The results are in: Windows XP is the most popular OS among dotTechies

A couple of weeks ago I asked dotTechies “What operating system do you use the most?” Now the polls have been closed and the results are in – Windows XP is the clear winner with Windows 7 following in second place:

[poll id=”12″]

To be honest, I was expecting Windows XP is the most popular, but was a little bit surprised to see how many dotTechies have adopted Windows 7 so early after its release. Usually people decide to wait before upgrading to Microsoft’s newest products (so Microsoft has had a chance to iron out the bugs) but apparently pre-release marketing of Windows 7 was done exceptionally well. (It also didn’t hurt that Windows 7 received praise from pretty much across the whole board.)

Another interesting thing I was found was a comment:

Ashraf: “Indeed at my most recent job, it was very shocking to see that most of the computers in the building(s) were running Microsoft Windows 2000, even though – at the time – the Windows series was up to Vista.”

Is it so hard for you to figure out why?

“VERY SHOCKNG”, INDEED!! Well I’ve got news for you, Ashraf. I use Windows 2000 Professional; AND I LOVE IT! Of all Microsoft Operating Systems, Windows 2000 is THE BEST – very robust, very stable, very reliable, etc. And dare I say, Windows 2000 is a very smooth, and unintrusive, operating system. I guess You Did’t Know All That!!

That’s Why, Ashraf, “…that most of the computers in the building(s) were running Microsoft Windows 2000, even though – at the time – the Windows series was up to Vista.”

The women and the men behind those Windows 2000, understand TLC – the pricelessness of DEVOTION, BEAUTY, LOVE, FIDELITY, RELIABILITY. The secret behind UPS success!!!

I rest my case.

It wasn’t the first time I have heard someone praise Windows 2000 in such a manner, but when I first heard it, I just dismissed it as someone who is unable to let go of things. Now, however, it seems Windows 2000 still has a strong following. Interesting. (Windows 2000 was “before my time” so I can’t say much about it personally.)

(BTW Chindu: the reason my work still were running Windows 2000 were not because they “loved” it as you say. It was because they couldn’t afford to upgrade =P.)

Thank you everyone that participated, and see everyone in the next Ask dotTechies poll!

Related Posts

  • Ramesh Kumar


    My Dear Dear Friend – Rarely if ever, do I say what I am now about to say – *I must have done some good deed to get a friend like you*. :)

    You & others like you, sadly very few in number :( , do a “power of good”. Where there is a “power of good”, there is always a lot of “good in that power”.

    I had intuited this “OS trend”& was persistent about it. I even thought I was “pestilently persistent” rather than just “persistent” but the intention from my side was always “only” positive in terms of both vibes & sense. In any case not a single one of us is so superbly educated as to become clever enough to fool ourselves……….always.

    Friend, if a Microsoft employee happens to read these last 2 posts I fondly hope they revise their remuneration strategy towards closed beta testers (if not alpha testers as well) in the exact same manner suggested by me. It would improve Microsoft mkt shares & profits all the more & also benefit their customers all the more……….worldwide. Its “Win-Win” even for “Win” aka Windows.

    Chief in various industries worldwide this is precisely why companies have revised their personnel remuneration policy – both for permanent employees & also for contract employees. They have changed it from “Fixed Remuneration” to what is called as “Varcomp”.

    I won’t be surprised if Microsoft employees are already on “Varcomp”. I do hope “Closed Beta Testers” are also shifted to it.

    Microsoft finance team, Microsoft shareholders, Microsoft consumers & even the owner of Microsoft would benefit from this suggestion. I say this with utmost respect, self confidence & affection.
    Ramesh :)

  • To answer the question of “how long is the teething period” I got and listed the release dates and SP release dates of Windows 2000, XP, and Vista. I then calculated the difference in time between point for each OS. What I got was:

    17 February 2000
    -15 August 2000; 180 days-5 months, 4 weeks, 1 day
    -16 May 2001; 274 days-9 months, 1 day
    -29 August 2002; 470 days-1 year, 3 months, 1 week, 6 days
    -26 June 2003; 301 days-9 months, 4 weeks

    August 24, 2001
    -September 9, 2002; 381 days-1 year, 2 weeks, 2 days
    -August 6, 2004; 697 days-1 year, 10 months, 4 weeks
    -April 21, 2008; 1354 days-3 years, 8 months, 2 weeks, 1 day

    November 8, 2006;
    -February 4, 2008; 453 days-1 year, 2 months, 3 weeks, 6 days
    -April 28, 2009; 449 days-1 year, 2 months, 3 weeks, 3 days

    Now from this we see, mostly clear, two trends. The first is that in general later SPs take longer than earlier ones, which could mean that there are fewer problems to fix or it could mean that there’s more problems so it takes longer to get out. The other is that the later the OS the longer it takes to get the first SP out. Hate to say it but the numbers don’t seem so good for Microsoft.

  • Ramesh Kumar


    Yes I do know those aspects about SP. But one thing still shocks me! Yikes!

    *So the guys at Microsoft only define that an OS should be for 2 to 3 years but do not define 2 things at all :( :( :-

    1) How much of those 2 to 3 yrs are “permissible teething time”. That’s unfair. It’s a “hiding from mummy” kind of thing isn’t it? “mummy” here means user. I would suggest that teething should complete at beta stage & not go on to “release candidate” version. The RC version should be bug free. Accountability has to improve. If closed beta testers are paid then those closed beta testers should be paid not as a flat fixed amount before “release candidate version” gets released but as variable compensation. That is a partial fixed fee is paid before “RC” version gets released & a partial variable fee gets paid after release of RC. The latter being correlated with “bug freeness” after release of the release candidate.

    Like everyone else in life closed beta testers also need to pull their own weight rather than depending upon others to pull them along. This is also because many closed beta testers do beta mainly to get the app at a discounted price. Given that there are no free lunches in the corporate world its time these guys also fell in line (that is if some of them haven’t)

    2) Within those 2 to 3 years it does not tell users how soon they would get the SP isn’t it. It’s a “I won’t commit to mummy how quickly I’ll complete my school homework” thing isn’t it? For the record “mummy” in this case is user & not Microsoft.
    Ramesh :)

  • Ramesh Kumar


    Chief, it’s always such a pleasure to interact with you. Earlier I knew you were as bright as honest. Now I know that you are as bright as honest as mature – I refer your post 32 point no.3. :) I wonder what else I’ll learn in your subsequent posts :arrow: :D Psst……the arrow is thanks to Locutus. I got it by typing : followed by arrow followed by : :D

    Btw I am sure there would be MIS to find this out rather than having to use one’s old boy network. There are tracker software which form a part of companywide ERP which can flash the count differential to expose the number of orders in the order book versus number of deliveries made. It would also throw up how slowly the order book is getting serviced.
    Ramesh :)

  • @Ramesh Kumar: An SP for the most part doesn’t contain any security patches and/or hot fixes that can’t be downloaded on their own, it just packs them all together. An SP may also contain big feature upgrades, like adding Blue-Ray stuff to Vista (I don’t remember what exactly but I remember that SP2 for Vista added some Blue-Ray features). As to how they decide when to release an SP I can’t say. They only thing I can say is that it will be released on patch Tuesday :)

  • @Ramesh Kumar: BSOD & Other Bugs related To Win7

    1)Because depending on what’s causing the problem one must take appropriate action to fix the problem.

    2)Who know, but Microsoft is not the first and defiantly not the last company to have orders exceed production. And while the consume may not like it a smart consume looks into why and if they find it’s just that the company got more orders than expected they will wait. If that’s not it or they can’t then they more to something else. A bit mean perhaps but true.

    3)Possible true but while I could use my contacts to find out I know that doing so may lose me them so for now I can’t say either way, but I do agree that what you say does make sense.

    4)I’m not saying that he should feel better because of that and if that’s what it sounded like I’m sorry for not being clear. What I was trying to say about the BSOD is that it is very hard to fix them without having the computer in front of you to work

    I agree 110% that a solution must be found, though I wouldn’t say every ones love them. :D

  • @Ramesh Kumar: I planed to last night but I has some problems getting to dotTech. Working on them as I type.

  • Ramesh Kumar


    Hi Friend! :)
    Looking forward to your replies on the other aspects too.
    Ramesh :)

  • @Ramesh Kumar: Like you, I’ll break my reply up so it makes it easier to read, and to know to what points I’m replying to.

    I happen to agree with out on integration for the most part, though I admit I think there are things that should not be “baked-in” to the OS.

    Now, yes the consumer may be getting less “bang for his buck”, but that same consumer complains about the built in features or that it’s integrated in the first place. And even if the consume likes it Microsoft then has to deal with the DOJ or the EU. IE is a prime example of both!

    I’ll get to you other points later, since like you I’m typing this on a break that’s just about to end.

  • Ramesh Kumar


    This adoption rate thing about Win7

    As of Feb 23 2010 1822 hrs Wikipedia shows Win7 mkt share as 7.70%. Win 7 has completed more than 12 mths. Let us still consider this to be only its 12th month. In its first 12 months Vista had achieved a far far higher adoption rate than 7.70%

    Friend I differ from you on placing the blame at Vista’s poor PR, “entirely” or “at least for the most part”. Here’s why:-

    Some analysts ascribe Vista’s failure to the huge mass of anti-trust cases the company suffered when Vista was being conceived (aka being coded)or just delivered (aka launched). The caseload was so voluminous apparently that it kept Vista coders either occupied or at least distracted.

    Win7 did not face that legal caseload. Why then is Win7 adoption rate lower than Vista adoption rate? How fair on our part would it be to blame a citizen belonging to an earlier generation for sins committed by a citizen belonging to a later generation? Its a “the buck stops here thing”.

    I do not know if user agents mimic the OS as well rather than only Email Clients, Browsers etc. If OS also gets mimicked then Win7 shares could be even lower than 7.7% i.e. its adoption rate could be even lower.

    In hindsight the company could have delayed Vista launch but didn’t. In foresight I am suggesting Windows 8 does not get launched soon. Rather Windows7 should be allowed to “live” longer. I do hope the second time around history does not again repeat itself.

    Therefore to me Win XP being loved “longer” or “more” is the symptom of a problem rather than being a cause of one.

    Sometimes tilting too much towards shareholders can be hurtful to consumers although in other situations tilting too much towards consumers can be hurtful to shareholders.

    Perhaps in this context a balance still needs to be found.

    Ramesh :)

  • Ramesh Kumar


    Teething Problem – How long should it last?

    Analogically & just to inject some humour, just so the discussion does not get heaty due to any error on my part…… :)

    Even the most affectionate mother weans her child “before” adolescence rather than “after” adolescence. How long should teething be allowed – 1yr, 2yrs or 3yrs?

    Analogically I would suggest that Win7 either weans itself off mother’s milk faster or at least lives longer. Otherwise its daddy would feel most upset. :) I mean its like he kept changing nappies & paying for all those little baby things & still his child never really grew up………….but died at a very young age! Since daddy & mummy are still at an appropriate biological age they try to have another child instead? They’ll still feel bad for the one they lost.

    Therefore if the company defines 2 to 3 years as the time period for OS then within that 2 to 3 year period how long is teething allowed to last? Have they defined “teething time” or is only “total time defined”

    Is there a mandate which defines a time period within which SP has to get released? Why cannot security patches & hotfixes fix the problem? Why wait for an entire Service Pack to do so.

    What happens to those consumers who bought it before its SP1 appeared? Have they done any wrong if they buy it before SP1 arrived?
    Ramesh :)

  • Ramesh Kumar


    There are 2 more aspects you’d raised. I am just zipping away for lunch. I’ll be right back & address those two issues as well
    Ramesh :)

  • Ramesh Kumar


    BSOD & Other Bugs related To Win7

    1)Why should a consumer bother if the problem is caused by a bug, an update, a backorder problem or any other reason. As far as that consumer is concerned he has already paid for it & is still unable to use the product aka still suffering!

    2)For the moment let us assume it is a backorder problem & not a bug. If backorder queue is long it only proves my point that there is a long queue of dissatisfied consumers – even though reason could be different. Perhaps the backorder department is busier catering to irate consumers who have already licenced Win7 rather than new customers who have not yet licenced Win7?

    3)In any case its quite unlikely that a large & wonderful company such as this cannot manage its production well enough to satisfy sales. Further more because in a recession ridden global economy most companies are actually hungry for sales – so they would manage production vigorously anyway even if it meant manpower redeployment, manpower expansion or outsourcing

    4)Even if “backorder” is suffering due to a long queue how would one suffering BSOD be pacified by knowing that others are standing in line to licence Win7. He (aka poor guy) is bothered only about his own “ailment” even though there would be fellow-ailers or other ailers with different ailments?

    Therefore in any case a solution is required. I say all this with utmost respect & forethought because we all love this company & wish well for it always
    Ramesh :)

  • Ramesh Kumar


    Now for the point relating to why I feel Win7 needs to be for more than 3 years.

    It is a consumer-oriented argument & not company-oriented “in the short term”. I say this with respect & self confidence because I know what heading a business means. In this case, it won’t give the company a short term gain but a long term gain. In the interim the Win7 team may face some pressure but it would eventually end happily even for them because doing what I suggest would increase Win7 installed base rather than eroding it.

    I am aware of the company announcing that its profits went up exponentially in the previous quarter & that it was ascribed to Win7. So why do I say this?

    Unlike consumer products & consumer durables, when it comes to software, especially OS there is one very significant difference. In consumer products & consumer durables sales revenues are directly correlated to mkt share. That’s because FMCG & consumer durables are sold whereas software is licenced.

    Therefore despite Xp mkt shares being substantially higher than Win7 the revenues from WinXp is substantially lower than Win7. After all the entire licence amount is collected at the very beginning. review if that can change.

    Another reason for improved profits is that Microsoft has vastly improved control over piracy in recent years. This has helped improve both profitability & liquidity. Piracy controls are much improved now versus initial Xp days. Therefore ascribing improved profits or record profits to “greatness” of Win7 alone is something I cannot “fully” accept.

    My homework also tells me that when global meltdown happened Microsoft year on year sales in fact dipped significantly. Therefore there was all the more reason to push out Win7 even faster even if it was not fully “de-bugged”. The finance guys also must have offered sound internal reasons because the company’s debt-equity ratio also was 1:1 (Google’s is 1:10). Debt discharge takes place even faster when there is cash sales & not merely a large installed base. Oh I know the company has huge reserves therefore this point is not so crucial.

    Don’t you think all this is fine from a shareholder’s point of view. Why should a consumer bother if he remains dissatisfied? That’s why I say that in this context an exception should be made to the philosophy of “2 to 3 years”. “2 to 3 years” satisfies shareholders but not consumers.

    Microsoft is an excellent company. I am certain a little profit lost today would be more than recouped with profit made tomorrow. It helps the marketing team too simply because the ratio of “satisfied users” divided by “total users” would increase even more.
    Ramesh :)

  • Ramesh Kumar


    Since there are several points I’ll break my reply into a couple of posts rather than one huge post. Kindly bear with me on that.

    Functionality Removal – Versus Vista Win7 has reduced the number of baked in apps you say. That naturally saddens Vista users who have migrated to Win7 “at least as of now” – “a bird in hand being better than two in the bush”. Versus XP it need not be difficult to answer a complex question. Just take WinXP SP2 (start date) as a reference point & compare Win7 versus that. In any case some point or the other needs to be taken anyway for the analysis.

    Other things remaining any consumer feels sadder when features are removed simply because he gets less bang for his buck. This includes Win7, cars, refrigerators etc etc. If integration takes longer, consumers would remain sadder; longer

  • @Ramesh Kumar: I think you miss understood of what I said. For the most part Win7 is LESS integrated than previous versions of windows. They removed Windows Messenger, Windows Movie Maker, Windows Mail, and Windows Calendar while only adding Native VHD support. Now those list are Vista to 7 only but you get the idea (if you do XP to 7 it gets more complex making it harder to say how much was added and how much was removed.

    As to the low adaption rates, where are you getting those facts? Win7 is doing very well, though some of that might be because of the PR nightmare that was Vista.

    As to introducing an OS on the late side, while your point is a good one they can’t wait too long or they run into the problems XP-Vista change had. They key is two balance the change rate, and 2-3 years does seem good.

    As to the problems with 7, I can’t really save why that person is getting a BSOD, since BSOD are very hard to diagnose remotely I’ve found. As to the media problem I don’t think it’s because they’re adding features, more likely I’d guess there’s a backorder problem.

    As to your teething concept, that’s actually a common idea, the idea being not to buy an OS till after the first SP, the idea being that the first SP with have fixed most if not all of the main bugs.

  • Ramesh Kumar

    An average a Microsoft OS lifespan is 2 to 3 years. After that Microsoft tries to move to its next OS.

    Win7 has some teething problems over an extended period of time. The low adoption rate & low market share are perhaps symptoms of a “teething problem which has gone on for too long a time”.

    It means that Win7 has teethed over 50% of the time (if its lifecycle is 2 years) & 33% of the time (if its lifecycle is 3 years). Isn’t a teething phase lasting 33% to 50% (of total lifespan) a bit too long? Would anyone tolerate a car which “teethes” over 33% to 50% of its time?

    Win7 is baking into the Win7 OS (aka “backward integration”) several functionalities which earlier existed as separate-standalone-not-baked-into-the-OS apps. Given the extended teething phase Microsoft could consider running Win7 for more than 3 years so that the teething phase at least in percentage terms (if not in years) reduces sharply.

    Running Win7 for more than 3 years would help Microsoft gain even more consumers. Consumers who are currently marginally brand loyal (e.g. Linux users, users of both OS etc) would express greater “goodwill”, “feelgood” & “loyalty” if Win8 is introduced only after Win7 problems are solved. This is as true for software as it is for any other product category.

    Some Win7 problems are expressed in our forum. People have even suspected likelihood of Win7 BSOD due to recent Win7 updates!

    One person has not got a Win7 physical media even after two & a half months of requesting it (refer forum). Why? Is it because OS system files are continually changing because newer functionalities are getting baked into Win7 OS? Could be?

    It would be nice & & fortunate if some professional who is appropriately placed in life answers this. If nothing else it might solve issues or eradicate wrong impressions. Were those impressions incorrect it could well be corrected on either side.
    Ramesh :)

  • @Ramesh Kumar: I see what your saying, and the debate can go either way. My point was more that MS has done this before (droping the DOS kernal for the NT one), and even Apple did it when they moved to Intel. MS’s problem is really more that people are too atached to XP.

  • Ramesh Kumar

    In fact Steve Ballmer of Microsoft himself has said that he thinks Linux market share is “actually” 5% & not 1% as “reported” by stats counter analyzer
    Ramesh :)

  • Ramesh Kumar

    Any concept – including “timeout” has to serve a business objective of the developer too – aka “profit maker” & “innovator”. It has to make techno-commercial sense always. “Techno” as well as “commercial”. No problem with that. I am in total agreement with you on that. My disagreement relates only to the manner it is being done.

    Let’s look at this from a “developer” perspective. A later genre of development i.e. “techno” part could as much be conveyed by an “entirely new OS name” or by “version numbering” or by doing “both”. In fact one can even adopt both strategies.

    Version numbering can actually save the company some overheads & costs too because you are retaining some coding & perhaps only adding to it. For the finance guys 2 ratios actually improve – “Sales per employee” & “business per dollar invested”. The upgrade can be “charged” rather than being offered “free”. Microsoft is a bold innovator on technology can they not be a bold innovator on pricing strategy as well?

    For the marketing guys a demanded consumer benefit can continue to be served.

    The overall mkt share drops in recent times for this huge & excellent company is a humbling lesson for Microsoft despite its being huge & excellent.

    I know that they are a smart company & would bounce back.

    XP & Win7 are not merely “different” OS but “different genres” of OS – including the way they manage run time. Retaining both genres means protecting both genres. Choosing to drop one (even eventually) may either mean relinquishing that one genre to a competitor as well as ceasing to serve a consumer benefit.

    As a well wisher I’d like to share a very shocking fact. Microsoft actual mkt shares are actually much lower than its reported market shares purely because the method by which market shares are being collected. Many users use “user switching agents”. When the “stats counter analyzers” pick up market shares they interpret the “browser” or “email client” or whatever based upon what the “user agent” says it is & not based upon what it actually is.

    Many users mimic usage of Microsoft software for various reasons. There is therefore all the more concern
    Ramesh :)

  • future hacker

    Well, my answer is Windows Vista. What!? it’s to late!
    I forgot to vote =P

  • @Ramesh Kumar: For the recored they’ve done the kill thing beore, do they make programs for DOS any more? no. They only make for the newest OSs. The problem is that while XP is about a DECADE old, people want it to still be the newest and the greatest. That and since usually MS went 2/3 years per OS people were not as set in their ways (95 to 98 to 2000 to XP (which is about 2002 offically).

  • Ramesh Kumar

    One thing keeps me back from delaying migration to Win7. To me the guys behind Windows7 don’t act very self confidently. One eye is wishfully trained into Windows 8 i.e. the future & another on the past i.e.XP. At least they could have been private about Windows8. There is no end to this. Another reason is I’ve tried to get answers to some questions & failed. Plain & simple how many apps which run on XP run well on Win7. That is a priority need for me. Also I’ve never felt this earlier – why is Microsoft “force killing” XP. Its like a WWF Match between Undertaker (XP) & Ray Mysterio (Win7). Why tie one of Undertaker’s hands behind his back just because he is much larger than Mysterio. That’s just an analogy. :D They are creating new apps which work only on vista or win7. Somehow my earlier experience with Microsoft was more pleasant because I felt there was lesser conflict of objectives – i.e. what benefitted the company benefited the consumer & vice versa :( I mean if XP lingers it is because it is preferred


  • @Ramesh Kumar: SP stands for Service Pack, but yes that’s the idea.

  • Ramesh Kumar

    Samuel (comment 8)
    Thanks.:) Also understood the reasoning behind it. So from July 13 there is going to be only one security patch i.e.SP3 as far as XP is concerned.


  • @Ashraf: I’ll take it as a complement.

  • Ashraf

    @Clarkson: I consider Samuel my granddad. Does that make you feel better?

    (Just kidding, of course. No offense intended Samuel!)

  • @Clarkson: If it makes you feel any better 2k wasn’t before my time.

  • Clarkson

    Windows 2000 was before your time? WTF are you doing writing here then ? I figured a bunch of kids were the writers here, but now I know for sure. Yikes.

  • @Ramesh Kumar: The reason MS is removing XP SP1 suport is because they only suport a product so long, and since SP3 is out the problems people with SP2 may have are fixed in SP2. It does make a lot of bussiness sense to drop SP2 suport.

  • Anon

    I, too, love windows 2k. The only reason I switched to linux is because of its lack of wifi support and windows love messenger. It runs much faster than any other version of windows I’ve ever tried.

    While I’m at it, I suggest switching from XP to 7, it’s beautiful, smooth, and runs nearly as fast as xp.

  • Ramesh Kumar


    Actually haakon preferring xp at home is neither old fashioned & simultaneously preferring linux in the office is neither self contradictory nor surprising. I was quite surprised to learn these mkt share figures & am therefore sharing them with you.

    Windows has a 90% mkt share in “client” computers aka home computers & only 1% share in “server” computers segment aka office computers. The 90% mkt share in the “client” segment is (61%Xp + 29% all others put together)

    Linux is exactly the reverse of Windows. Linux has only 1% in “client” segment aka home computers & 90% mkt share in the “server” segment aka office computers. BTW these figures have remained unchanged even throughout the .NET era!

    Therefore you’ve chosen the “best” in the home segment (i.e.XP) & the “best” in the office segment (i.e.Linux). Millions of others do exactly what you do haakon.

    Since mkt share is the best indicator of consumer preference it means that the latest version is not necessarily the best preferred. The reason/s could be anything

    Windows has got its act right at home & Linux has got its act right at the office!


  • Ramesh Kumar

    It is quite likely that WinXP decline rate may now speed up.

    I use XP 32 bit SP2 mainly because it supports most apps. I use SP2 because it is more prevalent than SP1 or SP3 & my acquaintances say it is comparatively much better. WinXP SP2 is stated to be more prevalent than SP1 & SP3. All this might change now change more rapidly because among other things:-
    1)Win7 is of late offering apps which only work on Vista & Win7 and not on XP
    2)Wikipedia says that as on July 13 this year Microsoft would withdraw support of SP2 in WinXP

    In the first 12 months of Win7 it had gained a mkt share of around 9%. During the same period XP had an 8% share loss. Overall windows share dipped. Therefore it is quite likely that the entire gain of Win7 was at the cost of XP.

    By withdrawal of SP2 service on July 13 this year Microsoft is obviously trying to accelerate XP decline – a kind of “managed cannibalization”. As far as I can tell Microsoft has not shared the reasons on the internet so far. Possibly this is also due to increasing pressure on Microsoft from the hardware guys as well

  • Maddog

    Windows 2000 Is an extremely good operating system but it is like Xp … getting old.Soon I will be migrating again,but this time Linux will be the choice mainly based on price (or lack of :-) )

  • Josh

    Windows Vista/7 may be nice, but I suspect that for many users the required hardware upgrade is simply too expensive or unnecessary. I think this is probably the main reason for XP’s lingering popularity, although product pricing, familiarity, resistance to change, force of habit, driver issues, program incompatibility, and teething issues also affect the slow transition to Vista/7.

    For now, XP delivers what current users need. I remember that there was a lot of resistance and criticism when XP came out, but attitudes have changed since then. The leap from XP to Vista/7, though, is much greater than with previous releases of Windows, so I suspect the changeover may take longer.

  • Gene Healy

    I’ve 3 PCs here at home. One has Win XP Pro SP3, one XP Home SP3 and one runs Win 7 Pro 64-bit.

    Win 7 is to Vista what XP was to ME.

    But the reason I only have Win 7 on one machine is because the two older ones are P4 – 2 GHz with only 2 GB RAM. If I hadn’t upgraded to a Quad-core Q9300 machine, I’d never have put Win 7 on it. (Plus I was able to get a very competitive price for an OEM version of the software which helped a lot too. )

    BTW great website. Thanks for your hard work!

  • haakon

    I am not too surprised :-)
    BOTH with the result OR that Windows7 is so popular.
    I guess most dotTechies maybe TRIED “Vista” and changed back to XP almost at once :-)
    Windows7 got good “scores” all the time…from early beta to the final OS.
    I have it installed… AND USED on more than a few machines in our network… BUT got to admit I feel more “at home” with Windows server 2000 AND / OR WinXP…. Yes…. I am utterly old fashioned.
    I do like Windows 7..and are using it more more and more often-For old ppl like me- I just need to get used to the new OS :-)
    We also use Linux on some machines or a combination.
    I am responsible for most of the IT systems at work and DO want it all to be changed to Linux.
    OK..sorry… I way too often speak too much :-)