Windows 7 nears EOL anniversary - still has over 100 million users

[HEXUS]

But thankfully active online Windows XP users are firmly below the 1 per cent mark.

Read more.

[Ryhl]

These stats can't be fully trusted because they're mostly based on guesswork, but clearly, one piece of guesswork here is way more off than the other.

We know Windows 10 passed 1 Billion users in March 2020 and if the Netmarketshare/Statcounter stats are to be believed, Windows 7 has about a quarter of Windows 10's users, which would mean over 250 Million installs. If Ed Bott is to be believed, those percentages are off by double digits and the Windows 7 share should be more like 7%.

I can fully see why so many still use Windows 7, it was a stable OS that worked and didn't try to be a jack of all trades, like Windows 10 does.

[mers]

I have Win10 on my main PC and 7 on my other and 2 lappies on 7. I still think Win10 is a pigs ear but thanks to Open Shell and O&O shut up plus a bit of tinkering I can just about stomach Win10. I take these sort of calculations with a pinch of salt , most people were and are forced onto Win 10 when buying a new PC and a great percentage of those would have prefered to have Win7 had it not been for driver issues etc. I've had several clients that have reqested me to wipe and install Win 7 on new machines over update issues , intrusive behaviour and other crap that comes with 10. I'm lucky to have years of experience ( since 286 days ) and spare decent PC's to afford me the choice of control , not leave it in the hands of Microsoft. Win 7 remains to my mind the best version M/S ever produced of Windows.

[3dcandy]

I have Win10 on my main PC and 7 on my other and 2 lappies on 7. I still think Win10 is a pigs ear but thanks to Open Shell and O&O shut up plus a bit of tinkering I can just about stomach Win10. I take these sort of calculations with a pinch of salt , most people were and are forced onto Win 10 when buying a new PC and a great percentage of those would have prefered to have Win7 had it not been for driver issues etc. I've had several clients that have reqested me to wipe and install Win 7 on new machines over update issues , intrusive behaviour and other crap that comes with 10. I'm lucky to have years of experience ( since 286 days ) and spare decent PC's to afford me the choice of control , not leave it in the hands of Microsoft. Win 7 remains to my mind the best version M/S ever produced of Windows.

But is not as secure and lacks many refinements of Win 10. If you have the right hardware Win 10 is much much faster than Win 7, was dual booting for a while but there is no point as 10 is better. I really cannot see why people hold onto 7 - it's 2 versions old now

[dannyboy75]

But is not as secure and lacks many refinements of Win 10. If you have the right hardware Win 10 is much much faster than Win 7, was dual booting for a while but there is no point as 10 is better. I really cannot see why people hold onto 7 - it's 2 versions old now

I'm with you. Windows 7 was great in its time, as was XP. But the world moves on. Sure, Windows 10 has plenty to dislike - visually it's not as appealing as 7, and I hate the whole Settings / Control Panel thing in 10. Control Panel and its applets work fine, why do we need its uglier, less user-friendly brother (Settings) too? But 10 is far more secure (obviously) and as a gamer it's a no-brainer really. Most games aren't even going to run on 7, not to their full potential anyway.

[QuorTek]

giving opportunity of using same skins would be nice though, I do miss windows 7 to be honest, but Windows 10 works nicely, though still on the pro variant, I wonder why should be shielded behind so much 'userfriendly' garbage, which in previous versions of windows, you had more direct access to the Control Panel and other weird things much easier, without being forced to go by certain apps they have.

I miss DOS 6.0

[Corky34]

These stats can't be fully trusted because they're mostly based on guesswork, but clearly, one piece of guesswork here is way more off than the other.

They're based on more than just guesswork, every time you visit a website you're sending a user agent string with what OS you're using in it. Yes that can be spoofed or the tracking cookie blocked so you get double counted but the vast majority of people don't go to the bother of spoofing or using a constantly rotating IP address. (To see your basic user agent string you can use a site like this (the text in the blue banner is the user agent string, click on it for more details))

[Ryhl]

But is not as secure and lacks many refinements of Win 10. If you have the right hardware Win 10 is much much faster than Win 7, was dual booting for a while but there is no point as 10 is better. I really cannot see why people hold onto 7 - it's 2 versions old now

You sort of answer your own question, Windows 10 can be better but only "If you have the right hardware".

As for faster, I triple booted Windows 10, 8.1, and 7 for over 5 years and found 10 to be the slowest in terms of overall performance and feel. Maybe I never had the right hardware...

[Ryhl]

They're based on more than just guesswork, every time you visit a website you're sending a user agent string with what OS you're using in it. Yes that can be spoofed or the tracking cookie blocked so you get double counted but the vast majority of people don't go to the bother of spoofing or using a constantly rotating IP address. (To see your basic user agent string you can use a site like this (the text in the blue banner is the user agent string, click on it for more details))

The last time I looked, services like Statcounter use scripts to gather the OS data. If you use an ad or script blocker, it will block the script these services use. They are also only active on specific sites so you have to visit a site in question to get counted.

So, your PC has to be connected to the internet, visit a site that uses the script, and not be blocking it to get counted. That rules out hundreds of millions of PCs at a swipe I would suspect. To get an overall worldwide market share of Windows takes a large number of estimations considering their gathered data only takes into account one subset of users.

[Saracen999]

.... I really cannot see why people hold onto 7 - it's 2 versions old now

I can give you several reasons that apply to me.

1) I have some old hardware, that while old, still works perfectly. But, the manufacturer either no longer supports it or in one or two cases, no longer exists. And it or it'd drivers won't run under anything later than 7.

So, if I upgrade to 10, I either have to give up on what that hardware does, which ain't happening, or spend a lot of money replacing it. Also, not happening.

2) The software equivalent of 1), but same logic, same principle.

3) If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Now, I just about fully retired these days so no business case exists for re-investing in either above case. In all the above machines, there is no need for a net connection, so they aren't net-connected. And indeed, a couple are still XP. But they work, and do the job I expect of them.

4) I am currently thinning down my (home) machine collection, the the current 14 or so, of which two are Win10. So, if I just upgraded them to Win 10, that's a dozen licences I have to buy. Why on earth do that?

5) Above machines just .... work. I turn 'em on, do what I need and turn 'em off. To upgrade to 10 means spending quite a bit of time reinstalling, and getting everything set up how I want it.

6) Quite a bit of that hardware is pretty old but, as per 3), ain't broke. Much of it either would run 10 like a three-legged geriatric old dog with a heart defect, or just refuse to run. In fact, the Win10 installer would probably laugh itself into a hernia at the temerity of me even trying to install it. Yet .... ain't broke, etc.

I could probably come up with a couple more, but the point is clear. None of the above says I would recommend 7, and certainly not XP for anyone buying or building new, BUT there are oodles of good reasons, often involving wasting neither money nor time, for not upgrading old ones.

Oh, and

7) Suppose some of the hardware in 1) or 2) did work, or was supported, under 10 .... hypothetically. What benefit is there, for a machine I use for one or a few specific purposes, in upgrading and spending the time/money, even if I could. They still would only be doing what they're currently happily doing under 7, but under 10?

[kalniel]

3) If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The problem is it is broke and they're not fixing it any more.

[Saracen999]

The problem is it is broke and they're not fixing it any more.

Nope. For what I'm doing with it, it ain't broke. I don't care if it doesn't do things I don't want done anyway.

[3dcandy]

I can give you several reasons that apply to me.

1) I have some old hardware, that while old, still works perfectly. But, the manufacturer either no longer supports it or in one or two cases, no longer exists. And it or it'd drivers won't run under anything later than 7.

So, if I upgrade to 10, I either have to give up on what that hardware does, which ain't happening, or spend a lot of money replacing it. Also, not happening.

2) The software equivalent of 1), but same logic, same principle.

3) If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Now, I just about fully retired these days so no business case exists for re-investing in either above case. In all the above machines, there is no need for a net connection, so they aren't net-connected. And indeed, a couple are still XP. But they work, and do the job I expect of them.

4) I am currently thinning down my (home) machine collection, the the current 14 or so, of which two are Win10. So, if I just upgraded them to Win 10, that's a dozen licences I have to buy. Why on earth do that?

5) Above machines just .... work. I turn 'em on, do what I need and turn 'em off. To upgrade to 10 means spending quite a bit of time reinstalling, and getting everything set up how I want it.

6) Quite a bit of that hardware is pretty old but, as per 3), ain't broke. Much of it either would run 10 like a three-legged geriatric old dog with a heart defect, or just refuse to run. In fact, the Win10 installer would probably laugh itself into a hernia at the temerity of me even trying to install it. Yet .... ain't broke, etc.

I could probably come up with a couple more, but the point is clear. None of the above says I would recommend 7, and certainly not XP for anyone buying or building new, BUT there are oodles of good reasons, often involving wasting neither money nor time, for not upgrading old ones.

Oh, and

7) Suppose some of the hardware in 1) or 2) did work, or was supported, under 10 .... hypothetically. What benefit is there, for a machine I use for one or a few specific purposes, in upgrading and spending the time/money, even if I could. They still would only be doing what they're currently happily doing under 7, but under 10?

I was awaiting your input sir. We've had this "debate" before and I say you're not the usual person. If you notice I said a little caveat about having the hardware and in your case you don't (as in older hardware). I can see why some will hold on to it, but someone who goes out an buys a reasonable level of hardware and then slaps on an old version of Win 7 to me is just lazy and it's madness...

If you are in a position to spend a smallish sum of money on a new system then Win 10 is really a no brainer just because it works better, is faster in nearly every way and is so much more secure (though the jury is out on the privacy side)

[Corky34]

The last time I looked, services like Statcounter use scripts to gather the OS data. If you use an ad or script blocker, it will block the script these services use. They are also only active on specific sites so you have to visit a site in question to get counted.

So, your PC has to be connected to the internet, visit a site that uses the script, and not be blocking it to get counted. That rules out hundreds of millions of PCs at a swipe I would suspect. To get an overall worldwide market share of Windows takes a large number of estimations considering their gathered data only takes into account one subset of users.

True, but even though though the one mentioned in the article is only used by 0.9% of all websites that's still 3 million sites using it so like i said they're based on more than just guesswork, like i also said yes tracking cookies can be blocked so you get double counted but the vast majority of people don't go to the bother, blocking the statscounter cookie wouldn't prevent you from being logged, it would just prevent you being tracked.

Ask any web developer, or anyone with their own site for that matter, stats on who's visiting your site are easy to come by, I'm not trying to claim they're perfect however it's more than guesswork and given there's no better way of collating things like OS usage numbers it's the best we have (that is unless you trust the actual vendor (Microsoft, Google, Mozilla, etc) to report unbiased figures, not that they do that very often).

I can see why some will hold on to it, but someone who goes out an buys a reasonable level of hardware and then slaps on an old version of Win 7 to me is just lazy and it's madness...

It's blooming hard as well, most hardware manufactures don't publish Win7 drivers for newer hardware and some of the workarounds are a little hacky to say the least.

[Saracen999]

I was awaiting your input sir. We've had this "debate" before and I say you're not the usual person. If you notice I said a little caveat about having the hardware and in your case you don't (as in older hardware). I can see why some will hold on to it, but someone who goes out an buys a reasonable level of hardware and then slaps on an old version of Win 7 to me is just lazy and it's madness...

If you are in a position to spend a smallish sum of money on a new system then Win 10 is really a no brainer just because it works better, is faster in nearly every way and is so much more secure (though the jury is out on the privacy side)

I don't disagree with that. In part, I was getting in one final 2020 "10 sucks" just for old times sake.

And yup, noticed the caveat.

A minor .... well, not exactly disagreement, but point of differentiation. "More secure".

If the machine is connected, then yeah, sure.

But if it isn't, and I mean physically isn't, then I'd argue no security risk exists. Or short of a burgling hacker, it doesn't. Those undoubted security weaknesses in 7 have no practical threat surface, for an air-gapped machine that doesn't even have a network interface. My old machines used to have network cards, the likes of NE2000 or NE-1000, and I think my old 10-Base-T cables are probably still routed round my office. But the cards ended up in a skip years ago. Oh, and my office door has a decent lock and the wife doesn't even venture in there, let alone anybody else.

[winactive]

Running W7 into 2020-21 is for fools.

Should have updated or upgraded while W8.1 was an option, it's much faster than W7.

W10 is the default option for many but just take it over W7 it's still free.