There’s been a lot of hand-wringing in the Microsoft fan base thanks to a recent report about Android usage outstripping that of Windows. Guys, relax. This transition was inevitable. And Microsoft has been planning for this day for years.
I’ve written and spoken a lot about the transition from traditional PCs to more mobile device form factors. And about how Windows long ago fell from its dominant role thanks to this transition: Today, mobile devices like smartphones and tablets account for a much bigger percentage of personal technology usage and sales than do PCs. And the dominant mobile platform, of course, is Android.
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
This transition explains Microsoft’s “mobile first, cloud first” strategy. And while the firm has too many toes in the water these days, so to speak, I feel that it’s future as a major force in cloud computing is very clear. Everything else it is doing today—yes, including Windows—is on the way out. No, not immediately. But that is the trend.
And, seriously, think about it. Think about what Microsoft is doing in Windows 10 today, and try to imagine how any of it could ever possibly result in more usage, or more sales, or a bigger overall market. It’s not possible. This product is really in maintenance mode, and all Microsoft can really do is make it better for the audience of users who do use and rely on it every day. And slow, maybe, what is an inevitable decline.
Android, meanwhile, is still ascendant. It isn’t just a bigger target for app developers and users, it’s expanding into new form factors and device types too. And it will see growth, directly, at Windows’ expense. New Chromebooks that can run Android apps and current and future Android hybrids like the (admittedly lackluster) Pixel C will continue to chip away. Just as the company’s G Suite apps and services chip away at other Microsoft businesses.
Today, the Microsoft fan can take solace in this: Windows remains a more powerful and full-featured productivity environment for those people who need to get real work done. The doers. The—I know—creators. And Android, while improving steadily, has a long way to go. Will that change over time? Sure. But today is not that day.
But whether you believe Android “surpassing” Windows has already happened or not—I don’t actually trust StatCounter data, sorry—it is going to happen. This year. Soon. But then it always was. So give your hands a rest and get on with your life. Nothing has changed.
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#95735">In reply to Eric Jutrzenka:</a></em></blockquote><p>Sun's vision was really about having somewhat dumb workstations connected to a centralized server made by guess who? Except for the idea of not running applications directly on the workstation, Sun's vision was the antithesis of cloud computing.</p>
skane2600
<p>As been pointed out many times before, it's a bit of an Apples and Oranges comparison. Whether an application runs locally or in the cloud, the device used to run or access the application has always mattered and it always will. Human architecture is fixed for the foreseeable future, so form factors matter.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#95828">In reply to Eric Jutrzenka:</a></em></blockquote><p>Besides the well-known technical challenges and historical failure of a truly "universal" platform, there's a business problem too. Phone makers want to differentiate their products by adding new features and sometimes modifying the OS in disruptive ways. Even if a universal app platform existed today, it would be constantly chasing the next iteration of phones and OS's. Microsoft supports this approach through Xamarin because they don't have a successful phone and ecosystem to defend, but Apple and others do.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#95950">In reply to Darmok N Jalad:</a></em></blockquote><p>We have four working PCs in our house, two of them purchased in the last year. So it's best not to generalize. Most activities done on smartphones today were never commonly done on PCs. </p>
Bats
<p>Paul doesn't trust StatsCounter? What does Paul actually trust? Paul should trust different information sources, because he has been wrong with pretty much everything right? That's not even an exxageration.</p><p><br></p><p>This topic isn't new. Paul has been trying to assure Windows'fans for years that Windows will be a dominant player in our computing lives, when in fact, it going in the opposite direction. LOL…this is kinda like "Baghdad Bob" from Iraq War2 fame, when he went on the air to say that the Iraquis were winning the war, when American troops took over the building that he was broadcasting in. "Baghdad Paul?"</p><p><br></p><p>Let's get something straight here with Paul. Paul doesn't work in the "real" world so he doesn't know what "real" work is. He doesn't even know the environment. He is a stay at home blogger. He doesn't even know that you can manage and "create" stuff for his Thurrott.com blog from an iPad. Just check your Apple and Android stores and look for the WordPress app. While you are there, look for the Adobe Photoshop app. Now tell me, that Paul can't "create" content for his WordPress site using mobile devices? He is either a dinosaur or wholly misleading us. </p><p><br></p><p>He is right about one thing and that is Microsoft knows this. This is why Microsoft is trying to desperately hold on to their fading share of the technology market. They tried it with Mobile and since they failed they're are trying it through Android, via MSFT assimilition. </p><p><br></p><p>So If Paul says "Don't worry….," then you believe me…YOU HAVE TO WORRY!</p><p><br></p>
Lateef Alabi-Oki
<p><span style="color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250);">What is unsettling for the Microsoft fanboys is how Google seemingly unraveled Microsoft as the dominant computing platform on the planet. </span></p><p><br></p><p><span style="color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250);">Google turned Microsoft's playbook upside down and forced their hand in so many ways. Think about it. Microsoft was forced to adopt open source philosophy. Forced to give away its OS for free. Forced to take mobile seriously. Forced to adopt the cloud. Forced to embrace platforms other than Windows, and so on.</span></p><p><br></p><p><span style="color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250);">Don't get it twisted. Microsoft did neither of this willingly. They did this, exclusively, because of pressure from Google.</span></p><p><br></p><p><span style="color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250);">Meanwhile, Google, through cunning, patience and persistence, has now set itself up as the king of the computing platforms of the future via Android and the Web. </span></p><p><br></p><p><span style="color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250);">Android is a far more open, flexible, customizable, versatile, and scalable operating system than Windows is, or will ever be. So it's popularity for mobile, IoT and embedded development will only continue to gain momentum. And for larger computing form factors (tablets, laptops, and workstations), the combination of Chrome OS and Android is still vastly untapped potential that can do even more damage to Microsoft.</span></p><p><br></p><p><span style="color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250);">As for the web, well that's always been Google's playground. Google from the get go placed all its bets on the Web. While most of its competition bet on native. Today, it's clear that the Web is the future computing. And aside from now owning the most dominate OS, Google pretty much has the most dominant and popular web services that matter (Google Chrome, Gmail, Google Maps, YouTube, Search, etc). </span></p><p><br></p><p><span style="color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250);">This is what is unsettling for the Microsoft fans. Google had a singular objective to make Windows irrelevant. Windows today is irrelevant. Its only relevance lies in proprietary services, legacy apps, and legacy workflows. </span></p><p><br></p><p><span style="color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250);">As a developer, I can't remember the last time I cared if any of my projects ran on any Microsoft platform or product. It used to be that I had to add a wrapper for IE, or a cross-compiler shim for Windows. Today, for most developers, it's all about Android, iOS, and the Web. And that's in large part courtesy of Google.</span></p><p><br></p><p><span style="color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87); background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250);">And for us, free software and open source fanboys, we are just glad that open source, open standards, and the open web finally won. Thanks, Google!</span></p>
Hifihedgehog
<blockquote><em><a href="#95955">In reply to Lateef Alabi-Oki:</a></em></blockquote><p>I was nice….</p><p><br></p><p>Evidently, you have not truly dealt with normal everyday users in the real world who are exploited on a very regular basis in spite of the supposed "bulletproof nature" of app sandboxing and other "security measures." </p><p><br></p><p>Besides, most of these people are not on the latest or upcoming versions of Android which is being in discussed in that very video of yours, where security chief Adrian Ludwig is speaking in his typical idealized marketing jargon. </p><p><br></p><p>Besides, about half of the world is still stuck back on KitKat or earlier which are even worse than the later versions of Android ( <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/271774/share-of-android-platforms-on-mobile-devices-with-android-os/" target="_blank">https://www.statista.com/statistics/271774/share-of-android-platforms-on-mobile-devices-with-android-os/</a> ). </p><p><br></p><p>Around the clock, rampant security issues arise from unknowing people misclicking spam emails, accessing illegal download sites, and installing apps and giving them permissions they otherwise never should have.</p><p><br></p><p>Actually, Windows does have a very finely granular, user-based permissions hierarchy. You have been reading far too much Android propaganda dribble lately and probably never have run and managed a corporate Windows Server-based network. </p><p><br></p><p>Interestingly enough, the statistics you cite are clearly hyperbolic, fabricated, and off-the-cuff given how generic the numbers you cite are. As a realistic metric, perhaps you should take a stroll by a high school and ask some of the students there just how many have gotten a virus on their Android phone lately. </p><p><br></p><p>That would be your first taste of humanity's reality outside of your jaded Android shrine. And Android… the most secure OS? If we are speaking of strictly mobile OSes for a moment here, any competent professional could tell you iOS easily leads in security without peer.</p><p><br></p><p>This conversation ends here. You showed clearly condescending, derogatory dialogue towards leading expert technological pundits and analysts who know much more than you ever will with your limited world view. </p><p><br></p><p>In fine, you are an incompetent, unteachable, and pig-headed Fandroid, unopen like Fort Knox to any real or valuable discussion. Judging by your comments, you sound like an indoctrinated Google intern. Good day, sir.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#96362">In reply to brettscoast:</a></em></blockquote><p>Microsoft didn't think of the finger-touch approach that Apple used for the iPhone and was slow to adopt it for their own products but they were focused on mobile long before Apple was and never really stopped. MS's mistake was to make devices like the pocket PC too closely mimic the UI of normal Windows with scroll bars etc. Windows 8 had the same problem in reverse – they tried to make their non-mobile OS more like what they imagined a mobile device would need. IMO, the second smartest thing Apple did with the iPhone (the first being the finger-touch interface) was to make its OS independent of their desktop OS. </p>