Microsoft takes in $60b, sells 180m Vista licenses since launch
[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
Relevant Posts
- Poll: Is Microsoft's new ad working? (39 days ago - 220 Comments)
- Windows XP downgrade deadline extended to July 31, 2009 (6 days ago - 72 Comments)
- Windows 7 coming June 3rd, 2009? (29 days ago - 110 Comments)
- Microsoft's PBDA platform makes Big Content happy, should make TV tuning easier (32 days ago - 18 Comments)
- Windows 7 to be officially named... Windows 7 (Yesterday - 189 Comments)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
Nick Darveniza @ Jul 19th 2008 6:13AM
It's already surpassed XP for the same amount of time, Engadget.
Nick Darveniza @ Jul 19th 2008 6:18AM
BTW
That was first comment!
And Vista DOES play Crysis (no, it does, shutup)
and it DOES play Doom!
kccboy2004 @ Jul 19th 2008 8:02AM
amazing. well done Microsoft ! That is a serious piece of software. I love my Vista. I have 3 copies on 3 home pc's. It is no wonder it sells so well;
1. Fast
2. Stable (not a single hangup or crash)
3. Media centre
4. Intuitive.
Again well done Microsoft.
kccboy2004 @ Jul 19th 2008 8:09AM
another thing... Vista is really well priced;
$99 for a product that will last the next 5 -7 years (like XP).
I think that other lesser products require the users to pay for updates every 12 -18 months.
Josh @ Jul 19th 2008 9:56AM
I see what you did there attacking OSX as "lesser". Why don't you just appreciate the success of the operating system you and enjoy and not attack the other major operating systems.
High Ranks make you sterile @ Jul 19th 2008 11:08AM
How come Wii Sports gets shit for its sale since it's bundled with Wii but Vista doesn't when it's bundled with 90% of computers?
Kelmon @ Jul 19th 2008 11:31AM
"$99 for a product that will last the next 5 -7 years (like XP)."
But it didn't. Vista was a considerably delayed software project. Microsoft certainly didn't intend XP to "last" as long as it did and everyone had to put up with that. I certainly don't think you'll find users of OS X or Linux complaining that their OS is refreshed often. It's an interesting attempt to spin what is accepted by all to have been a messed up project as a good thing, but definitely invalid.
futurepastnow @ Jul 19th 2008 12:02PM
I didn't know I was "required" to pay for updates every 12-18 months.
jason @ Jul 19th 2008 12:03PM
OSX users have to pay for each refresh though. That is money every year to keep up with the latest.
Linux users get it free. (it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure this one out)
2007-2012 is my projected life expectancy for vista.
just because they will release Windows 7, doesnt mean that they will automatically stop supporting Vista (they will probably throw in a SP around 2011)
Pete @ Jul 19th 2008 4:06PM
Does this inclide the owe soo many ppl who buy vista computers and den change the os to XP ??
iPriest @ Jul 19th 2008 1:54PM
Does look like WM 6.1 tough
mike @ Jul 19th 2008 2:39PM
@kcc
Are you kidding me??? I run Vista Ultimate on my brand new laptop and it crashes ALOT! Vista isn't all that bad, but to claim it 'stable' is laughable.
Even Balmer refers to it as 'A work in progress'
kccboy2004 @ Jul 19th 2008 2:57PM
@Josh,
I don't see that as "attacking" the competition. I would consider that as a comparison. I happen to think that Vista, for me is the best operating system, I have no restrictions and great free ongoing support for a single price of less than $100.
I do enjoy it. I don't think that I mentioned OSX. I don't think that I would really classify OSX in the same category though. OSX is really just UNIX with a GUI interface isn't it. It is not really a consumer level OSX - that was not the intention of OSX. OSX is for graphic designers and video editors, not the general public. Even then I think that you need a high end machine to operate it. Have you ever tried to burn a video DVD in OSX using a G4 ? Are there any real consumer applications that are used it OSX ? Any mainstream games ?
Unless I am mistaken...
As I say though I think that Vista does not really have any competition in the consumer field for me.
kccboy2004 @ Jul 19th 2008 3:17PM
@mike,
I would send your laptop back.
I have 3 systems running Vista. Never ever had a crash. (Firefox 3 in beta did drop out quite a few times though). My OSX system does crash and hang all the time.
Seriously, there is something wrong with your Laptop. What kind is it ?
zephead @ Jul 19th 2008 3:19PM
@kccboy2004
"$99 for a product that will last the next 5 -7 years (like XP)."
Make that "$99 for a product that will --not see any major upgrades for-- the next 5-7 years".
Another thing, why not spend $30 more and get the "ultimate" version? Oh that's right, because your ultimate version costs $260/$400 (depending if you want to upgrade or get the 'full' version. Much more than $30 extra, my bad.
roach @ Jul 19th 2008 5:28PM
@kccboy2004
I too have 3 license of Vista installed on a machine from 1.1 GHZ laptop to quad core desktop. All run awesome!
I surprise with the number considering all the bad press and trash talk -and most of the talk comes from people who never used Vista.
Hamidxa @ Jul 19th 2008 6:16PM
Microsoft has sold more Vista licenses in 18 months than Apple has sold licenses of its operating systems in 18 years.
Gotta love it!
Andrew @ Jul 19th 2008 7:08PM
@Hamid, I am sure Bentley/Ferrari doesn't give a damn how many cars Hyundai sold last year. Apple doesn't compete with Vista in itself, it's a "luxury" product.
roach @ Jul 19th 2008 10:54PM
@Andrew
Crazy Microsoft thinking its product is in the same level as Apple. They got to end such madness thinking and stop those stupid "l switched to Windows" commercials.
Brandon @ Jul 20th 2008 12:00AM
I received about six copies of Windows Vista (thru MSDNAA and some survey) They were all Vista Business variant. (32bit, 64bit, w/ Media, w/o Media) All my friends in CS department received similar number of copies. I'm sure many CS students in most US university got them for free too. I wonder if all those number also got counted in 180m figure.
Drew @ Jul 20th 2008 1:14AM
What are you smoking guys? I really want some. Yeah it's like $99 for an upgrade but not if you're buying it brand new. If you buy basic it doesn't contain enough and if you guy ultimate then it has too much. It's a huge resource hog, lots of clicking just to get a task done, severely overpriced, not to mention it took forever to launch. I mean at least XP is usable now.
If you have the computer to run it well (and judging that we're all on Engadget I'm figuring we're all techie enough that we do have the specs) then it runs great. But for the average person, not so much. Several of my friends who are now on Vista hate it. Lots of them want to switch back. My friend owns a decent Sony laptop with Vista and all he has had only problems (huge loading time, bogged down, etc).
I personally don't mind Vista. It's a prettier version of XP in my opinion but is also severely overpriced. Although, I do have to tip my hat to MS selling 180 million copies. That's a lot more than people expected.
Kelmon @ Jul 20th 2008 12:12PM
@kccboy2004
I've seen some silly comments but suggesting that OS X is UNIX with a GUI and therefore not designed for consumers just beggars belief. Remember that Windows 95 was simply DOS with a GUI but no one suggests that this means it wasn't designed for consumers, since that is exactly what it was designed for. I have no idea what you are calling a "consumer application" but I am sure this is a definition that we can all have a good laugh about.
I will also note that even OS X Leopard runs fine on my old G4 Titanium PowerBook. Yes, it burns data and video DVDs. I'm not sure why you think it wouldn't.
Ultimately, it's clear that you do not own or have access to a Mac. Leopard, with all its flaws, does not crash constantly and the only kernel panic I have encountered with it was due to a compatibility issue with Parallels Desktop and it's kernel extension. That you like Vista is fine but you are not fooling anyone by, frankly, making stuff up. Seriously, it isn't that important a topic...
TheWakeUpCall @ Jul 20th 2008 7:37PM
@Drew
What they were 'smoking' was Windows Vista. If you actually used it on your computer you would be able to see it's good too. If your friends find it slow, their laptops are probably slow. An old Sony Vaio is still slow, whether it's slow or not.
It is not designed to run on 1GB of RAM or something. 1GB is the new 256MB. If you want to run Vista, you need to run it on a new PC, simple. And unlike you suggested it doesn't need to be 8GB of ram or something, 2GB will do fine on a laptop, 3/4 better on a desktop. That's not too much to ask these days.
I don't know how you can say the OS is overpriced, because a new PC is still about £200 less than a Mac with the same hardware, which is a known fact.
chris @ Jul 19th 2008 6:22AM
really, 180 million, i wonder if all boys at microsoft were forced to buy a copy or maybe 2 copies.
Kizorblade @ Jul 19th 2008 7:32AM
At least give credit where it's due, and it is due here.
Mich @ Jul 19th 2008 11:05AM
whatever microsoft reports, i am not paying a dime for this vista crap
Not even if they hand out free, it goes straight to shredder, period.
Tony2X @ Jul 19th 2008 11:14AM
So that would account for 160,000 of them or thereabouts.
Kevin T. @ Jul 19th 2008 11:53AM
MS employees get it for free. Quite a few copies I'm told, around a dozen licenses IIRC.
Andir3.0 @ Jul 19th 2008 12:08PM
"MS employees get it for free. Quite a few copies I'm told, around a dozen licenses IIRC."
Wonder if those are counted in sales like the replacements for the other devices being sold by MS.
And duh! When you are practically forced to buy Vista with a new computer nowadays, it's not like people are buying it out of demand. Everyone I know has told me they would rather wait to buy a new PC if it had Vista. I know a few people that bought it because they develop and want to make sure stuff still works. Other than that, I see very little interest/demand.
Goopy @ Jul 19th 2008 12:15PM
@mich
same here. even my neighbour who used vista pirated copy dump that sh*t.
Feelinggood @ Jul 19th 2008 12:20PM
Desperate Microsoft to count Windows XP sales as Vista sales (more typical Microshfat tactics...)
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/145145/dell_to_offer_windows_xp_beyond_june_30_cutoff.html
Za @ Jul 19th 2008 12:27PM
Most of those licenses came bundled with computers. I assure you, having worked in sales, that if you don't give the customer a choice when they need a computer, they will go with what is available.
Neal @ Jul 19th 2008 2:10PM
MS employees do NOT get it for free. They are able to buy it at a drastically reduced price, but they have to buy it like anyone else.
bjsguess @ Jul 19th 2008 2:28PM
Are all Apple fans completely brain dead? Look we have put up with your endless iPhone, Airbook, and Touch posts. We are constantly reminded about how well those products sell. Now we finally have a post showing significant inroads made by Vista and all you can do is put up some lame argument about how customers are "forced" to use Vista.
Look, if you buy a PC from a big box store you have a limited choice when it comes to the OS. If you walk into BB or CC you will be offered a variety of manufacturers but really only one OS, Vista. We all know that.
How is that any different from Mac's situation. If I walk into an Apple store what are my choices for OS? Let's see, there's OS X ... and OS X ... and OS X. If I want a Mac I'm "forced" to get OS X. You have NO choice of buying a Mac product and having Vista pre-installed instead of OS X.
Typical consumers have a choice of either a Windows product or Apple product. Why can't Apple fans get it through their head that their are millions of very satisfied Windows users who aren't interested in a Mac? If I wanted a Mac I would buy one.
Mark Anderson @ Jul 19th 2008 2:24PM
You know, when I hear all these comments that loads of PC buyers immediately downgrade to XP I go and look at OS usage statistics.
Which show XP decreasing and Vista increasing.
Any other bad arguments or are we done here?
kccboy2004 @ Jul 20th 2008 7:16PM
@chris,
Steve Jobs knows that OSX can't cut the mustard. Here is the reasoning:
If it could then he would allow OSX to be installed on any PC
Corporation after corporation tells him so, because they decide against OSX as the desktop client software, even though they have a version of UNIX running on the main server.
These are the facts.
OSX= EPIC FAIL.
(granted unless you are a graphic designer with a high end machine - low end machines can only view pictures and surf the web using OSX. Fact.).
Tone @ Jul 19th 2008 6:24AM
180 million unsatisfied customers.
fanman @ Jul 19th 2008 7:37AM
The mind of a fanboy:
Good news about rival product ---> This may reflect poorly on my chosen marketing god, or well on a company I despise. I will therefore add baseless hearsay ---> Stir well for 3-4 minutes, add a sprinkle of caps lock key if necessary ---> Bad news about rival product is complete.
Musouka @ Jul 19th 2008 8:03AM
I am satisfied with my Ultimate :)
kccboy2004 @ Jul 19th 2008 8:04AM
wow Tone, have you ever used this software? it is sound and solid and secure. I am completely satisfied. (I converted from OSX - OSX was terrible).
tydei8 @ Jul 19th 2008 9:04AM
I am not an unsatisfied customer. Didn't your mother ever tell you what happens when you assume things?
fanman @ Jul 19th 2008 10:01AM
@ Eddie,
The exact same thing as every other piece of software ever written.
"ZOMG VISTA WONT WOLK ON MY PENTIUM ONE THEREFORE IT SUKS!!111!1!"
Backlin @ Jul 19th 2008 10:32AM
I am also satisfied with Vista Ultimate on my desktop. It runs better than XP, probably because of the FF-Class hardware.
John @ Jul 19th 2008 10:49AM
Well, I'm a half-satisfied customer. Runs great on my desktop, runs not so well on my laptop. And by 'runs not so well', I mean, 'runs great for the 40 minutes or so that I can keep it off of a wall socket'. But performance wise, still solid.
vdogg89 @ Jul 19th 2008 11:43AM
i hate people who bash Vista when they've never actually tried it outside of Bestbuy. Theres so much you dont realize that is handy, plus Ive never had problems with vista not running correct. It works far better than xp does.
phanbouy @ Jul 19th 2008 12:21PM
lol at the irony of a legion of fanboys getting frothy on another supposed fanboy
Snitch @ Jul 19th 2008 6:08PM
Your right, that is a really bad # for microsoft, it a big # no doubt but if you take into account how many PCs have been ship with vista worldwide in the last 18 months you will see what am talking about. Dude it took them 6 years to make vista, 180 million licenses is peanut's to the amount of money they might had spend cooking it for 6 years
Ashley Allen @ Jul 19th 2008 6:26AM
I still don't get peoples problems with Vista, I've been using it for more than a year now and I've never had a problem.
BobTurbo @ Jul 19th 2008 6:56AM
The Windows user interface sucks - it always has. I haven't had any problem with Vista vs XP, it is just as reliable, fast, and so on, but the user interface is terrible. They got a few things right, such as nice clear fonts, but 90% of the UI is still just as pathetic in relative terms as Windows 3.11.
Windows 7, despite Microsoft bringing in some guy from Adobe to help with the UI, will still suck. Microsoft have done little right since monopolising the market a long time ago.
Chris @ Jul 19th 2008 7:02AM
Hmm... I dunno, people always tout XP as being reliable and fast, but I found drawing on XP to be really bad (and yeah, I had my graphics card drivers installed). I've also had numerous weird glitches with just about every version of Windows I've used, and I'd say XP and Vista level on that one.