Windows 11 Doubles Its Share in Last Two Months, Upgrade Offer Adoption Happening at Twice the Rate of Windows 10

Tsing

The FPS Review
Staff member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Messages
11,075
Points
83
windows-11-pc-devices-1024x576.jpg
Image: Microsoft



Windows users have been a lot more eager to upgrade to the latest version of the popular operating system in comparison to its predecessor.



That’s according to Panos Panay, Chief Product Officer, Windows + Devices, who shared a blog post this week discussing Windows 11’s relevance in the market and what users can expect in the next big update to the OS (e.g., Android app support). In a portion relating to engagement and growth, Panay revealed that people are upgrading to Windows 11 at twice the rate that Microsoft saw for Windows 10, indicating that there may be a higher level of interest in the OS than critics have suggested.



“Since the launch of Windows 11 in October, we have seen strong demand and preference for Windows 11 with people accepting the upgrade offer to Windows 11 at twice the rate we saw for Windows 10,” wrote Panay.



“Windows 11 also has...

Continue reading...


 
Windows 10 didn’t exactly have the best rollout either; that is a bad benchmark.

It’s like being twice as fast as a snail.
 
If I wasn't on Alder Lake-S, I wouldn't be considering Windows 11 anytime soon.
 
I've installed 11 on my server a few months ago, and I still can't get the start button working. It does nothing when I click on it. I can't be bothered to re-install it since I'm not using it as a desktop anyway so it is only mildly inconvenient. But if it was my desktop PC I'd be fuming.
 
and I still can't get the start button working
It's totally useless even when it does work. It's now just mostly advertising space.

My Start / task bar crash and restart all the time. And you can't click on the stuf (icons of crap running the background, WiFi settings, etc) in the task bar anymore from the start menu: if you hit the Windows key and try to click on them, you just go back to whatever program you were in; you have to tab to the Desktop to get those easy access things (whatever they are called) to work now.

Fortunately, I've long since stopped using Start, it's mostly been replaced with Steam.
 
I guess I'm in the minority here by saying I've been with Windows 11 since the early stages, and haven't run into an issue yet. Games have always worked, it can be customized, and you are not made to use Edge (or whatever it is now) as your default browser. Running it on three machines including my work laptop.
 
guess I'm in the minority here by saying I've been with Windows 11 since the early stages
Same here, but can’t say it’s been pleasurable or smooth. It’s running on my gaming machine so it isn’t critical, and as long as I can get to Steam most of the issues are just minor annoyances.

But many small issues keep popping up. That said, 10 wasn’t immune to that either, but with the Start/Taskbar overhaul 11 seems like a big regression from 10
 
I've installed 11 on my server a few months ago, and I still can't get the start button working. It does nothing when I click on it. I can't be bothered to re-install it since I'm not using it as a desktop anyway so it is only mildly inconvenient. But if it was my desktop PC I'd be fuming.

What are you doing running a consumer OS on a server anyway? For a server, go Linux or FreeBSD, or at the very least a Windows Server release.
 
I guess my take is as follows.

With most tech there is a benefit to adopting the new stuff. It is faster, more power efficient, and does the job better.

With software that is rarely the case. It is almost always better to stay on tested and true software as long as possible, until you are forced off of it for one reason or another, or at very least until there is a new feature in a new release you could very much use.

As of right now, I am not being forced off of Windows 10 for any reason (once it goes EOL in 2025, that will be a different conversation). I also can't think of a single benefit from installing Windows 11. It literally does nothing I am interested in that I can't already do with Windows 10.

So why switch?

I'll install Windows 11 in 2025 if I am still using Windows at all at that point.
 
With most tech there is a benefit to adopting the new stuff. It is faster, more power efficient, and does the job better.

With software that is rarely the case. It is almost always better to stay on tested and true software as long as possible, until you are forced off of it for one reason or another, or at very least until there is a new feature in a new release you could very much use.
I typically think of it the other way around - hardware iterates much slower, in no small part because it has to be physically manufactured. It's less prone to bugs or security holes that would require replacement -- not immune, but most that are discovered can be software/firmware patched without necessitating a hardware replacement.

Whereas software, it iterates much faster -- all you need to do is hit the Compile button after working on it, not wait 6 months for it to bake in a fab and hope you get a decent yield. It also tends to have a lot more security holes that get discovered and subsequently fixed.

Installing new software versus hardware -- there, that's a mixed bag and depends on your environment. It can go either way. Most small software updates are relatively painless -- just like sometimes hardware is as simple as plugging in a cable. And then sometimes software requires massive infrastructure overhauls, just like hardware can involve a full toolbox, powertools, and a case of beer.

Just as an example using Windows; my previous gaming rig did Win 7, 8, 8.1, and 10 before I finally retired it. My current rig was 10 and now 11, and I expect to still be running it come 2025 when whatever is next will probably be announced.

Software also tends to be more expensive - most of the rigs I've owned, I've spent a lot more money on the various software than I have the hardware -- often by orders of magnitude.

*edit*

this is a fun site

1644003983991.png

1644004096341.png
https://steamdb.info/calculator/
 
Last edited:
I typically think of it the other way around - hardware iterates much slower, in no small part because it has to be physically manufactured. It's less prone to bugs or security holes that would require replacement -- not immune, but most that are discovered can be software/firmware patched without necessitating a hardware replacement.

Whereas software, it iterates much faster -- all you need to do is hit the Compile button after working on it, not wait 6 months for it to bake in a fab and hope you get a decent yield. It also tends to have a lot more security holes that get discovered and subsequently fixed.

Installing new software versus hardware -- there, that's a mixed bag and depends on your environment. It can go either way. Most small software updates are relatively painless -- just like sometimes hardware is as simple as plugging in a cable. And then sometimes software requires massive infrastructure overhauls, just like hardware can involve a full toolbox, powertools, and a case of beer.

Just as an example using Windows; my previous gaming rig did Win 7, 8, 8.1, and 10 before I finally retired it. My current rig was 10 and now 11, and I expect to still be running it come 2025 when whatever is next will probably be announced.

Software also tends to be more expensive - most of the rigs I've owned, I've spent a lot more money on the various software than I have the hardware -- often by orders of magnitude.

*edit*

this is a fun site

View attachment 1461

View attachment 1462
https://steamdb.info/calculator/


The thing is, software can be patched. In most cases hardware can't.

So , there is little benefit in waiting for hardware to become more stable over time.

Software on the other hand? The older it is, the more eyeballs have been over it and worked on it, and generally the more stable and secure it is. At least until it is no longer supported. At that point you need to move on to something newer.

Last year in 2021 I upgraded all of my Ubuntu 16.04 LTS servers to 18.04 LTS, as 16.04LTS finally ended support (unless you want to subscribe to the extended support packages)

Yes, there was is 20.04 LTS and 20.10, 21.04, 21.10 and 22.04 LTS is almost due out, but I didn't want those. I'll upgrade to 20.04 in in 2025 when support on 18.04 ends, and I'll upgrade that to 22.04 in 2032 when support on 20.04 ends.

They need more time to simmer and mature before adoption.

I'm not quite sure what SteamDB has to do with this topic, but indeed it does look like a fun site. Here is mine:

1644008345100.png
 
I'm not quite sure what SteamDB has to do with this topic
Nothing really. I was just thinking about how much I have invested in software and got distracted on a tangent.

I think we are using the same data, just coming to slightly different conclusions. You make a valid point.
 
Yes, there was is 20.04 LTS and 20.10, 21.04, 21.10 and 22.04 LTS is almost due out, but I didn't want those. I'll upgrade to 20.04 in in 2025 when support on 18.04 ends, and I'll upgrade that to 22.04 in 2032 when support on 20.04 ends.
I'm curious and seeing I know almost nothing about Linux, but would all versions other then the newest one not be left as is unless the find a serious flaw and all developpement be done on the latest version only?
 
I'm curious and seeing I know almost nothing about Linux, but would all versions other then the newest one not be left as is unless the find a serious flaw and all developpement be done on the latest version only?
It really depends

If you are going with a major distribution, they don't necessarily write or update all the software that they include, but they do maintain a repository - so that the people who do write and maintain the software can submit any updates and people can easily download them. The repository's primary function is to make all the dependencies and other associated software easy to get -- you need an update to one piece of software, but it depends on 7 other packages, the update manager will snag it all from the repository and make your life much easier.

So the repositories are only maintained as long as the distribution decides. Once a distro hits EOL - some will shut down the repository, some will just let it sit but no longer maintain it.

And even apart from the repository, nothing is really stopping you from going straight to the source and getting an update and bypassing the repository all together. But you may find yourself in that magical hell of trying to chase down all the dependencies or compiling from source on your own.

So now, to answer your question. It could very well be a dependency gets updated without the application getting updated. Take the Log4J exploit - that was so widespread because that was a java-based dependency for creating and maintaining log files, and a lot of software used that dependency rather than writing code from scratch to do the same thing. But not necessarily everything there needed updating, just the L4J library needs the update (unless they significantly change the library so it breaks it's API).
 
Last edited:
Become a Patron!
Back
Top