Surely there will be more of these, but the first of them I found is this one in the Inquirer. Here's another one, in betanews. And yet another one, in PC World, which parrots never analyzes, so nothing it says is of value for learning anything.
Here's another one, by Computerworld which forever also proves incompetent at analysing Win10 adoption numbers. Honestly, they parrot without brains. All of them. But Computerworld is perennially the worst. Great at deciphering bits in financials, lousy at this question of how many and how long for Win10 devices.
INSTALLS DOESN'T MEAN SALES. OEMs have to install to sell machines, so if they have now 25 million more to SELL, that's not a success, just a preparation. So it's not a slowdown. It's not anything you can use to evaluate whether adoption of Win10 is good or not. ACTIVATION IS ONLINE so internet use of the more-internet-intense Win10 DEVICES which now include phones and tablets that Win7 and 8 couldn't have had, is of no comparative value! Honestly, does no one think anymore?
So of course, the tech mag conclusions are wrong, and I commented in the Inquirer and betanews articles, why. The analysis is always wrong. How long will it take for people to get the facts straight, and do the analysis properly?
I don't know, but since I'm a known Win10 critic, to say something less critical is refreshing. So here, the claim of Win10 adoption slowing, I call BS. I don't know if it's slowing or speeding up or whatever, because there isn't enough info to show anything, and the measures aren't the right kind over the right period, to say.
Opine your own assessments? I'm done with mine.
Edited by brainout, 01 October 2015 - 03:48 PM.