Despite Microsoft’s push to get customers onto Windows 11, growth in the market share of the software giant’s latest operating system has stalled, while Windows 10 has made modest gains, according to fresh figures from Statcounter.

This is not the news Microsoft wanted to hear. After half a year of growth, the line for Windows 11 global desktop market share has taken a slight downturn, according to the website usage monitor, going from 35.6 percent in October to 34.9 percent in November. Windows 10, on the other hand, managed to grow its share of that market by just under a percentage point to 61.8 percent.

The dip in usage comes just as Microsoft has been forcing full-screen ads onto the machines of customers running Windows 10 to encourage them to upgrade. The stats also revealed a small drop in the market share of its Edge browser, despite relentlessly plugging the application in the operating system.

    • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      18 days ago

      As much as I loved 2000, XP was better and 7 the best ever.

      2000 was the pioneer though, it was such a huge step forward in every way

      • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        18 days ago

        Yes, Win2k, WinXP, and Win7 were all major leaps forward in various areas. Imagine if 8 had been just a major cleanup of Windows 7 and unifying the various settings paradigms, how much better that would have been.

        • jj4211@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          18 days ago

          But alas, Windows 8 was the ‘oh crap, tablets and phones might eat our lunch’ release and the focus was throwing the desktop/laptop experience under the bus to try to cater to sensibilities of markets they were never going to capture. Also, to have their own ‘app store’ to try to wrestle a google/apple like revenue model for applications running on the platform.

          • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            18 days ago

            If MS had put any focus on allowing skins/themes for Windows, the touch market would have just been an extra feature. There is no technical reason they couldn’t have, as evidenced by the third-party apps that allowed legacy skins on previous versions, such as 8 and 10. But they needed that lock-in and forced experience, rather than giving people the choice.

            • jj4211@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              17 days ago

              I will confess that I think making windows UI appropriate for tablet or phone has to be more than a skinning exercise. E.g. software interacting with a mouse pointer unable to deal with more vague and multiple touches. UI elements needing different spacing for the form factor. A different scheme for switching full screen tasks and recognizing that traditional windowing isn’t going to be very helpful in a smaller than 9" format.

              Unfortunately windows basically favored touch at the expense of traditional desktop, when their home turf was very much not touch enabled.

        • JustARegularNerd@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 days ago

          Windows 8 was actually a big cleanup over 7. We got a much improved task manager, Explorer got a ribbon, copy operations now showed a graph, and performance was very similar to Win7. It was just that Microsoft overshadowed these improvements with the UI disaster and telemetry.

      • jas0n@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        18 days ago

        Long time Linux user here. The smoothest OS I’ve ever used was xp64. That just ran like butter. Unfortunately, it was killed off to push people to Vista.

      • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        18 days ago

        its funny since windows me was just windows 2000 but worse since they didnt have to worry about business customers

        • jj4211@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          18 days ago

          Windows ME was actually some Windows 2000 bits glued onto Windows 98. That’s why it was so terrible, it was kind of an afterthought when initial plans for ‘2k for everyone’ got abandoned as they realized the home app ecosystem needed more compatibility workarounds than they were prepared to offer. So instead of completing the 2k based product line, they just '2k’ed up Win98 to satisfy their then-current release cadence and make sure home market had a ‘current’ OS to go with the 2k professional line.