an end. Microsoft delivered SP3 in the first half of 2008, the last service pack for 32-bit Windows XP, and is being quiet about an eventual SP3 for Windows Server 2003, which would also apply to 64-bit XP. But this does not change the fact that XP has offered all it had, and that it's time for consumers to move forward.


 

At the end of January 2009, Vista officially turned two years old


 

On January 30, 2007, Windows Vista hit store shelves worldwide. Yet, a couple of years later, Vista is somewhat misplaced in the context of the computer market. There is a dissonance between the operating system, hungry for many GB of RAM, ready to feast on consistent many-core CPU power, and consumers who are focusing spending primarily on resource limited netbooks. With ultra-low-cost machines disrupting the PC market, Vista simply cannot fit, unless you try to fit an ogre into a tutu. Microsoft released SP1 in the first half of 2008 and is currently working on Service Pack 2, whose Beta is available for download.


 

For the “three months ended December 31, 2008 compared with three months ended December 31, 2007,” Microsoft revealed in the 10-Q filing on January 22 that “Client revenue decreased primarily as a result of PC market weakness and a continued shift to lower priced netbook PCs. OEM revenue decreased $465 million or 12% while OEM license units decreased 1%. The decline in OEM revenue reflects an 11 percentage point decrease in the OEM premium mix to 64%, primarily driven by growth of licenses related to sales of netbook PCs, as well as changes in the geographic and product mixes. Revenue from commercial and retail licensing of Windows operating systems increased $113 million or 19%. Based on our estimates, total worldwide PC shipments from all sources was approximately flat, driven by increased demand in emerging markets, offset by decreased demand in mature markets.”


 

At the same time, for the “six months ended December 31, 2008 compared with six months ended December 31, 2007,” Microsoft revealed that “client revenue decreased primarily as a result of PC market weakness and a continued shift to lower priced netbook PCs. OEM revenue decreased $510 million or 7% while OEM license units increased 3%. The decline in OEM revenue reflects a seven percentage point decrease in the OEM premium mix to 68%, primarily driven by growth of licenses related to sales of netbook PCs, as well as changes in the geographic and product mixes. Revenue from commercial and retail licensing of Windows operating systems increased $238 million or 20%. Based on our estimates, total worldwide PC shipments from all sources increased 4% to 7%, driven by increased demand in emerging markets, partially offset by decreased demand in mature markets.”


 

A failure? Don't be so quick to judge


 

Criticism has repeatedly deemed Windows Vista to be nothing more than a failure on Microsoft's part. Still, at the end of 2008, Vista owned a market share of 21.12%, according to Net Applications. If this percentage is correlated with a volume of licenses, it means that Microsoft has sold over 200 million copies of Windows Vista in the two years since the operating system hit the market. The end of 2008, when Windows client revenue slipped, the loss was in conjunction with a slowing down PC market, and the fact that Microsoft got 80% of its revenue for Windows copies through OEM partners. As the global economic crisis deepens, Microsoft is bound to post ever deteriorating results for its Windows client division throughout 2009, and at least until Windows 7's general availability.


 

At the end of January, Windows 7 Beta downloads continue to be live


 

Many users look to Windows 7 as the answer to all their Vista troubles. Millions of them now have the chance to download, install and test drive the first public Beta of the operating system. Microsoft won't say the exact number, but Steven Sinofsky, senior vice president, Windows and Windows Live Engineering Group, did make a reference pointing to a couple of million downloads, and the Redmond company did prolong the availability of Win 7 Beta downloads past the initial cut-off date, which was January 24, signaling that the limit of 2.5 million wasn't indeed reached.


 

Microsoft Evangelist Kevin A. Remde dared ask what he referred to as the billion dollar question “should I wait for Windows 7 instead of deploying Vista?” He also provided the answer earlier this month, “My opinion on that: Absolutely do not wait for Windows 7. Deploy Vista. (with Software Assurance) Sure, I’m loving Windows 7 and some of the new UI features, but the overwhelming step-up between XP and Vista is still such a huge advantage in productivity, reliability, performance, security, manageability, etc. If you really learn these benefits and how they save you time and frustration (and that means MONEY), you shouldn’t have much trouble cost-justifying the rollout. I sincerely believe** that.”

“So… sure Windows 7 has some nice new navigation and a few less times UAC pops up… but it’s just not the same big change. Windows Vista is the way to go, even if you only consider it the stepping stone to Windows 7. You are very unlikely to have any compatibility or hardware driver issues moving from Windows Vista to Windows 7,” Remde added.


 

Windows 7 will not have a second Beta. From Beta 1, Windows 7 will move directly into Release Candidate stage. As of the RC milestone, the operating system will be complete. Microsoft will simply soften the remaining rough edges of the operating system and will get it ready to be released to manufacturing. Windows 7's RTM will be followed by the GA (general availability), a deadline that Microsoft continues to keep to itself.


Windows 7 Beta is available for download here.

Product keys to activate Windows 7 Beta are available here.


TAGS:

Windows 7 | Beta | Windows Vista | Windows XP
Read by 10,678 user(s) | Add comment | Link to this article TWEET THIS


Article rating:
Very Good (4.6/5) 13 vote(s)    

Subscribe to news | Print article | Send to friend

© Copyright 2001-2010 Softpedia
Contact:

 

 

SEARCH THE NEWS ARCHIVE :




Today's News
| Yesterday's News | News Archive


MORE RELATED ARTICLES:


Windows 7 Build 70XX Roadmap: RC Next, Then RTM and GA

New Variant of Web-Based Windows Live Messenger

The Final Wave of XP SP3 RTM and Vista SP1 RTM - Nowhere to Hide

Build IE8 RC1 Custom Install Packages

Windows 7 Windows Error Reporting Infrastructure

Hyper-V Live Migration Architecture Insight

Vista SP2 Release Candidate (RC) Escrow Build Is Live

Windows 7 Core Networking QoS Enhancements

User opinions:


Comment #1 by: João César B Silva on 31 Jan 2009, 16:04 GMT reply to this comment

Nearly everyone knows Windows Vista has failed: this could be seen by the way it was released, on the date of its release. Now, two years later and the news "Windows 7" is coming to replace both Vista and XP (much widely used on both 32 and 64 machines). Windows 7 (Windows 7???) will be given a BETA status and will be tested for a while. A day will come when it will officially be available for non-beta testers. It now seems what is being of increasingly big help for everyone who likes computing are the LINUX OSes and the softwares using the GPL / GNU Licenses: they seem to be so more ready and adequate for today's computing needs. Long Live LINUX - Let's forget this Microsoft.......


Comment #2 by: Rocky on 31 Jan 2009, 17:30 GMT reply to this comment

i think windows 7 wont take over windows xp as per its reqirements are too high for the 3rd world countries users and overall the problems of drivers and softwares.... winxp is rocking..lets see what time shows us....who will supersede, either windows xp(sp2) or windows 7.


Comment #3 by: John on 01 Feb 2009, 06:39 GMT reply to this comment

Okay, let's REALLY think about this. The OS that truely needs to die in this case is WINDOWS 2000! All the OSs from Win2k INCLUDING Windows 7 are all based on Windows 2000. It's about time for something new. Longhorn was about to do this, but instead MS decided to ship a new theme for Windows XP called "Windows Vista" and sell it for anywhere from $99 to $200. It's time for something that shows consumers that Windows is more powerful than the other guys, and since we are talking technology that is close to 10 years old, it currently....isn't.


Comment #4 by: karl on 01 Feb 2009, 10:16 GMT reply to this comment

I disagree with MR.Remde Vista is most certainly NOT a huge step up from XP, it isnt stable nor more secure. Vista is bloated, fatboy of an OS. 200 million sales in 2 years is not good when compared to, the number of XP licences still being sold. Business sector have turned their back on Vista, privately many people revert back to Xp cos it is more stable, less of a resource hog and is easier to use.

Comment #4.1 by: dreyfus on 02 Feb 2009, 00:48 GMT

Lol... All you said is so untrue. You don't know what you're talking about, sincerelly. XP is so retard and old tech. Vista runs far superiour on my Quad with 8 GB of ram on raid0 than xp would do on the same hardware cause it can't manage it well.
Think about it!
Vista has different network stack, different audio stack... how come you may say is not far from XP... lol... Is SO superiour than XP. All of you that says that are people that are unaware of technical stuff. Come on people!
People like you should be running Windows 95 cause it eats a small amount of ram. Belive me... it will run smoother than XP :) (To bad current chipset desings doesn't support it) - that will happen with XP too... Technologies in like Intel Turbo Memory and so are not available in XP, DX 10 as well. So... not a huge step?

Comment #4.2 by: John B on 07 Feb 2010, 02:40 GMT

I support karl and disagree with Remde and dreyfus. Sure, Vista may run OK on dreyfus' quad processor with 8 GB of ram! Good luck getting that config standardized in corporate America! Many business desktops can only hold 2 or if you're lucky, 4 GB.
Also, it is not even true to say that all vista machines can be upgraded to Win 7 - I speak from experience, where Win 7 has no drivers for my nVidia card and HP say they have no intention of making any - nor for XP - i am locked into a slow, unfriendly, unstable system. Already gettingg Mac envy....


Comment #5 by: yosef on 02 Feb 2009, 03:06 GMT reply to this comment

Considering the security and strength of an operating system in and of itself has its merits, especially for Windows-OS's, but I think most experienced users have learned to rely heavily on 3rd-party solutions.

Whether it's a browser, e-mail client, productivity suite, firewall, antivirus, instant messenger, and so forth, people are learning to branch out.

While I think that Vista excels over XP in terms of design interface, I still feel that XP was the winner for me (I uninstalled Vista and downgraded to XP). While XP doesn't have some features of Vista, it is very light on system resources, very easy to control (making it easier to secure), and is stable.

An OS is about work, not flashy eye-candy, and businesses know this.


Comment #6 by: lokesh on 03 Feb 2009, 07:55 GMT reply to this comment

i hav win vista sp1, i wanna change d win.....so can ne one suggest me which win is better ....win vista sp2 or win xp sp3 or win xp sp2
i hav 2 gb ram


Comment #7 by: BiggyEyEs on 04 Feb 2009, 10:10 GMT reply to this comment

I'm so damn hell tired off all these senseless 'XP is better than Vista' misconceptions by non-technical people who likes to spread and believe other people. Unless you have some specific requirement (or limit) that is just definitely not working for Vista, then you are an idiot not to at least try Vista (SP1) for a while. Just like playing a new game, say DJ Max, where you have to press buttons and crap when youre used to playing DDR instead, it WILL take you a while to get used to it. Of course there will be a learning curve. Don't tell me XP was better than 98 and 2000 when it was released, and don't tell me it took you a bit of time to get used to it. Also, XP was based on 2000, unlike Vista which was created from scratch (hence the long dev't time together with patches and service packs for XP.) Also, if you're having hardware problems (especially drivers) with Vista on your old computer, then you simply need an upgrade just like XP when 64-128mb RAM for 98 was the norm. All our computers now, which are all Intel Core-based now have Vista installed because of stability. Yes, Vista was MORE stable than XP for us. It was less stable when I installed it on our aging P4 2.4A of course.

It just depends on your configuration which will make or break your Vista installation much like XP when you install all the crap bloatware. Also, I have installed Vista SP1 on netbooks powered by the Intel Atom and they don't have performance problems with 1GB ram. But personally, you need 1.5GB RAM to get Vista running smooth and 2GB+ to get everything fast and smooth. I've installed Vista 'properly' on my profs' laptops who believed XP was better than Vista, and heave ho... now they're Vista evangelists.

btw, I had better times with Vista than XP because of all the BSODs and configurations XP has brought to me. It just took me a while to get Vista right and there you go. A new perfect OS for me. I also use Ubuntu, Sabayon, and OSX86 Leopard.

Share your opinion:

Your Name:
Your Email Address:
(will not be used for commercial purposes)
Solve this to prove you're not a bot: =
Your review/opinion:

 




Windows tabGames tabDrivers tabMac tabLinux tabScripts tabMobile tabHandheld tabGadgets tabNews tab

SUBMIT PROGRAM   |   ADVERTISE   |   GET HELP   |   SEND US FEEDBACK   |   RSS FEEDS   |   ENTER NEWS SITE   |   ENGLISH BOARD   |   ROMANIAN FORUM