Windows 8 March, 2014 Market share

Seems Windows 7 is outgrowing Windows 8. Actually these are always numbers for the previous months.

Windows 7 Now Installed on Half of PCs Worldwide As Windows 8.1


Edit;

Although not directly related to market share maybe a tactic to increase market share.

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/02/28/is-microsoft-looking-into-making-windows-81-free-for-all/

http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2014/03/01/7703257.htm

 

mann what about linux and all those open source os's...people should give it ago.

 

Most users, at least as of now, are not sophisticated enough to be able do deal with Linux and its configuration. The other issue is having IT of friends and or family to help them out with issues. This one day may change, especially if M$ does not get in gear with a UI consumers want.

I love being able to help out friends and family so I then tend to hover towards the OS they use. It helps to that I enjoy the UI of that OS as well. I dabble with Linux based UI's but tend to gravitate away as there is no body local using it. I have had a few people inquire about it but get turned off when you mention there is no 100% office professional compatible app out there. Not that stuff can not get done just not as easy as in Office. On that note if Office were issued for Linux or a cloud based one that could be run from a Linux browser (no active x etc.) then those Linux UI's would be seen in a new light. Then again convince people it is ok and secure to work from the cloud etc..

Back to topic, a lot of this as explained are XP users migrating to Windows 7. This probably means Enterprise, or businesses, converting their systems to Windows 7 over Windows 8.x. It still is what it is though.

Edit;

This link shows things a bit different.

http://wmpoweruser.com/report-windo...rket-share-windows-xp-still-in-29-53-devices/

 

Eco systems based on other OSes, FLOSS or not, are hardly relevant in this case. (Maybe Mac is relevant sometimes.)

As for "business" and "pro", depending on what kind of business you're doing things can be quite different.

 

My office entered 2014 with about 50% Win7 machines, 50% WinXP machines. Even though both myself and the head of the tech firm we contract with personally prefer Win8.1 over Win7, we're replacing the XP machines with Win7 machines, not Win 8.1 machines, because (1) we want consistency amongst office machines and we don't want to pay to upgrade the currently-functioning Win7 machines just to achieve consistency with 8.1, and (2) it's a more "mature" release in terms of bugs, security, and third-party software running smoothest. Win8.1 is still relatively young in terms of deploying an OS in a business setting.

If WinXP wasn't losing support in a month, we wouldn't have upgraded those XP machines until they broke. I think businesses updating their XP machines before that deadline is a significant contributor to the rising Win7 usage right now.

 

We're starting to get "3K" 15.6" laptops at work, and while we are still standardized on Win7 across all PC laptops, it's clear that Win7 wasn't designed for screens this small and hi-rez. Menus and things are too small to practically use. The DPI adjustments help, but makes it look kinda weird and introduces some abnormalities. I'll be throwing Win8.1 on one and seeing if it does a better job, and if so I'll be encouraging that for future deployments of that style of laptop.

 

15.6 at what resolution? I use a 17.1 at 1080P and even that seems a bit large, I could easily do 15.6 at 1080P then again I have really good eye sight up close.

Edit; With Windows 8 being out since 10/2012 it should be plenty mature enough for deployment in a business situation. There though does exist the fact of software presently used in an environment that may already be proven to run up to Windows 7 that has yet been proven to run reliably on the Windows 8 platform.

 

There's no difference between Win8 and Win7 if you're talking single-monitor configs. If you have multiple monitors, then Win8 has a few features that may help.

 

These laptops are 2880x1620. It's really microscopic and unusable at the native 100% DPI. 150% DPI works, but some text ends up too large for some boxes.

 

Yes MS really needs to work on font scaling especially since very high ppi lcds are becoming more common.

Beamed from my G2 Tricorder

 

I threw Win8.1 on one of these laptops, and 150% DPI is *much* more reasonable and things look much more normal (it's also the default at this resolution). The fonts are not quite OS X + Retina good but they are certainly in that general direction. It's clear MS planned for this with Win8.1.

 

Seriously? So many people have "fuzzy fonts" in Windows 8 with anything but 100% DPI font scaling.

Here's just a few:

Windows 8 Blurry/Fuzzy Text
Poor font rendering in Windows 8 (blurry text) - Microsoft Community
Fix: Fonts & Text appear blurry or blurred in Windows 8

 

That's wonderful. It's exactly as wonderful in Windows 7. No difference, at all. And of course, the larger issues with Windows' aging desktop graphics foundation are still in Windows 8, the same as they were in Windows 7, and the same they were in Vista. By the way, Vista was the version of Windows for which Microsoft at some point had announced that they would address those issues. So here we are, in 2014, and Microsoft has done diddly-squat on that front. So, what was it again they "planned for"?

 

None of those mention HiDPI screens (since no consumer PC shipped with one back then). Yes, if you 150% DPI at 1600x900 it's going to be blurry. That's not exactly a mystery. Back then the DPI setting was borderline "ease of access", one of those tradeoffs one made when they needed everything bigger and would deal with text not fitting in boxes or whatever. Now that consumer PCs are coming with these 2880x1620 (and higher) screens, DPI scaling is an absolute requirement. Windows 8.1 handles it very well, the stock desktop and apps look darn nice, I didn't see any odd cutoff text or things not fitting. Some fonts are *slightly* jagged, but only when I really look close do I notice. From normal sitting distance it's imperceivable.

How to Make the Windows Desktop Work Well on High-DPI Displays and Fix Blurry Fonts

The blurry font thing is (was) also not monopolized by Windows.

10 Mac Apps that Need MacBook Pro Retina Support (and Pronto) | TIME.com

Apple got it nailed down quick because they just happen to control the hardware and the ecosystem, and now most of their systems are HiDPI. I believe out of the 10 apps there, all of them got "fixed" soon after (or just before) the article. Office 2011 was fixed within weeks. I expect Windows apps to take longer and have far more derelict apps that never get fixed.

 

High PPI or not, when 99% of the machines out there use 1920x1200 or lower resolution monitors/LCD's it's a fail on MS part. I can't say about Hi PPI because I don't own one and don't see any definitive articles on the matter. All I can tell you is on my 13.3" 1080p screen (which is ~ 165ppi) 125% scaling and 150% scaling look atrocious.

 

On my 1080p 11.6" screen, at 125% and 150% scaling, it depends completely on the software whether it looks blurry or not. Chrome looks blurry at 150% but not 125%. MS software looks good at both. This is basically the same as what happened when the first Retina MBPs came out. The first-party software looked good, but third-party software did or did not depending on whether the third-party software developer addressed the issue. It wasn't Apple's fault of Google didn't update Chrome for high-DPI OSX machines, and it's not Microsoft's fault if Google doesn't update Chrome for high-DPI Windows machines.

I don't think there was as much controversy over it with the RMBPs because, on average, people use a lot less first-party software in the Windows world than in the OSX world.

 

That's peculiar, because I have a Surface Pro 2 with a 1080 screen, and Win8.1 looked great at any DPI, which was good since at 100% it's borderline too small.

In Windows 7 I definitely see DPI abnormalities, which I mentioned. The taskbar is particularly obvious, I have seen the various taskbar icons get weird at anything but 100%/150% DPI.

 

That's curious because between the four laptops currently in my possession: 1080p 11.6", 1080p 13.3", 1366x768 11.6", 1366x768 10.1" anything other than 100% font scaling looks fuzzy, all running Windows 8.1.

 

In what programs? I've got two 1080p devices, one 16.4", one 11.6", running Win8.1 and I'd like to see if I could duplicate your experience.

 

Some PNG format screen shots should do it.

 

Just google for Windows 8 blurry text or fuzzy fonts... problem solved. This is 2014 btw.

 

What a way to flip the bird to someone trying to be helpful.

FYI, with ANY problem with ANY consumer device, googling doesn't give you any clue as to how widespread it is, since the only people who go and complain online are the people affected (whether they be 10% or 90%).

 

Sorry, I misread your post I read it as (my ADD kicking in): "and I couldn't duplicate the experience" not "I'd like to see if I could duplicate". I speed read...

In any case just bump the font scaling to 125%, that's stock for Win 8.1.

 

1080p 17.3" Win7 here. Anything other than 100% scaling also gives blurry/fuzzy text.

 

I took some 150% screenshots, but my uploads keep getting dithered regardless of the format I use. So they won't give an honest view of what I see on a 2880x1620 panel. Needless to say, the vast majority of the built-in stuff looks fine, 125% is a little dithered in places but I'd stop short of "blurry."

 

some more pertinent links;

Windows Market Share Falls to Lowest in Decades, But Should Microsoft Care? | Windows content from Windows IT Pro

Weeks before expiration date, Windows XP still has 29% OS market share | Ars Technica

Microsoft Reportedly Lowering Windows 8.1 Costs to OEMs -- Redmondmag.com

 

The significant changes are iOS and Android eating into desktop share as a whole (and that is absolutely something Microsoft needs to continue to address), not shifts within desktop market share. The shifts within the "desktop OS" piece of the pie are not particularly significant. From your first link, describing the shifts within the "desktop OS" piece of the pie:

And the reducing the price of Windows licenses for low-cost devices is to combat iOS and Android. As per your third link:

 

I seem to remember a thread about Chromebooks taking massive slices of the market and M$$$$'s DAYS ARE NUMBERED@!!!!! Man that ".06% to .15%" jump sure drives that point home! And MS lost 1% of the desktop market! How will MS deal with this massive destruction of their market share?

Oh, offer a quarterly dividend. Microsoft expands board, announces quarterly dividend | Microsoft Pri0 | Seattle Times

 

Well, I have never commented on those Chromebooks, but I'll say this: I would absolutely love to hear the silence in Microsoft's boardroom after someone offers them a "joke" as hilarious as this one. Here's a hint: Waiting until those things are at a 50% marketshare before thinking about a response is, shall we say, a sub-optimal approach. It is clear that Goggle, piece by piece, is putting an infrastructure in place (of which Chromebooks are only one component, by the way) that has the potential of becoming a mortal threat, and not only to Microsoft. Only a fool would laugh at that picture.

 

NBR: where I go to hear that an OS that has 0.15% market share and growing is a serious threat to established players, but an OS that has a 5% market share and growing (Windows Phone) is going nowhere.

And Google absolutely has an infrastructure that's a mortal threat to the traditional Wintel PC: Android. Android and iOS have been what's been driving the decline in PC sales for the past few years. If people rely on iOS and Android for day-to-day tasks, and thus replace their PCs half as often because they're being used less, PC sales drop 50% even though nobody is going entirely without a PC.

 

And I remember early on hearing how good windows 8 was and how well it would be accepted along with all the excuses and what not. it took 30+ years for M$ to establish their dominance in the OS/UI market. in the end it will not break down today or even tomorrow but with the UI in its current state it seems they are to be geared towards future loss.

 

I don't remember reading about Windows 8 in this context at all. It was mostly just technical "here's how the Metro stuff looks" previews. They also recommended touch screens and tablets, since those were still the cool future thing in 2011. The reviews were relatively positive though. None of the METRO SUCKS MICROSOFT SUCKS GOODBYE M$$$$$$ HAHAHAHA stuff. Just a "it has a learning curve, but otherwise it's fast and usable."

And then Apple updated their Boot Camp system to support Windows 8.

 

I am not talking preview, I am talking about once it went RTM and most beta users knew they got the extremely short end of the shaft. I don't remember touch for a PC ever being the cool thing. If windows 8 were properly separated in its desktop/touch interface, as we all were screaming for, then maybe it would have been the cool thing. Agreed though, just as I saw it too, pre-RTM the outlook for Windows 8 was good.

It is not that metro ever "sucked" just the forced implementation on desktops sucks. M$ sucks for feeling it can force whatever agenda it pleases on the consumer despite almost two years of the consumer largely saying NO THANKS. I am not saying everyone is going to abandon M$ based on this but people are fickle and will look elsewhere for something to work for them, Be it Windows 7 or otherwise. I would venture to say there is little no to no consumer loyalty when it comes to brand if the particular consumer dislikes Windows 8.x.

Now to the rub. If Windows 8.x is not fixed properly just having metro could scare away consumers even from Windows 9. Consumers will fear a purchase of windows 9, even if totally fixed in the desktop arena, could be reverted at any time via an update at M$'s whim. The only way to avoid this feeling for the consumer is to dump Metro all together in Windows 9. This IMHO would be a bad thing not a good one. I would like to see metro work out in the tablet and phone arena. Eventually if Windows desktop is fixed I would like this on my phone and maybe an RT tablet too. Again IMHO, M$ needs to de-vilify metro ASAP.

Now while a lot of that was off topic, it actually would drive up market share and that is on topic.

While off topic a bit, these links will show Update 1 most likely will not drive further market share (here is to hoping they are wrong);

http://arstechnica.com/information-...oncessions-that-still-wont-make-people-happy/
http://www.zdnet.com/a-new-windows-8-1-update-tries-to-win-back-desktop-diehards-7000027123/

 

We've had several threads where the following has been mentioned:

iDevices and Android were eating away at desktop PC market share before Windows 8 was released

Last I checked, this has not changed. iPads are still unconditionally better at lots of lower demand tasks than a laptop would ever be. They are also cheaper than a decent laptop, and substantially better build quality and durability than laptops in their price range.

Windows 8 did not single-handedly destroy the PC market

We know this, see my first point. Just like Windows 8 didn't destroy the market, it certain't wasn't going to save it. "Oh, Windows 8 is fantastic, I think I'll sit on the toilet with my Windows 8 laptop instead of my iPad!" No. Tablets are now embedded in all the nooks and crannies where laptops didn't fit right.

Along with these, Microsoft has the Surface RT, which only confuses buyers, and the Surface Pro, which is totes awesome but way too expensive. On the other end of the spectrum are the Dell Venue 8's with their dopey 2GB RAM, 32-bit Atoms, low-res screens and poor storage capacity. But they are dirt cheap.

We actually like Win8.1 at work as it is, but there has been no "go" on actually deploying it. We had one department of users with some very vertical web app that only worked with IE10 for some reason. Since I got the new HiDPI screen laptops and Win7 just doesn't look nice on them we may have to revisit it for those.

 

I am sorry we are not talking the decline of the PC is any of the prior posts, so I am not sure where that is coming from. As far as you guys like Windows 8.x that is fine too. Just understand, and I am sure by the numbers you have to agree, to date this is not the general consumer consensus. Understand too I wanted and want M$ to succeed with the OS, as the UI is it however will not and once again as I have always stated things could have been so very different.

 

Your use of the term "market share" and users "looking elsewhere" implies a platform move, as the shrinking PC market simply means more Windows machines are being retired.

Also I admit your continued use of "M$" triggers something and I really just end up skimming quickly over your posts. I probably miss a lot of content.

 

Market share, by the numbers as provided in my links, are an OS totals compared to one another. Particular interest in PC interest but minimal tablet access etc. does sneak in. I'll apologize you get irate over "M$" but again I do not mean this in any derogatory sense other than back in the day they sold out to the man and became a business, and were absolutely ruthless business men as well. Now maybe that is a bit truer today again in that they are more concerned with their business plan than what consumers want and will purchase or upgrade too. As mentioned many times I have been using it since the first IBM machine and DOS and will continue to do so.

Edit; from a time well before the Windows 8 RTM issues.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/har...ws-7-sp1-performance-increase-cqd-owners.html

 

They always were a business. So are all the other businesses out there. A business doesn't "sell out" when it operates...like a business.

 

They were a group of guys in a garage, hobbyists mostly that made a business out of it. I guess you can say by calling it, or even registering the name, Microsoft they were a business at that point. As mentioned I did not come up with M$ but it was very shortly after their launch and I have used it since.

 

Registering a name doesn't mean that someone is a profit-oriented business instead of a bunch of "hobbyists," but (1) opening an international office in Japan might, and (2) negotiating a contract with IBM to provide IBM with software sure does. These two events happened in 1978 and 1981, respectively. That's over three decades ago, and Microsoft had only operated for a few years before it was unquestionably a business...

Obviously nobody is going to stop you, but even you agree that the term M$ is a reference to Microsoft's decision in the late 1970s to become a for-profit business instead of some sort of open-source collective or something like that, not anything from the past few decades. And you should be aware for a lot of people, from myself to SubZero to Penny Arcade, continued use of the term nowadays undermines your posts and the points you're trying to make. It's a red flag that someone is a fanboy or hater, just like terms like "crapple," "iSheep," "Fandroid," "Shamsung," etc are. The use of these sorts of terms in serious discussion undermines any serious point you're trying to make. That said, if you want to do so, it's your call.

 

Thanks, so you are saying if I stop using M$ someone will listen to me and full fix Windows 8, well then done. But if not, then no skin off my back for things just being the status quo.

Edit, at times I've been a fanboy, hater, or just plain indifferent (I even liked Windows ME) but through it all M$ as the abbreviation I've used has trudged on.

 

Can we just stop arguing about trivial things like name writing...

The last time a Win8 thread (about UI) sparked some good discussion, it went "interesting" as well and end up locked. Let's hope this one doesn't.

 

Agreed, this should be for market share so I will apologize for my part in leading it astray, Other than if M$ wants to come in and offer a full fix for the UI if I stop using M$, it is a done deal. Then IMHO we will see some real progress in market saturation.

 

Ugh, I hate seeing Windows 8 with so much market share - it should all be 8.1 by now! All those people not realising there's a major free update for their PC's - it saddens me

 

The problem is that some machines have trouble with 8.1 over even plain Windows 8.0. Otherwise I am sure the saturation level for market share would be higher.

 

Warning! This is my one, and only post, concerning what I think about these 7 vs. 8 OS war threads.

I've been in the IT biz, for over 40 years. So if you don't want to read what an old man has to say, stop here, and go forward/back to another post.

/Rant on/

My, my, my... Losing Aero is a "deal breaker" for some people. :rolleyes2:

I have 4 computers in my house, not counting my daughters 2 laptops. Each one is using a different version of Windows. Win98, WinXP, Win7, and Win8.1. I like each flavor, for a variety of different reasons. Yeah I had a learning curve, when I received each of my new machines with an updated OS. But that's the fun part of getting a new OS, hunting, pecking, clicking, now swiping, then wow, look at that! The art of discovering, something new, and amazing, is truly one of the joys in life. You all know that I'm "way over the hill" when it comes to age, but I'm just a "kid in a candy store" when it comes to new technology, and new operating systems. I've read, what appeared to be a "zillion" pro/con Win8 reviews, before I obtained my first Win8 machine. It's a Lenovo A520, with a 23" 10-point touchscreen. I've had it for around 5 months, and just upgraded to Win8.1 two weeks ago. I didn't have any problems "adjusting" to Win8, or the Metro interface. When I was comfortable using 8, I went through the 8.1 upgrade. This A520 handled the upgrade flawlessly. I didn't have any, I mean zero, zilch, nada, problems downloading, and installing the 8.1 programs. No compatibility issues, and I didn't lose any hardware functionality.

Before I received my Win8 system, I thought that I would get a lot of use from the Metro apps. I had seen them in my daughters Windows Phone 8X by HTC. I only have use of my left arm, and hand, and I figured that I could touch, and swipe to my hearts content, on the start screen. I spent some time arranging, and modifying, my start screen on the A520 under Win8. I had more choices to modify the apps position, and size, under 8.1. I really like the live tiles, but I don't like the inability to change the background color, or the icon itself, in the individual app tile. Still, the start screen was where I was going to hang out. I planned to divide my time, by using the Metro apps 80% per session, and the desktop 20%. Then reality set in. (I bet you know where I'm going here. ) The programs that I use the most, launched me into the desktop to execute the interface.

Ya, hey der, (As we sometimes say when traveling up north in the UP) there are a lot of Metro apps that execute with the new, fancy, interface. It's just that I don't use them very often. I mean, even if I wanted to use IE as my browser, I don't like the IE Metro interface. Even the NetFlix Metro app appears to be cumbersome. So, maybe I'm not going to hang out on the start screen after all. As it turned out, I'm at the desktop 90% per session, and only use the Metro side 10%.

Still, this issue is not "a deal breaker" for me, or make me want to trash Win8 entirely. I honestly like most of the changes MS made on both the desktop side, and Metro. Also, I thought I'd be using my fingers, touching, and swiping all over the screen. Then I powered this baby down, and went to sleep. The next morning, by the dawns early light, I got up to see my screen, with my greasy finger streaks, all over it. Now I'm not an obsessive, compulsive person, but it still grossed me out. Hell, I wipe off my laptop's screen, even if I only see a smudge on it. So you guessed it, I barely touch my A520's screen anymore, and I do everything with my mouse.

I'll still be running Win7 on my laptop, and Win XP on my wife's gaming desktop. (No, not those extreme games. She plays hidden objects, and other games from Big Fish) My daughter, and her boy friend, both have laptops. They don't like any OS that they have to pay for, or constantly update. I think they're using Ubuntu at the moment. I never hear them complaining that "something doesn't work right" or some game crashed their computer. Then again, her crowd actually uses game consoles (she has a ton of them, starting with my old Atari, and going through her current PS3) with 4 multi-player joysticks, so everybody can get in on the action.

I just can't believe that so many (or at least a very vocal minority) feel so passionately over these MS operating systems. Seven is the bomb, and 8 is the radioactive rubbish left over, after they dropped the bomb. Or is it seven is only good for people who actually use their machine for real work, and 8 is for those clowns who play in the Metro world? I don't see the point of endlessly regurgitating the difference between Win7, and 8. How many years can you flog a dead horse? I'm all for a good debate, but when a debate degenerates into some vile "I'm right, and you're a donkey whatever", it's no longer civilized.

As Rodney King once said "Why can't we all just get along"? :rolleyes2:

But that ain't gonna happen, as long as some people like to keep blathering on, Ad nauseam, about something that is not really a life altering issue. Maybe it is "life altering" if you have stock in MS, and you're counting on that for your retirement. So I guess that next month, we'll see another thread that starts the "debate" anew. As for me, I was devastated when OS/2 Warp bit the dust. I'm still astounded by some of the boner moves that IBM has made. I got over it. MS is no different. Deal with it, move on, and use what ever OS suits you best. If you have such a problem, with what you think MS is forcing you to swallow, spit out the kool aid, and join GNU. :laugh:

/Rant Off/ :SLEEP:

 

First off this thread had no 8 vs. 7 carnage, but thanks for introducing it. This thread is to address slow market penetration of Windows 8 in general. It had gone a bit astray with my use of an askew abbreviation for Microsoft.

I can appreciate your feel for the need for a rant only not too sure why you had waited so long, the issues here have been addressed a multitude of times. Essentially the debate has been settled as to whether specific users find Windows 8 usable/likeable for themselves. Now the debate will start up again soon though.

It seems to start with every new iteration of the "NEW" Windows UI that pops up supposedly to help address the frustrated desktop consumers. Since the new UI enhancements seem to fail each time in this regard we all hope our complaints will be utilized for a full fix of the UI. Apparently we are hoping in vein but we can still hope.

As far as the UI being forced down our throats, yup it is. GNU is easy for a lot of us here, the problem is all our friends and coworkers going the same path. Problem is back in the day you were either IT or a sever hobbyist, then came the command line/GUI wars. This, for a lack of a better term, dumified the PC usage. With this in flowed the masses. As the GUI's were tweaked with each iteration the masses became more initiated to having computers, the experience was smoother and smoother along with the interface becoming easier each time as well.

Then along comes Windows 8, so as not to address the issues we will just say they exist. The problem here then is with the alternate GNU there are just too many UI's and worse yet you bring back the dreaded, to most casual users, command line. Say goodbye to anything close to a dumbed down interface. So to the point again, great advice to those here but we are all concerned for the others we know.

 

"This thread is to address slow market penetration of Windows 8 in general. It had gone a bit astray with my use of an askew abbreviation for Microsoft."

LOL I know how much you love/hate M$.

"Essentially the debate has been settled as to whether specific users find Windows 8 usable/likeable for themselves. Now the debate will start up again soon though."

Wait... the debate has been settled? Who won? I don't think my post/rant devolved into the dreaded "debate", but posting a monthly update on market share, using a new thread, seems to be shoving your, ahem.. displeasure down our throats.

View attachment 110260

If you only had posted a single thread, and let it ride, we would all see how much interest there is in the MS Market Share. You could have updated it every month.

"Since the new UI enhancements seem to fail each time in this regard we all hope our complaints will be utilized for a full fix of the UI. Apparently we are hoping in vein but we can still hope."

I think that this inadvertent malapropism, is really the whole point to your bringing the market share up again, and again. MS has gotten under your skin, and it's making your blood boil.

As I've said, I don't think I was debating anything in my rant. I was just telling about my experience using the new MS Win 8.x OS. I guess I should have started a new thread titled "My Experience Using Win 8.x". Take it with a grain of salt. After all, I'm only one "share".

 

I have always had a love/indifferent/hate relationship with the company. Most who have been around as long as I are in the same boat. I repost to avoid so much off topic showing up in each months thread. This is why I also title them as a per month. Easier to sort through.

Thanks, yes please a new thread would have been nice. Agreed though this thread was already polluted with off topic. Maybe if it did not inspire rants and/or off topic we could have had one of those long threads. Things have calmed down a lot though now that the debate over features is over and most have made up their minds as to what they want in their computer.

Remember too, I do not create the news or the numbers, you guys are all just shooting the messenger.

On topic this one is maybe somewhat encouraging;

Microsoft leverages 'cute' to sell Windows 8 tablets in Japan