Despite Microsoft’s push to get customers onto Windows 11, growth in the market share of the software giant’s latest operating system has stalled, while Windows 10 has made modest gains, according to fresh figures from Statcounter.

This is not the news Microsoft wanted to hear. After half a year of growth, the line for Windows 11 global desktop market share has taken a slight downturn, according to the website usage monitor, going from 35.6 percent in October to 34.9 percent in November. Windows 10, on the other hand, managed to grow its share of that market by just under a percentage point to 61.8 percent.

The dip in usage comes just as Microsoft has been forcing full-screen ads onto the machines of customers running Windows 10 to encourage them to upgrade. The stats also revealed a small drop in the market share of its Edge browser, despite relentlessly plugging the application in the operating system.

  • katy ✨
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    12 hours ago

    because windows 2000 was peak windows

      • katy ✨
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        its funny since windows me was just windows 2000 but worse since they didnt have to worry about business customers

        • jj4211@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Windows ME was actually some Windows 2000 bits glued onto Windows 98. That’s why it was so terrible, it was kind of an afterthought when initial plans for ‘2k for everyone’ got abandoned as they realized the home app ecosystem needed more compatibility workarounds than they were prepared to offer. So instead of completing the 2k based product line, they just '2k’ed up Win98 to satisfy their then-current release cadence and make sure home market had a ‘current’ OS to go with the 2k professional line.

    • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      10 hours ago

      As much as I loved 2000, XP was better and 7 the best ever.

      2000 was the pioneer though, it was such a huge step forward in every way

      • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Yes, Win2k, WinXP, and Win7 were all major leaps forward in various areas. Imagine if 8 had been just a major cleanup of Windows 7 and unifying the various settings paradigms, how much better that would have been.

        • jj4211@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 hours ago

          But alas, Windows 8 was the ‘oh crap, tablets and phones might eat our lunch’ release and the focus was throwing the desktop/laptop experience under the bus to try to cater to sensibilities of markets they were never going to capture. Also, to have their own ‘app store’ to try to wrestle a google/apple like revenue model for applications running on the platform.

          • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 hours ago

            If MS had put any focus on allowing skins/themes for Windows, the touch market would have just been an extra feature. There is no technical reason they couldn’t have, as evidenced by the third-party apps that allowed legacy skins on previous versions, such as 8 and 10. But they needed that lock-in and forced experience, rather than giving people the choice.

      • jas0n@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Long time Linux user here. The smoothest OS I’ve ever used was xp64. That just ran like butter. Unfortunately, it was killed off to push people to Vista.