Windows 7's first birthday: 240 million sold

Windows 7's first birthday: 240 million sold

Summary: Windows 7 was released a year ago today (October 22), and Microsoft has announced More than 240 Million Licenses Sold. The blog post by Brandon LeBlanc adds: "As of September, Windows 7 was running on 93% of new consumer PCs and has over 17% global OS market share (according to Net Applications as of October 1st).

SHARE:
TOPICS: Tech Industry
6

Windows 7 was released a year ago today (October 22), and Microsoft has announced More than 240 Million Licenses Sold. The blog post by Brandon LeBlanc adds: "As of September, Windows 7 was running on 93% of new consumer PCs and has over 17% global OS market share (according to Net Applications as of October 1st)."

At the beginning of March, Microsoft's chief financial officer Peter Klein claimed that 90 million copies of Windows 7 had been sold, and during its July earnings call, Microsoft said the number had risen to 175 million. Windows XP sales will (in theory, at least) end today, so Windows 7 should comfortably beat 300 million by the end of the year. However, this could still be less than 25% of the installed base.

Microsoft has not provided any numbers for how many Windows 7 PCs are actually being used in business, and the vast majority of companies still appear to be using XP. The blog post does mention one success. It says:

General Motors has made significant progress on their Windows 7 deployment and their IT leadership loves the speed of our operating system. They have about 22,000 employees on Windows 7 and expect to have about 80,000 employees on Windows 7 by the end of 2010.

In a video, GM's Ken Michel says the number is 30,000 seats and that the year end "would give us 100% completion". This year, the company is buying about 40,000 PCs running Windows 7.

A follow-up post by Microsoft's Stephen L Rose, Happy Birthday Windows 7, says that "over 88% of all companies are currently piloting Windows 7". The number comes from an IDC study that says 39% of companies have already started the migration, and 25% will start in the next six months. "This is aggressive for Windows adoption," says IDC's slide.

Of course, since many companies have 100,000 or more PCs, the migration to Windows 7 is still likely to take another two or three years. Companies whose IT staff were too stupid to start testing and converting apps written for IE6 after Windows Vista came out could struggle to complete the migration in a reasonable time.

According to NetMarketShare, Windows had 91.08% of the operating system market in September, followed by Mac OS (5.3%), Apple's iOS (1.18%), Java ME (0.95%) and Linux (0.85%).

Windows XP remains by far the most used operating system, with a 60.03% share. XP is followed by Windows 7 (17.19%), Windows Vista (13.35%), Mac OS X 10.6 (2.72%) and Mac OS X 10.5 (1.67%). The numbers, based on website monitoring, include non-PC operating systems, and will therefore slightly understate Windows' PC market share.

Topic: Tech Industry

Jack Schofield

About Jack Schofield

Jack Schofield spent the 1970s editing photography magazines before becoming editor of an early UK computer magazine, Practical Computing. In 1983, he started writing a weekly computer column for the Guardian, and joined the staff to launch the newspaper's weekly computer supplement in 1985. This section launched the Guardian’s first website and, in 2001, its first real blog. When the printed section was dropped after 25 years and a couple of reincarnations, he felt it was a time for a change....

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

6 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • >> Companies whose IT staff were too stupid to start testing and converting apps
    >> written for IE6 after Windows Vista came out ...

    Charming, as ever.

    But their real problem was designing specifically for IE in the first place. If they'd designed to standards instead, then they'd have no problem now. They wouldn't have to worry about any browser, as long as that browser followed standards. Vista, Win 7 or whatever quirks are in (or not in) later versions of IE would not be a factor.
    BrownieBoy-4ea41
  • "Companies whose IT staff were too stupid to start testing and converting apps written for IE6 after Windows Vista came out could struggle to complete the migration in a reasonable time."

    I feel sorry for those that specifically coded websites to only be compatible with IE, and now face upgrade issues. However, I think Microsoft has also fallen short by not releasing subsequent browsers to be better at backwards compatibility. It seems pretty silly to recode sites to match browsers. Code the site to be standards compliant, and you will at least increase your chances of not needing to recode. While this is not a guarantee, it can minimize the issues. Part of the problem however in the past has been that Microsoft has not adhered to standards, until more recently. And for the sites that don't work in other platforms besides Windows, you are essentially turning away visitors.
    Chris_Clay
  • I just read today that Windows 8 will be potentially released in about 2 years. Obviously this is a very rough timeframe. It makes me wonder how companies that are having difficulty getting to Windows 7 (from XP) are going to take it. Putting a lot of resources into getting up to Windows 7, then shortly thereafter having to again upgrade to Windows 8. Hopefully, the upgrade from 7 to 8 will be a little more seamless, for their sake.
    Chris_Clay
  • 'Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer insists that Windows 8 is his company's riskiest product', source:DailyTech
    There is a few options/speculations here:
    Either Windows 8 / 2012 is the last legacy/backwards compatible disk based installed OS, or Windows 7 is.
    An incremental update named Windows 8 / 2012 is not risky. Its protecting the past/market share.
    The other option would be to build Windows 8 into the Cloud Only, which could be a possibility by then, a very thin client+cloud. Sounds like their trying to pre-empt Google by jumping to the next stage first. The very thin client being based on Windows 7 Mobile or similar.
    By 2012 Fibre Optic Broadband would need to be well established, but in terms of revenues it would certainly flex the muscles of its coffers.
    Virtualisation Technology will be a big part of Windows 8. The cake is going to cut, part in the cloud / part of it - a smaller client install. I think we have seen the last big disk based release.
    adamjarvis
  • @apexwm
    > However, I think Microsoft has also fallen short by not releasing subsequent
    > browsers to be better at backwards compatibility.

    Meanwhile, other people think it tried to hard too provide backwards compatibility...

    > It seems pretty silly to recode sites to match browsers. Code the site
    > to be standards compliant, and you will at least increase your chances
    > of not needing to recode.

    Yes, this is what Microsoft recommends.

    > Part of the problem however in the past has been that Microsoft has not
    > adhered to standards, until more recently.

    Not true. Microsoft followed standards better than Netscape, which was more interested in creating its own standards as a competitive strategy (hence "best viewed in Netscape"). IE6 was reasonably compliant with the common standards of its day.

    Since then, IE7, IE8 and IE9 have all been progressively more standards-compliant. Fact.

    @adamjarvis
    > The other option would be to build Windows 8 into the Cloud Only,

    Sorry, that sounds completely nonsensical.

    > Either Windows 8 / 2012 is the last legacy/backwards compatible disk
    > based installed OS, or Windows 7 is.

    Both Windows 8 and Windows 9 are legacy/backwards compatible, but contain quite a bit of virtualisation.

    > By 2012 Fibre Optic Broadband would need to be well established,

    They would need to be well established for roughly 2 billion people across six continents. By 2012, there is not even a chance that Fibre Optic Broadband will be well established to the furthest reaches of the M25 ;-)

    I am sure you are familiar with the concept of "back-hoe time"....
    Jack Schofield
  • "Not true. Microsoft followed standards better than Netscape, which was more interested in creating its own standards as a competitive strategy (hence "best viewed in Netscape"). IE6 was reasonably compliant with the common standards of its day.

    Since then, IE7, IE8 and IE9 have all been progressively more standards-compliant. Fact."

    Here are a couple of articles backing up my point, IE6 was probably one of the worst for complying to standards:

    http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE6Bugs/

    http://www.positioniseverything.net/ie-primer.html

    I've also developed websites for about 15 years. Another problem that really used to bother me is when people would ask us for help with the sites they created in Microsoft Frontpage, that would ONLY work in IE. It turns out Frontpage, Word, and even Visual Studio put in tags that only IE understands. This is a separate issue from the browser argument above, but just another example of Microsoft trying to create their own "standards", rather than adhering to ones already established. However when using non-Microsoft products like Dreamweaver, Composer, and others, sites could be created that worked in Netscape, IE, and others without issues.
    Chris_Clay