"OK" wrote in message
news:05a3l3dt67rhaub3gubchrlev8nld9ucoe@4ax.com...
>
> http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=10


not this hoary old error again - Licences shipped by Microsoft DOES
NOT EQUAL LICENCES INSTALLED.........
when will you idiots ever learn that?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

OK wrote:
> http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=10

Dead link
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHUciD4dyr7s6PRYgRAgzFAJoCafvwMjPVrtH2t1Vov4 TBY9qptQCePKQU
OXy6gz6Ch+jvf478N2hOs8I=
=nj+P
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 20:46:21 GMT, ed wrote:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>OK wrote:
>> http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=10
>
>Dead link

Really?

On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 18:41:01 -0000, "Gordon"
wrote:

>"OK" wrote in message
>news:05a3l3dt67rhaub3gubchrlev8nld9ucoe@4ax.com...
>>
>> http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=10
>
>
> not this hoary old error again - Licences shipped by Microsoft DOES
>NOT EQUAL LICENCES INSTALLED.........
>when will you idiots ever learn that?

That's not shipped licence you idiot. Just hits on hundreds of
thousand different web web counters.

On 2007-12-02, OK wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 20:46:21 GMT, ed wrote:
>
>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>Hash: SHA1
>>
>>OK wrote:
>>> http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=10
>>
>>Dead link
>
> Really?

Link works fine.

Couple observations on the data reported there:

1. Note they split Mac OS into two, depending on whether it is running
on Intel or PPC. Those probably should be combined.

2. iPhone is ahead of Windows CE? That's interesting. I know the
iPhone is selling well, but I have a hard time believing its installed
base has overtaken Windows CE. A hell of a lot of business people use
Windows CE-based phones. So I think what this shows is that iPhone
users are more likely to actually use the internet from their phone.

3. No XBox360?

Tim Smith wrote:
>
> 2. iPhone is ahead of Windows CE? That's interesting. I know the
> iPhone is selling well, but I have a hard time believing its installed
> base has overtaken Windows CE. A hell of a lot of business people use
> Windows CE-based phones. So I think what this shows is that iPhone
> users are more likely to actually use the internet from their phone.

Actually, MS has had a real uphill slog in the handheld market. Linux
is actually showing a lot more movement in this area than WinCE.

Thad

On 2007-12-03, thad05@tux.glaci.delete-this.com wrote:
>> 2. iPhone is ahead of Windows CE? That's interesting. I know the
>> iPhone is selling well, but I have a hard time believing its installed
>> base has overtaken Windows CE. A hell of a lot of business people use
>> Windows CE-based phones. So I think what this shows is that iPhone
>> users are more likely to actually use the internet from their phone.
>
> Actually, MS has had a real uphill slog in the handheld market. Linux
> is actually showing a lot more movement in this area than WinCE.

For business phones, though, they seem to be doing OK. What I see when
I see business people using their phones are:

#1. A lot of them use Blackberry.

#2. Windows-based phones.

#3. A scattering of others. PalmOS, OS X (iPhone), etc.

Checking at Sprint and Verizon and AT&T, at all of those, the majority
of the non-Blackberry smartphone/PDAs are Windows-based. (I didn't
check T-Mobile, because their website doesn't seem to have an easy way
to split out the smartphone/PDAs).

I think the main reason for this is integration with corporate
Windows-based email systems. Windows-based phones tend to work better
with Windows-based corporate email systems, so a lot of business people
go with them. (I recently had a chance to talk quite a bit with an
iPhone-using lawyer, and he said that's the only problem he has with his
iPhone. In every other way, it is far superior to his prior phone, but
their corporate email system isn't happy with it).

No doubt MS has a very small part of the total phone market, as there is
no advantage that I can see to running Windows on a non-business phone,
but in the business phone market, they seem to be a major player.

* Tim Smith fired off this tart reply:

> I think the main reason for this is integration with corporate
> Windows-based email systems. Windows-based phones tend to work better
> with Windows-based corporate email systems, so a lot of business people
> go with them.

Or is it just an assumption?

> (I recently had a chance to talk quite a bit with an
> iPhone-using lawyer, and he said that's the only problem he has with his
> iPhone. In every other way, it is far superior to his prior phone, but
> their corporate email system isn't happy with it).

Yeah, it is crazy.

> No doubt MS has a very small part of the total phone market, as there is
> no advantage that I can see to running Windows on a non-business phone,
> but in the business phone market, they seem to be a major player.

It's not WinCE, is it, it is Win Mobile. Or is that just a name change?

--
Tux rox!

On 2007-12-03, Linonut wrote:
>> No doubt MS has a very small part of the total phone market, as there is
>> no advantage that I can see to running Windows on a non-business phone,
>> but in the business phone market, they seem to be a major player.
>
> It's not WinCE, is it, it is Win Mobile. Or is that just a name change?

I've been assuming it is a name change, plus maybe a version update or
two.

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Gordon

wrote
on Sat, 1 Dec 2007 18:41:01 -0000
:
> "OK" wrote in message
> news:05a3l3dt67rhaub3gubchrlev8nld9ucoe@4ax.com...
>>
>> http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=10
>
>
> not this hoary old error again - Licences shipped
> by Microsoft DOES NOT EQUAL LICENCES INSTALLED.........
> when will you idiots ever learn that?
>

Actually, it probably does -- except that the units the
licensed product are installed *on* are most likely sitting
in boxes somewhere in a warehouse. ;-)

Either that, or they're slicked quickly and replaced with
a Windows XP image. (I'll admit to wondering if Microsoft
is getting paid twice for this privilege. Nice racket if
they are!)

--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
fortune: not found

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 12:35:42 -0800, The Ghost In The Machine
wrote:

>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Gordon
>
> wrote
>on Sat, 1 Dec 2007 18:41:01 -0000
>:
>> "OK" wrote in message
>> news:05a3l3dt67rhaub3gubchrlev8nld9ucoe@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=10
>>
>>
>> not this hoary old error again - Licences shipped
>> by Microsoft DOES NOT EQUAL LICENCES INSTALLED.........
>> when will you idiots ever learn that?
>>
>
>Actually, it probably does -- except that the units the
>licensed product are installed *on* are most likely sitting
>in boxes somewhere in a warehouse. ;-)
>
>Either that, or they're slicked quickly and replaced with
>a Windows XP image.

This is just very theoretical. For starters it not possible with
computers *designed* for Windows Vista (e.g. there is no DX10 support
on XP). For computers *compatible* with Vista, then it's possible but
those are going to be very hard to get in few months from now.

Menwhile, the Vista user activity on the weg grows steadily, despite
that (probably factional) loss you mention.

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/repo...=Windows+Vista


> (I'll admit to wondering if Microsoft
>is getting paid twice for this privilege. Nice racket if
>they are!)
>
>--
>#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
>fortune: not found

"OK" wrote in message
news:mq59l39uvkb3360e88nqqd7bveh8q8lf0n@4ax.com...
> Menwhile, the Vista user activity on the weg grows steadily, despite
> that (probably factional) loss you mention.

Well it's bound to, isn't it, otherwise MS will go bust, won't it?

On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 10:04:17 -0000, "Gordon"
wrote:

>"OK" wrote in message
>news:mq59l39uvkb3360e88nqqd7bveh8q8lf0n@4ax.com...
>> Menwhile, the Vista user activity on the weg grows steadily, despite
>> that (probably factional) loss you mention.
>
>Well it's bound to, isn't it, otherwise MS will go bust, won't it?

Keep dreaming. People *want* Vista:

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/repo...=Windows+Vista

OK wrote:

> On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 10:04:17 -0000, "Gordon"
> wrote:
>
>>"OK" wrote in message
>>news:mq59l39uvkb3360e88nqqd7bveh8q8lf0n@4ax.com...
>>> Menwhile, the Vista user activity on the weg grows steadily, despite
>>> that (probably factional) loss you mention.
>>
>>Well it's bound to, isn't it, otherwise MS will go bust, won't it?
>
> Keep dreaming. People *want* Vista:
>

Yes. But they want it not on their machines
--
Microsoft's Guide To System Design:
If it's broke, don't fix it.
If it ain't broke, fix it.