Windows 8 more widely used than OS X, IE still on the rise | Hacker News Reader

Windows 8 more widely used than OS X, IE still on the rise

arstechnica.com

27 pointsshawndumas74 comments

Bravo to Firefox for keeping Chrome at bay for another short while.

Boo to the folks still using IE 8. Also boo to the innovation-repressing homogenization of mobile.

I maybe wrong but I think a lot of users are switching back to Firefox from Chrome. My personal observation is that Chrome is getting more bloated, buggy and intrusive. Sad to see my favorite browser degrading.

I nearly did, but Chrome handles my university's webmail client better (and what with the NSA and all, they strongly recommend against mirroring your mail to an American server, which rules out most of the nicer webmail interfaces).

How about using a local mail client rather than a webmail one?

It'd be a pain in the rear to setup and keep synched for my home computer, lab computer, and smartphone. And Horde's not amazing, but it works well enough.

As someone who stuck with Firefox through the years when Chrome was almost-certainly better, I feel your pain. Perhaps a major tech company revitalize Google's efforts by entering the browser market.

That's certainly what I did. Firefox has improved immeasurably (at least for me) since about version 14, while Chrome has crept up in size. As a point of reference, if I open one tab in Chrome with Google Music and I let my computer idle for a minute, the various Chrome processes will sum up to between 800-1024MB of memory. You know how much Firefox with 8 tabs takes? 420MB.

Apparently people don't like this comment, but unlike some I do not possess scads and scads of RAM.

The underdog has room to improve - the reigning king has a throne to rest its laurels upon.

I imagine Chrome will pick back up soon, Google needs to make a move on web apps in Android before the Firefox Marketplace steals the webapp momentum.

Chrome has gone from the 'fastest' (whatever that means) and 'leanest' (ditto) to one that has the (penultimate) worst cold start times[1] and worst memory efficiency[2].

[1] http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/chrome-27-firefox-21-ope...

[2] http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/chrome-27-firefox-21-ope...

My hypothesis is that Chrome is lately sacrificing memory for speed by doing heavier matryoshka caching on the rendered parts of a page. This is important for, say, smoothly compositing DOM elements on top of a WebGL canvas, or compositing CSS3-animated elements into a scrollable div. (Actually, I'd think this would cause higher video memory usage, not regular memory usage, but I'm not quite sure how Chrome tracks video memory; is it all grouped together as the memory usage of the "GPU process" in Chrome's task manager?)

I can perhaps understand buggy and intrusive, but how has Chrome gotten more bloated? I can think of very few features that have been added since it was first released.

Sorry, I don't want to "login" to my browser. That's bloat. I don't need to synch my browser's state across all devices (and if ever wanted to I'd use a known trusted sync source like my OS-device sync or a independent cloud service).

Other cruft - built-in password manager, built-in pdf render, flash runtime… a bit more and it's a standalone OS (say, like ChromeOS).

If all this were a plugin, I'd be fine with that … but it keeps prompting me and I can't disable it.

It's really just an OS posing as a browser. Kinda like iTunes for Windows - lots of cruft and some features and many bugs.

Eventually it'll all be part of Google+.

As a developer, I've gone back and forth over the years. I just switched back to Firefox I think for good though. Chrome crashes consistently now and having Gmail and google music open at the same time is a total resource hog. I was even using the Canary version and that was hardly ever stable.

I've also come to favor firebug over chrome's dev tools.

Canary is a nightly build, it's not supposed to be stable.

For me it wasn't even usable. I can understand some glitches here and there. Most of time, it just froze or crashed when I only had a few tabs open.

"bleeding edge" to me is more than just being able to use a product for an hour at time.

I moved to Firefox from IE in 2004 for the same reason I moved back from Chrome to Firefox recently. Chrome has increasingly agitated me as options and features were removed or hidden, then the stability and responsiveness took a nosedive. I wrote about it: http://mkronline.com/2013/03/28/i-switched-back-to-firefox-a...

Depending on the industry people still use IE7.

Here the mining industry seems to LOVE IE7, where every other industry IE8/IE9 leads.

Ungh, our "corporate" desktop ie version just barely got moved to IE 2 months ago. It is an improvement (we literally had XP and ie6 6 months ago) but that isn't saying its that great.

I run portable chrome to make things tolerable.

"IE 2" == IE 7, right?

Yep, I suck at typing. :)

Is Netaplications an actual reliable source? They're results are so far skewed from that of all of the other web usage analytics groups.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers

Never thought I'd see the day that it would actually be news that the current version of Windows is still selling more licenses than Mac OS X.

Seeing as OS X is at 7% market share, I would say that it has less to do with OS X and more to do with users not upgrading from previous versions of Windows. Not that you would ever even think that when walking around SF.

Yeah, I think it's mostly enterprises' "do not want" reaction to Win8. Win7 was great for enterprise, but Win8 is just a horrible fit for that market. I think it will get skipped by enterprises just like Vista did.

> Win8 is just a horrible fit for that market

If they bring back the Start menu (which they're half doing in 8.1) and allow the OS to boot directly into Desktop mode, then I think that Windows 7 and 8 would be essentially the same for enterprise users. They can just ignore all the new touch/consumer-centric features that have been added on. In fact, there are quite a few improvements under the hood from 7 to 8 that they could benefit from.

So the selling point is that it's not worse than Win7, and the new consumer-centric touchscreen features can just be ignored, and there are various "under the hood" improvements that no one ever actually explains.

I'm not exactly seeing a compelling reason to break out the corporate checkbook here.

Yeah, I was shocked by the "dad" test: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4boTbv9_nU

And when Gabe talked about 8, I winced: http://www.neowin.net/news/valves-gabe-newell-calls-windows-...

But watching a few "tips" / "best of new features" videos for 8.1... I start to feel a little left out.

Just type to search. Re-engineered file copying. Hot corners make it seem like someone at least skimmed an article on Fitt's Law. And, ooh, Win + Print Screen? Just make the screenshot a file. Yeah, should have been fixed back in 95.

So, er, maybe they got a few things right?

I haven't upgraded yet, but... the dissonance is mounting.

8.1 has me considering an upgrade. I'm assuming it'll run on a laptop that runs Windows 7. Though it's probably more economical to just upgrade the laptop unless they offer an OEM->full upgrade path. I could use a few more cores and > 4GB of RAM.

I can't imagine anyone using Windows 8 by choice.

I can. Considering I use it on my (non touchscreen) desktop by choice and prefer it over Windows 7.

The way I see it, Win8 is Win7 with some polish to the core components (runs a little smoother, improved file management dialogues, etc) and some different menu design. Once you are comfortable with the different menus, there is basically no sacrifice.

The "tile" menus are actually even an improvement for my HTPC. Not perfect- HTPC never gets enough love- but better.

Why not? They made a bunch of performance and under-the-hood improvements.

Exactly. I started using it as a test and never went back to 7. It is a lot faster. I never didn't like Aero, I think is way too slow. The start button doesn't bother me because I pin my most used programs, use the charm bar and shortcuts. A lot of people don't know what they are missing with all the improvements.

I like Windows 8.

I like Mac OS X.

There, I said it. I own both. I use both, daily. They do not have to be mutually exclusive.

I feel like we're at a support group meeting. I just stood to clap for you in my living room.

My name is numo16 and I'm a Windows 8 and Mountain Lion user...

Appaholics Anonymous

I am doing it daily, I think it's a great OS.

Are you running 8.1?

Also are you using any tile/native/windows8 apps?

I only ask because I had the great displeasure of attempting to use the native skype app last night, and could not simply adjust my mic volume without ending the call.

There are large fundamental issues with the UI(ie right click, the right bar thing having no mouse area forgiveness, no app specific settings menus, and many others) that have prevented me from completing even the most basic of task.

What "fixes" are you using to be able to even interact with the UI?

I am absolutely not trolling, but I am completely bewildered by these comments popping up.

I'm not the parent, but I do run Win 8.1 on my main laptop. I don't use Metro apps (Netflix and a couple games excepted), because there are better apps to do the same thing on the desktop (and before 8.1 not being able to run Metro apps on more than one monitor was a pain). For the specific case of Skype, I use the desktop client (my laptop doesn't have Windows 8 drivers for its webcam, and the Windows default puts the video upside-down), and it works fine.

My basic experience with Windows 8 (and especially 8.1) is that it's an improvement over 7, so long as you just use desktop apps - it boots quicker, and there's a number of useful UI tweaks (Windows Explorer and the Task Manager are notable here). Also, I like the Start screen - being able to comfortably arrange a couple dozen apps for easy access means I almost never have to go digging in the menu.

Assuming you are on a desktop or laptop computer, hit the "Desktop" tile and proceed to use Windows 8 exactly the same way you always used Windows 7. For all practical purposes, on a desktop the "tile" menu just replaces the start menu.

> For all practical purposes, on a desktop the "tile" menu just replaces the start menu.

Yes, except that with the old "Start" menu, because it was hierarchical and because each item was much smaller, you could pack a lot more information into it than you can with a screen of tiles.

As things are unfolding, it seems we'll have both a tile display and a hierarchical tree behind the old "Start" button or some equivalent.

I never said it was better.

There actually is still a hierarchical tree in the start screen, it just defaults to your customizable pinned apps start screen. Right-click the start screen and hit the All Apps button in the lower corner for the traditional folder structure of the start menu (in smaller tile form, of course).

I use 8 on my laptop and Surface RT. Here are a few tidbits:

- With a few exceptions, I don't use any "modern UI" apps. I'm not a huge fan of them, just like I'm not a fan of most iPad apps. I like multitasking and power-usering too much. For example, I greatly prefer desktop IE to modern IE, even on a Surface with no keyboard/mouse, because it feels faster and the tabs and toolbars are always visible - I'd rather have them there than a tiny bit more browser viewport.

- I use a couple modern apps on the Surface where I have no alternative, like Skype. That said, if I'm in full-on "tablet mode" (on the couch or standing, no keyboard attached, just consuming), the good modern apps feel just as good as or better than the good iPad apps. Browsing photos on SkyDrive or using Xbox SmartGlass, Maps or the video player feels good.

- On my laptop, everything works on the desktop as it always has, plus a few small enhancements over Win7. Launch apps by hitting the Windows key and the typing to search - I don't really care that it brings up the "Start screen" for a second. I don't use the tiles at all.

-I primarily use my Surface as a mini-laptop (with a Type Cover, the one with real keys) and almost exclusively use it for the browser and OneNote.

- Regarding right-click: on both Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8, MS is trying to standardize on the "tap and hold for a second" gesture for right-click/context menu. It's used all over the first-party apps and many third-party apps.

- Not sure what you mean about the charms bar having no mouse area forgiveness. On a touch screen, you swipe in from the bezel. On a monitor with a mouse, you hit the top right corner and mouse down along the edge.

- App specific settings menus are in the Settings charm. All of the charms (Search, Share, Devices, Settings) are context-sensitive to the running modern app. To me, this feels like "excessive refactoring" of the UI: it makes sense in some aspect because those features/activities are common across many apps, but it does feel weird to have them grouped and hidden away like that, especially in apps where one of those activities (usually search) is likely to be the first and only thing you do.

All in all, some of the new foundational concepts do need some further work, but they're not rotten to the core. If you're a standard desktop or laptop user with a mouse and keyboard and you prefer your desktop apps, then skip the modern ones. If you have Windows 7 and have no problems with it, there might not really be any reason for you to switch, but I don't think 8 is really a step back from 7 unless you're really on the hunt for things to gripe about.

I've been using Windows 8 (haven't upgraded to 8.1 yet) since basically day 1 and think it's great. I don't use any tile apps though and honestly never use or see that side of the UI. I have a desktop computer, so I stick to the desktop paradigm.

I don't need any "fixes" to interact with the UI. It works basically just like Windows 7, with a few minor tweaks (like Win+X). What doesn't work with right-click? As far as I can see it does the same thing as it did in Windows 7

I'll give you the right bar thing, but a) I hear it's fixed in 8.1 and b) the only thing there I use there is the shut down menu.

Now maybe the touch interface is as horrible as everybody claims, but as a desktop OS it works great

Upgraded to Windows 8 here by choice on a non-touch laptop.

I use it and you could say by choice since I wouldn't replace it with Windows 7 due the internal improvements. I decided to try it stock but I've slowly started disabling Windows 8 specific things and installing replacement software (for start menu, etc). Now it's like Windows 7 with a slightly better UI in some places and a slight worse UI in others.

My wife likes it. She bought a computer with it. But I complain constantly when I have to use it, and fix it for her. It took way too much effort just to locate "control panel".

I like Windows 7 just fine and don't see how Win8 improves upon it in any way.

Win-X gives a menu with the control panel and a lot of other options. Once you get used to it and look up the keyboard shortcuts online, it really is better than 7. Unfortunately it isn't discoverable.

> Unfortunately it isn't discoverable

I think this may be one of the largest problems for people making the switch. After moving to Win8, a friend of mine enjoyed everything about the new OS except for one "missing" feature from Windows 7. He couldn't hit the windows key and type in the search box in the start menu to find programs he was looking for. After I told him you could still do exactly this, I realized that there is nothing on the start screen that really indicates that you are automatically search focused (people are used to a search box that they can focus on). Now that he knows about this he has no qualms, but I guess there are some undiscoverable features that some of us have taken for granted in win8 because we've actually read up on how to be a power user.

Win-W -> start typing.

I use it on my home machine because I don't want to pay for a Mac or maintain a Linux desktop. Windows 8 was fine, and 8.1 fixes most of the rough spots in the UI.

It became less painful when I finally located the control panel and created a shortcut on the desktop. That along with a shortcut to my user folder (Documents, Pictures etc...).

Live tiles were something that makes absolutely no sense on a non-touch device, but that's the default. I still click on the desktop tile as soon as it loads.

> control panel

win+x, p

I join the chorus of people who use Windows 8 by choice. On a non-touch laptop. Admittedly I hardly ever use any of the metro apps because I haven't found any I think are worth using.

I found one notro app worth using: Netflix. Mainly because it prevents the laptop from going to sleep while I'm working on the desktop PC.

I use it by choice.

My desktop has both Ubuntu 12.10 and Windows 8, and I love both operating systems. My work computer is loaded with OS X, which I also love. Perhaps I'm a techie, but I think that a lot of the hate we see with Windows 8 is just growing pains.

So for people who perhaps want a look at some of the pros and cons of Windows 8, here is a list I can come up with after using it for a while. Please note that these are mostly subjective.

Pros:

  - Sand boxed applications.  The implications here are fantastic, and it means less tech savvy users can be safer using Windows.  
  - Full screen apps, and snapped apps actually work fairly well.  
    - These full screen apps are per screen for setups with multiple screens.  This is coming to OS X Mavericks which I'm really excited about!  
  - Hot keys allow for fast work!  (I can't say what is and isn't new in Windows 8, because I didn't try to optimize my work flow in 7 with hot keys)
  - The start menu UI is awesome once you are used to it, and much better than the old menu.  
  - HTML5 native applications.  From what I have seen it is not as easy as building a website though, which is too bad.  
  - Hooking up to a large screen TV is AWESOME.  With their design paradigm nothing is ever too small, and it feels so natural on a TV.
    - This is an area where both Linux and OS X have failed to me.  
  - Far better task manager (subtle, but awesome!)

Cons:

  - Failure on Microsoft's part to help users differentiate between a Windows 8 targetted app, and a "Desktop" app.  
    -  A proposed solution here would be to allow Windows 8 store apps to act as a desktop app, while remaining sand boxed. 
  - Desktop apps aren't sand boxed (see above).  
  - Windows store sucks.  
  - Full screen shouldn't be forced.  They made some good UI moves, but this is one that I wish they hadn't done.  
  - Command line (I mean, I just love bash way more, and no git bash isn't a fantastic replacement).  
  - Microsoft tries hard to force the use of GUIs.  Seriously I love using a shell to do most things.  
  - Start screen can be hard to manage for an average PC user.

EDIT Sorry for the formatting, I'm not really sure how to make the lists look pretty!

I can't imagine anyone using OS X by choice, but I know that I can't know the motivation of every person, so I respect their choice as a safe default.

Windows XP is kept in the ranks, by and large, by the Chinese http://www.networkworld.com/news/2013/080713-china-has-a-mas...

It's unlikely to change any time soon since if it ain't broke[1]...

[1] Your definition of "ain't broke" may vary.

OS X is at 7.44% according to the graph.

Windows 8 is at 7.41%.

OS X is at 7.25% according to that graph.

3.42 + 1.65 + 1.65 + 0.53 = 7.25%

Maybe they updated the graph but I also got 7.41% after adding all the OSX percentages after I read that comment shortly after it was posted.

Yes the graph appears to have been updated at September 3, 2013 6:47:17 PM

It used to be 3.42+1.73+1.76+0.53

The desktop browser statistics in the article value Internet Explorer higher than in other articles I have read such as this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers

Some stats count unique visitor totals of each Browser.

Other stats count page hit totals of each Browser.

Then you have ones that mess around with not including all of the particular Browser's versions.

And there is no telling who's getting a world-wide sample, who's taking out some coutries, who's samples over-represent a country because their traffic collection base is there, etc.

Wow. WIndows XP. What a beast that it's still north of 30%. Too lazy but when was it released and/or when was it replaced? I feel like it was superseded all the way back in 2007 or so?

XP was released in 2001. It was officially superseded by Vista in 2007 and arguably really superseded within the Windows universe in 2009 when Windows 7 came out.

I would venture that the majority of computers that run Windows XP are either people who don't use their computers a lot so that it wouldn't matter or companies. Seeing as Windows XP SP 3 is still supported through 2014 [1], businesses have no real reason to upgrade since it would be an added cost.

[1] http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/endofsupport.aspx

XP was good enough. Until it is no longer good enough for what people use it for (Microsoft Office environment or an email client) it won't be replaced.

I just hope we can see some congergence in either the ChromeOS or Linux Desktop space to see those eventual switches be to alternate platforms to remove the MS stranglehold.

Such a high number of Windows XP users isn't surprising, but it is infuriating for those of us that wish to deploy SNI (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Name_Indication).

I know that MS will never release a patch for it, but seriously.

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3857698

I don';t understand how Safari can have > 50% market share. I mean people in china and india definitely don't use iOS or OS X. How come safari numbers are so high?

It's also interesting to see how common IE is. In my company, we don't even test for IE anymore, it's chrome all the way. We think IE is negligible minority now!

That graph is only counting mobile browser share. That counts all iOS devices.

Since iPhones/iPod Touches/iPads make up over 50% of all mobile devices, this leads to a large portion of mobile web traffic using Safari.

> It's also interesting to see how common IE is. In my company, we don't even test for IE anymore, it's chrome all the way. We think IE is negligible minority now!

I know a ton of Rails web dev hipsters who totally ignore IE. It's quite amusing to see the same guys who were whining about IE-specific sites back in the early '00s now making WebKit-specific sites that they only test on their MacBooks and iPhones.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com