Microsoft boasts that 96% of netbooks now run Windows
By Donald Melanson 
posted April 6th 2009 7:12PM
posted April 6th 2009 7:12PM
Remember the old days when Microsoft was dragged kicking and screaming into offering Windows XP on netbooks? Neither does Microsoft, apparently, as the company is now all too happy to boast that a full 96% of the netbooks on the market run on its venerable OS. It's also, unsurprisingly, quick to point out that virtually all of that growth comes at the expense of Linux, which Microsoft once again notes sees much higher rates of return once folks "realize their Linux-based netbook PC doesn't deliver that same quality of experience." Of course, all of this talk also has a little something to do with the even more netbook-minded Windows 7 which, ironically, could well be trying to peel off some market share from XP by this time next year.
And...?
And so much for Linux. That's the cold hard truth. They had their once-in-a-decade chance and they blew it.
Netbooks may hurt pc manufacturers with their small margins, but Microsoft is more than happy to sell more Windows licenses.
@ TitaniumMan: linux blew it because there are too many bystanders like and unlike you, who don't/can't/can't bother to help linux out by developing [killer] programs / improving compatibility with hardware / ensuring things run as well as Windows right out of the box / give compellng reasons to switch. You know that linux is a community effort and you are not only sitting on your fence, you're also spitting onto the other side of the green. Thanks a bunch.
rant over
linux will never be ready for average consumer use. Stop trying.
@ TitaniumMan: "And so much for Linux. That's the cold hard truth. They had their once-in-a-decade chance and they blew it.
Netbooks may hurt pc manufacturers with their small margins, but Microsoft is more than happy to sell more Windows licenses"
Explain to me how Linux blew it? Linux did everything right and quite frankly linux is a better os than windows (xp,vista, and maybe even 7 time will tell) the only reason Linux market share is going down is becasue consumers are stuck in there ways and do not want to experiment with other OSes. linux flavors does everything microsoft does and more such as better security and faster boot times.
One last thing Microsoft will NEVER HAVE 96% share in netbooks. there was a article in the nytimes today:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/06/microsofts-netbook-conundrum/
that laid out why exactly. Microsoft is having a hard time selling PC manufactures on why they should pay $25 licensing fee for MS 7 on an netbook while they pay 75% on an laptop. also, many manufactures such as asus,dell among others want to keep linux around because they can customize it and make their product stand out from the rest of the pact. last reason why ms will never have this market share is that netbook manufactures are finding ARM chips appealing because of better power management and will start to embrace it. only linux makes they're os able to run on ARM chip sets MS currently doesn't offer an ARM edition of its os. these reasons and the fact HP is finding the android os (which runs the linux kernel) appealing for netbooks are reasons why ms will never have 96% and why linux is far from dead.
" You know that linux is a community effort and you are not only sitting on your fence, you're also spitting onto the other side of the green."
Not all of us are jobless basement dwellers who want to use their PC's operating system as well as PROGRAM IT THEMSELVES. I am willing to spend extra money on a non-free OS if I don't have to tell the God damn thing how to work on my own time.
@AVG
obviously you've never used any linux flavors. I've been using ubuntu for about a year now and i'm very computer illiterate. i don't know how to program or anything like that. though i lack this knowledge i find using ubuntu linux WAY EASIER than using MS. ubuntu was easy to set up the only thing i had to do was put in the cd and fill out the questionnaire (my name what city i live in) and i was done. also many programs that people use a lot ex.AIM, Skype, firefox among are made to work on ubuntu and for the ones that don't theres a open source version. And for that 1 in a million program theres a program called WINE that runs MS program. maybe if you opened your mind to open source and linux you'll like it.Stop living in the past the linux of the 90's is not the linux of today. Now linux is made for average people who want to get work done and use the internet.
I bought a DELL Mini 9 with Ubuntu and initially had the intention of loading Windows XP/7 on it, but after running Ubuntu for a few weeks I think I'll stick with it.
I think it's more than a match for WinXP/7 on the netbook platform.
I used Linux as my exclusive desktop OS from 1995-2002, but since I started using OS X on the desktop I barely looked back. I did install FC10 on my Thinkpad for dual-booting purposes a few months ago, but I was stunned at how much less pleasant to use desktop Linux has gotten.
Sure, there's no reason I couldn't install the window managers I used to use, and make it work like I expect, but the out-of-the-box experience has changed from being something unique and cool, to a cheap ripoff of Windows that doesn't work as well.
Linux may not challenge Microsoft on the desktop, but the fact of the matter is that the increasing awareness of Microsoft alternatives is only making MS look bad by comparison. It's not until you get out of the abusive relationship that is Windows that you begin to realize how poor a product it really is.
Microsoft may have some gains in this specific market, but the fact is that their stagnant products and utter lack of innovation makes it a sinking ship. They'll have to seriously turn things around with Windows 7, if it's not already too late. The only other alternative I can see is to cut costs in order to keep profits up with slowly declining market share in an expanding market. Maybe computer adoption will continue to grow faster than their market share decline, giving them a net positive. This much was clear to me 5 years ago, though it was a controversial view. These days, nobody in the industry would bet on MS' continued dominance.
Hooray for you Jay Jay, you get a cookie. You are a happy Linux user.
My parents will *never* be Linux users. We can debate on which OS is better, but they don't get it. They don't want to get it. They want to press the button that does the thingy that they expect. Hell they don't even get THAT right most of the time, but at least Windows tolerates their extra clicks and generally does what they want, when they want it. It's taken them decades to build up to this point.
Most Windows users are like my parents, and they NEED that familiarity. Most of us here on Engadget don't.
@Jay
"Stop living in the past the linux of the 90's is not the linux of today."
The Linux of today is having its ass handed to it by the Windows of 10 years ago. The public has spoken. Linux sucks. A handful of nerdy power uses like it? Great. That doesn't make the rest of us close-minded.
I tried linux then I found out that my Wifi card isn't compatible.
Gah...
This just makes me feel sorry for the general public that doesnt know better. After a few months with Ubuntu, using Windows (especially XP) is just painful.
This is an extremely hollow victory for Microsoft, for a number of reasons:
1. Those netbooks are all running XP, not Vista
2. The only way they managed to get there is by giving it away. The licensing prices for XP for OEMs was negligible. They actually brought it down to compete with Linux (you know, the free OS) on price. With the customer familiarity of Windows, the manufacturers couldn't really refuse. Representatives from various distros have been saying that they simply can't compete with Windows when it's free. That's what it took to beat linux in this market.
You'll see this when, despite the harsh economy driving netbook sales, Microsoft's revenue barely increases, or doesn't increase at all.
This isn't the end for Linux's consumer adoption hopes, though. Manufacturers like Windows for free, but once Microsoft refuses to license XP any more (sometime around 2099), they'll be back to the age old trouble of differentiating your product when nearly every other computer runs in the exact same way, and the additional expense of Windows licenses.
OEMs prefer to customise their machines to death under the illusion that you chose their machine out of brand loyalty rather than price. Also, since they can't grow their sales by differentiating their products significantly, they're going to try and increase revenue by squeezing every last dollar they can from that RRP.
Reasons for return is because Stupid McMasses can't use their 'EasyBling Pix' and 'BonziBuddy' on their Linux.
On the upside, I installed Linux on my mom's computer and my sister's aging laptop.
Some people like working ON their computers as in they enjoy dicking around getting everything working and configured just so, and learning new stuff. Most people like doing stuff WITH, as in turn it on and use is, and most people don't like learning new stuff, or at least, working hard to learn new stuff.
The simple fact is that people know and like XP. The like it more than Vista, and they like it more than Linux. OS X is a little different. It requires that converts learn something new, but OS X does what 99% of the people need right out of the box with no screwing around, and they can get their MS Office, and other stuff.
I Love Linux. I use it on a regular basis. But after using every flavor of windows, some Linux desktops and OS X, OS X is my desktop of choice, followed very closely by XP. I use Linux solely as a server OS.
When they add the ability to easily run windows apps in linux without some confusing wine process.. then it might have a chance. Only thing I could get to run in wine was notepad.
Linux chance or not chance, I don't think it's ready and now after years of trying to install the latest ubuntu on my laptop(s), I am not sure it ever will be there.
My install experiments always ended with one or the other bit not working - either graphics card, or networking, usually, and then I had to troll some forums to find the text file I needed to edit in some way to enable my hardware. I once tried upgrading ubuntu and afterwards my networking was gone... again. Despite the fact that this laptop used some generic Intel chipset like millions of others. From my perspective hardware support is the achilles heel of Linux.
Compare that to me setting up OS X on a new Mac - getting to the point where it had all my settings, all my programs, all my preferences, all my login items, took 2 hours of unattended copying via the migration assistant. 2 hours from unboxing to a working workstation - that's how it should be.
I wanted to like Ubuntu but there were a few problems I couldn't get past the several times I've installed it. It didn't like my dual displays and I couldn't find a single answer on how to fix that, the cruddy boot loader had to be manually tweaked every time Ubuntu was updated, and drivers in general were a pain. We had an old laptop at work that we were going to give to my coworker's sister with Ubuntu on it, but there was no driver for the Netgear consumer wifi card we had for her.
Plus, there is zero reason to run Linux if you have any plans to game at all, unless you're setting up a dedicated server.
To all those people complaining about their network card, if you did a 10 second google search, you would have found Ndiswrapper, a program that lets you use WINDOWS drivers for your network card.
And if you couldn't get your graphics card up and running, you should give up computers all together. On most linux operating systems, you can search for restricted drivers provided by the graphics card company.
I should clarify: with the dual displays, I couldn't find one singular answer, I found several much different answers, and the first few didn't work.
@bboston
THAT is the EXACT attitude why Linux will NEVER be successful. Elite, if they can't use Linux they are too stupid attitudes. Here's a clue for you. Most people wouldn't have a clue how to find Ndiswrapper, really understand what a driver is, or even how to begin troubleshooting something like that.
People like you, when noobs ask for help, you make them feel like idiots. And they keep using Windows. Congratulations. You are part of the problem, not part of the solution.
All this arguing on Linux's behalf... this article says it very simply.
We gave Linux to the masses, and the masses threw it right the fuck back.
The end!
Argue as to WHY until you are blue in the face, but it is an ugly, unintuitive disaster and nobody but the zealots want to bother with it.
The REAL story behind netbooks is OSX86, not Linux or Windows..
At the same time netbooks are getting more expensive. Must be the cost of the license.
So it seems like Linux has had its arse handed to it by an 8 year old OS?
Just goes to show that no-one really does care about Linux after all.
Still, look on the bright side - that 4% is still about double what you have on other consumer platforms.
acme - "Stop trying"... What a great philosophy you have. You are clearly destined for greatness.
@chispito: What does that have to do with netbooks? They come with linpus or xandros for the most part. As to dual monitors, I dont know if this was on a netbook, but wifi and hardware support is pretty much complete on netbooks.
Here's a link to help you out determining support on laptops (netbooks included)
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LaptopTestingTeam/ :)
@AVG: Stop living in the past; the Windows of today is the Windows of 10 years ago...
I'm going to join into this geek battle by saying i bought the winxp EEE901 (it was the last in stock), i left windows on one ssd, and put linux on the other. I'm a second generation linux user since I was 10 years old, I only really uses the linux partition, i only keep windows there if i really need to run a windows program (haven't in months). They can coexist, it just happens that linux is better.
@David
Hey good for you man. Yeah I just got a Mini 9 with Ubuntu as well and it's been great. This was my "can I hang with Linux" experiment as well, and so far it's been terrific. Machine boots fast, does everything I need it to do. Now I'm looking at maybe migrating my regular desktop over to Ubuntu as well, but will still probably keep windows apps available under WINE.
Driver support is the bane of Linux. With something like OS X, it only runs (normally) on hardware that Apple makes. They can make drivers rock solid that way. Linux will run on just about everything, including different architectures. Also, hardware makers don't have a big reason to make drivers for Linux, the average John Smith doesn't use it, as opposed to Windows. I expect drivers to get better as time goes on but until then I don't think your average Joe should jump ship to Linux.
@Randavance
Bravo.
96%?! That's too bad...
Because it's too fat an OS or because Windows 7 will be fatter?
Overall, a UNIX platform will outperform Windows on MID's. Once Apple embraces a little Linux, things may be doves and olive branches. If Windows 7 can go with the cellular platform definition of mobile, competition changes and 96% might still be relevant.
It will all come down to who has the bigger "Welcome to the Apps Store" banner.
oh shut up linux people
linux may be great accomplishment, but it has it's flaws
1) there's no one to take responsibility : people who hate osx rantabout appl, and people who hate vista rant about microsoft, with no one entity backing it, there's just no one to blame if anything bad happens
2) not compatable - open office sucks, lets face it, and it has even less professional programs (cad, matlab) than a mac
@ kangbp.nyc
Your first reason is a vey, VERY poor excuse.
Is touting the success of your nearly decade old OS is a good thing?
Engadget's indifference to implementing an edit button comes at the expense of my intelligence.
"Is touting the success of your nearly decade old OS is a good thing?"
If it is preferred more than current-day Linux distros, then yes.
It's a great thing for MS because the market is saying they'd take XP over Linux, which consumers don't seem to like
Is touting the success of gimping all of these little laptops. There were "conditions" to allowing XP on these.
It is until the ARM netbooks hit the market. MS doesn't have a good answer for that.
It's more successful that even MS want it to be! It's impressive that it has lasted so long. If people stick with XP there's no money to be made. Notebooks revived it again.
yeah they should be really proud that their (only usable) best selling os is 8 years old..
well, I've writing this from Vista... then I have three other computers running Vista... then a server running 5, yes 5, instances of Server 2008 (and 1 RHEL), then three workstations running Server 2008. I'm sorry you've never used it or couldn't last the two whole days it takes to learn the nuances.
@John --- don't mind him, he's just saying that because everyone else is saying it, it's the cool thing to do lately.
Or to paraphrase, "... virtually all of that growth [of XP] comes at the expense of Vista, which Microsoft once again notes sees much higher rates of return once folks "realize their Vista-based netbook PC doesn't deliver that same quality of experience."
Nice.
Or that Netbooks aren't powerful enough to run Vista, because they aren't designed to be as powerful as a full laptop, but an older OS, like XP, that requires less resources, runs great.
But then again, how can we bash Vista with that logic?
@Look_Around_You: The fact that Vista runs so poorly on netbooks speaks to how poorly made it is. Mandriva 2009 with Gnome, Compiz and all the latest everything runs better on my EEE 1000 than XP did. No custom kernels, no hacking, no bullshit. You don't like Linux? Fine, not my concern. But to blame Vista's poor performance on the hardware demonstrates that you don't know what you're talking about. Even OS X runs better than Vista on many netbooks, and it's not supposed to run on anything but Apple gear. Face facts, Vista is the new Windows ME.
@Look_Around_You
So when Windows 7 comes out, netbooks magically become designed to run the successor of Vista, is that your thinking?
Vista is crap, people, and your maniacal low ranking only demonstrates your ignorance.