AdDuplex has confirmed today that the growth of Windows 11 has slowed down significantly. Indeed, the market share of Windows 11 went from 19.4% in March to 19.7% in the company’s April 2022 report, which is based on data collected from around 5,000 Windows Store apps.
In comparison, Windows 10 version 21H2 saw its market share grow from 28.5% in March to 35% this month. Microsoft announced last week that the latest version of Windows 10 was now ready for broad deployment, which means that all Windows 10 users can now install it from Windows Update.
Sign up for our new free newsletter to get three time-saving tips each Friday — and get free copies of Paul Thurrott's Windows 11 and Windows 10 Field Guides (normally $9.99) as a special welcome gift!
"*" indicates required fields
Windows 10 version 21H1 closes the podium at 26.4%, down from 26.5% last month. The older Windows 10 version 20H2, which will reach end of support for Home and Pro users on May 10, 2022, now has a single-digit market share of 6.1% (down from 10.8% last month).
Earlier this year, Microsoft said that it was seeing “strong demand” for Windows 11 and with “people accepting the upgrade offer to Windows 11 at twice the rate we saw for Windows 10.” While the 19.7% market share reported by AdDuplex isn’t bad, it’s possible that the majority of Windows 10 users who could update to Windows 11 already did, and that the OS’ strict minimum hardware requirements are now preventing the rest of them to follow.
dftf
<p>I’m not sure if it still applies, but there used to be a thing called "downgrade rights" in <em>Windows</em>, so if a machine came with say <em>Windows 10</em>, you could legally rollback to <em>8.1 </em>or <em>7</em>. If that still exists, then machines may be <em>sold</em> with a <em>Windows 11 </em>licence, but actually have <em>Windows 10</em> pre-installed (or for enterprise customers, they can wipe-and-reload with their own <em>Win10</em> image), meaning market-share for <em>11</em> may be reported higher than what is actually in-use…</p>
dftf
<p>I’d say it’s simply a combination of (1) anyone with a PC eligible to run <em>Windows 11</em>, and interested in doing-so, has already updated to it; and (2) all that remains after-that are the 100s of millions of PCs which don’t meet <em>Microsoft’s</em> strict hardware-requirements, and so cannot upgrade to it.</p><p><br></p><p>Given <em>Windows 10</em> could run on most-devices from the <em>Vista</em> era upwards, but <em>11</em> only supports CPUs going back to, what, 2018 at the oldest, it should come as no-surprise to them that things are slowing-down. Forcing the purchase of new PCs during a widening "cost-of-living-crisis" may also prove to not be a good-look, either…</p>
dftf
<p>Just to provide some additional information I don’t usually see mentioned here: the <em>AdDuplex</em> survey is not just "5,000 <em>Windows Store</em> apps" (which makes it sound like randomly-selected ones) but "5,000 <em>Microsoft Store</em> apps which feature adverts that are served from AdDuplex servers". Other websites, such as <em>Ars Technica </em>and <em>The Register,</em> usually do make this clear.</p><p><br></p><p>Also, is it "Windows Store" and not "Microsoft Store"? The app on my <em>Windows 10</em> device is named the latter, though I would agree that "Windows Store" would make more-sense, as where-else does the store exist (aside from <em>Xbox </em>maybe?), given they don’t have their own smartphones anymore?</p>
dftf
<p>Because (though the lines may have blurred somewhat over-the-years), <em>Apple</em> is primarily a <em>hardware-focused </em>company (as they don’t sell <em>iOS</em>, <em>iPadOS</em> or <em>macOS</em> to anyone else, you only get it on their devices), whereas <em>Microsoft </em>remains primarily a <em>software-focused </em>company (as outside of <em>Xbox</em>, there isn’t much-else they sell that you could call "mainstream": <em>Surface </em>remains a premium niche, and I highly-doubt their PC peripherals, such as mice, keyboards and webcams, brings-in that much).</p><p><br></p><p>So, your answer, in-short is: <em>Windows </em>is relevant to <em>Microsoft</em>, as it is a software-product and (mostly through corporate licencing) brings in a lot of money. <em>macOS</em> isn’t as significant to <em>Apple</em>, given they don’t even charge for it thesedays, it’s just included on any Mac you buy. Same-logic as to why they report how-many <em>Xbox</em>, <em>PS5</em> and <em>Switch</em> consoles have sold, but not what firmware each is on. It’s just not relevant data to really care about… users don’t pay separately for the OS.</p>
dftf
<p>It’s obviously subject to each person’s own opinion, but the generalised view usually goes: 95=good, 98=bad, 98SE=good, Me=bad, XP=good, Vista=bad, 7=good, 8=bad, 10=good. NT and 2000 don’t usually enter into it, as the focus is on the consumer-orientated releases, and NT and 2000 were both targeted at businesses (though 2000=good is usually the view). As-such, people say <em>11</em> will likely be bad, if that perceived trend continues.</p><p><br></p><p>As for <strong>when did anyone last pay for a copy of Windows</strong>, the answer is either: when you purchased a device, as the cost of a <em>Windows</em> licence is included on all PCs it comes pre-installed on; or for large companies, they will have agreements with Microsoft to purchase a certain-number of copies of <em>Windows </em>(usually the <em>Pro</em> or <em>Enterprise</em> editions) via "volume-licencing". For regular home-users, I’d say <em>Windows 7</em> was likely the last-time, as many avoided <em>Windows 8</em>; <em>Windows 10</em> was made-available as a free-update for anyone on <em>Windows 7</em> or <em>8; </em>as is <em>Windows 11</em> now for eligible <em>Windows 10 </em>devices.</p><p><br></p><p>So <em>Windows 7</em> is likely the last, boxed retail-version any "home-user" or "small-business" likely purchased, I’d imagine.</p>