- Related Stories
-
More buyers home in on Office 2007
February 12, 2007 -
PC sales jump in Vista's debut week
February 8, 2007 -
The dawn of Vista
January 26, 2007 -
Report: Vista's business sales stronger than expected
January 11, 2007 -
Microsoft takes wraps off Vista for business
November 30, 2006
The market research firm's data showed the number of copies of Vista purchased was nearly 59 percent less than the number for its predecessor XP, looking at the first week of sales. Revenue was also down, but less dramatically, with the dollar value of first-week Vista sales off 32 percent from that seen with XP.
Vista went on sale both on retail shelves and on new PCs on January 30. Businesses with volume license contracts have been able to get the new operating system since November.
Although boxed-copy sales were weaker, PC sales during the launch week were up 67 percent over computer sales in the same week a year earlier, NPD analyst Chris Swenson noted.
"Thus, the preliminary data suggests that consumers are getting the message that they need a more robust system to take advantage of some of the new features in
Vista, and thus a relatively smaller number are opting to upgrade older machines with the new OS themselves," Swenson wrote in an e-mail.
NPD's report includes sales data from retailers such as Amazon.com, Best Buy, Circuit City, CompUSA, Kmart, Office Depot, OfficeMax, Staples and Target. The research covers the seven days beginning January 28, 2007, for Vista and the seven days beginning October 21, 2001, for Windows XP.
While sales of Vista were not as strong as with XP, weekly unit sales of Windows were five times higher than those of a year ago--meaning there was some bump for Vista, Swenson said. Also, he noted that the new high-end Ultimate Edition represented 30 percent of shipments. That helped boost the average selling price of Vista to $207, a rise of more than 65 percent from the average selling price of XP during its first week.
"So, although total dollars were down compared to XP, I think the preliminary data shows that Microsoft's gamble on a new high-end Vista (edition) will help keep dollar volumes from declining as rapidly as unit volumes in the near term," Swenson wrote.
An earlier NPD report showed stronger-than-expected sales to businesses for Vista since its November business launch, although the amount of study data was limited.
See more CNET content tagged:
Microsoft Windows Vista, retailer, Microsoft Windows XP, operating system, Microsoft Corp.






From what you have said it doesn't even sound like there's a business need for you to have Vista if you're already doing what you say with XP Media Centre Edition.
Funny that a MSFT partisan would whine about downloads not being counted, innit?
/P
signifcant changes under the hood that you simply can't get with
XP (or OS X at this point). ReadyBoost is one example - this lets
you use a flash drive as a fast cache source - since flash tends to
have significantly better random read access times than hard
drives this can be a significant performance booster - especially
on systems with smaller amount of RAM. Since its a write
trhough cache you can even yank the drive without any data loss
or instabaility. Its actually pretty clever (and I'm writing this on a
Mac). Another would be the more advanced networking stack
which automtaically adjusts to get better performance (its all
about buffer sizes - linux does this, vista does this now too, OS
X and XP don't do this). These sort of things don't add a lot of
flash to the OS but they do add substance.
The main problem right now is that the 3rd party drivers (like
the pathetic excuse for a video driver from nVidia) aren't
optimised - which is pathetic being that they had close to 2
years to work on them.
Now reflect what you would have said in December 2001...
"There is nothing in XP that requires shelling out that much $$, it's eye candy. You can add on security and appearance features to 98 ( many for free ) and have a XP look-a-like. "
on XP?
I bought a new computer with XP home after it had been out a while. The thing locked up all the time and was slow as heck. It wasn't until SP1 came out that it got better. It was still slow but it stopped locking up. I eventually ended up formatting and reinstalling and reinstalling all of the patches and it has be fine.
I am glad that some people just have to be the first one in the chess club to say that they bought Vista. They do perform a service by letting all of the bugs come to the surface so MS can patch it back together.
I will wait, until I can no longer use my PC at home and until MS will no longer support XP for my PCs at work, to upgrade.
And if you don't believe the hype of this, take a gander at the microsoft.public.windows.vista.general newsgroups.
im thinking that after the last support of xp i will slipstream the updates on a disk, since this is the last os i will have from MS
But the reason people aren't buying off the shelf is because it's not worth paying so much for so little.
The Aqua.. erm sorry, Aero interface is not worth over $200. And the Ultimate version is the only version that offers a real upgrade to XP Pro users. So why pay $260 for an upgrade that slows down your computer. Every other version is a downgrade in terms of features.
You could achieve the same thing buy installing Window Blinds, removing some ram, under-clocking your CPU and breaking media player.
Buying with a new PC however is a totally different kettle of fish.
You effectively pay no more than you would with XP installed - although you may want to spend an extra $100 on some more ram.
So what I think is happening is there is little enticement to "upgrading" the OS without first buying the necessary hardware upgrades. But if you buy the hardware upgrades, why slow them down by installing Vista - why not continue to use XP until Vista becomes a necessity.
Certainly those addicted to frame rates are not going to install a clone of the Mac's OS just to get transparent windows and a black taskbar (which you can get for free with the Royale Noir theme, minus the glass effects which are the main performance culprit).
I'm currently using a 2002 computer, so the upgrade will probably be this year.
Hmmmm, lets see... I can have the new and improved Vista or the old XP preinstalled on my new PC. Do you call that choice?? Microsoft is planning to discontinue selling XP anyway so your point is moot! Vista sales will only get stronger because THEY HAVE NO COMPETITION!! DUH!
What should you do?
A. Load up your corporate GPOs on a Vista Workstation, because there is no backend snapin
B. Upgrade your entire fleet to Vista
C. Panic
D. Accept defeat.
:) {Kidding)
You should just join the domain on new Vista macines and stop spreading FUD.
{Not Kidding}
You are the boss for Kontoss0.com - and your sysadmin happens to be d_sugden. What should you do?
A. Panic
B. Accept his reasoning against using Vista and downgrade new machines to XP
C. Check the real state of affairs and find yourself a better sysadmin
Right - correct answer is C!
Also, XP could actually operate at a (relatively) halfway decent speed on hardware that wasn't exactly brand-new or ungodly high-end. Vista simply can't - you pretty much need a new box to make it run w/ all the eye-candy and such turned on. That would explain why more more folks prefer new boxes are sold with the thing pre-installed, rushing out to buy a boxed copy.
All that said, I'll find it more interesting to see what the sales curve looks like from Vista release to a point six months hence. Any big-name product release will have an initial rush of purchasers, but will it actually sustain itself, absent any forced upgrades on the big-name OEM's part?
/P
and I am not changing to create problems I do not have now. my next computer will come with refined and debugged VISTA or I may buy an APPLE. but that
wont be for a few years,yet. sorry Microsoft!
p.s. I have installed Explorer 7. works well.
SO THERE FOR I WILL NOT BUY VISTA UNTIL ITS DEBUGGED, EVEN SO I MIGHT SWITCH 2 A NEW OS.
TILL THEN I WILL KEEP THE BEST OS XP!!!
Mini running OS X "Tiger".
I even get the fun Vista Home Premium eye-candy, and somehow it
all runs snappy on this old slow (by today's standards) $499 G4
Mini. It even came bundled with lots of great software. I don't
know how Apple does it.
Apple took the risky gamble of breaking backward compatibility and it paid off. Also having a smaller, dedicated user base made it work.
I don't think Microsoft could pull that off.
"Windows Complete PC Backup and Restore", "Networking Center
and Remote Desktop", and "Windows BitLocker Drive
Encryption." I can do without the last one, but the other two are
basically required. I could do the backup on my own, but
Windows makes it easier. The networking and remote is the
killer, though. I'm on the university's LAN and I can remote into
my computer from any other campus machine to get to
everything. Home Premium: $239.00 ; Ultimate: $399.00 (yes,
those are MSRPs). Why do I have to pay $160 more to keep my
data secure and backed up, and access it from where I want to?
I'll stick to a $129 every-thing-I'll-ever-need Mac OS. Actually,
does anyone know if the feature sets between Home Premium
and Ultimate are more different than I have made them out to be
in this post, please share.
Just curious how many hours it takes to research, purchase, install, and configure all that stuff.
I have friends who also enjoy doing this ... it's a hobby like fixing up old cars. But I think it's funny how they won't admit it's a hobby. They will claim they did it to save $300 (or whatever) after spending 50 hours upgrading all the parts in their PC. But had they worked that same 50 hours, they could have made $2000 and bought two new computers instead.
1. Intel® Core?2 Duo Processor E4300 (1.8GHz, 800 FSB)
2. 256MB ATI Radeon X1300 Pro
3. 1GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz- 2DIMMs
4. 160GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM) w/DataBurst Cache?
5. Dual Drives: 16x DVD-ROM Drive + 16x DVD+/-RW
This will cost you $940 - but I would recomment you 2GB of RAM for extra $130, and you get perfect Vista-ready PC with free Upgrade to Genuine Windows Vista? Home Premium, all for $1070, so you don't have to shell out $159.95 for your Upgrade Vista DVD when you deside to upgrade your OS.
I'm sure at some point I will end up with an OEM version, but at the moment I don't think it's worth what they are asking. Just my opinion and yes I have used it.
- Tried Vista its not all that special.
- by ServedUp February 16, 2007 10:04 PM PST
- XP by contrast, I find is more user friendly than VISTA.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- I meant upgrading from xp..
- by ServedUp February 16, 2007 10:06 PM PST
- mybad
- Like this
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (65 Comments)If any of you are looking to upgrade from Vista wait for Service
Pack 2 or if your eager Service Pack 1.
But I've been using Vista for a week and for some reason its not
as special as I had thought it would be, you get this definite
feeling that its uncompleted, as if more should have been added
to it, and I find a lot of drivers are still missing for some
peripherals, some apps don't work quite as well as they do
under xp, they still need a little ironing out.
But my advice wait for SP2, the allure of Aero fades on you after
using it after a week. Trust me.