Take Command and TCC Installer Analytics

I’ve been gathering system information about Take Command installations for the last several months. (The installer only sends system configuration information; it doesn’t report anything that could be used to identify a system or any personal or confidential info.)

Some of the information was expected; others were quite surprising. I thought you might be interested in seeing some of the results.

The following data is for the last month (August 9th – September 9th).

First, let’s see how the installations went:

Take Command installation success rate

I don’t get any information on what happened for the “user abort” results. The “fatal error” were primarily permissions errors (7), and a couple of unknown internal Windows Installer errors.

Take Command installations by country

This one was a little surprising – about 1,000 installations between Russia, China and Iran. I checked the sales for the month, and there was one single-system license in Russia, none in China, and none in Iran. Hmm. I’m not surprised about the piracy rate — I’m just surprised there are that many Take Command users in those countries!

And I’ve got to promote Take Command more aggressively in Greenland. That’s a big blank area on my map.

Take Command installations by user language

I was a little amused that the analytics broke out English between the US, Great Britain, and Australia. But then, I’ve had some very bewildering chats with Aussies …

Take Command installations by Windows version

Apparently the Take Command user base is a little more willing to upgrade to Windows 10 than the average Windows 7 user.

Take Command installations on x86 versus x64 Windows

This surprised me a little, because previous numbers had shown x86 to be much lower. A little digging showed the reason for the discrepancy — most of the x86 numbers here are coming from Russia, China, Iran, and India. Take those out and the x86 numbers are closer to 2.5%.

Hard to believe anybody’s still trying to run Windows with 1 – 2Gb of RAM. Probably those x86 users.

1680 x 1050?? I’ve never even heard of that resolution. The HD and above screens easily outnumber everything else, though there’s a fair number of the 1366×768 (tablet? ultrabook?) displays.

One comment
  1. I know this is a year-and-a-half old, but…

    The Windows on 1 or 2GB and the 1680×1050 are almost certainly both the result of installation in VM’s running on Macs. I’ve been running it that way for ten years (XP, then 7, now 10), and I’ve never given a VM more than 2GB. Never had a performance problem, and I often have a SQL Server up and running in the VM. 1680×1050 is one of the resolution choices on a MacBook Pro.

Add Comment

Required fields are marked *. Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.