Windows PCs crash three times as often as Macs, report says

Daniel Sims

Posts: 2,460   +74
Staff
In brief: The meme that Macs are more stable and secure than Windows devices has lingered since at least Apple's famous "Get a Mac" advertising campaign from two decades ago. However, a recent study has backed up the popular belief with solid numbers, indicating that Windows devices crash more often, remain insecure for longer periods, and typically have shorter lifespans.

Omnissa's 2026 State of Digital Workspace report outlines the IT challenges that various organizations face from the growing use of AI and the heterogeneous deployment of enterprise devices. The relative instability of Windows and Android is a recurring theme throughout the report.

The company gathered telemetry from clients located across the globe in retail, healthcare, finance, education, government, and other sectors throughout 2025. The data suggests that IT administrators face frustrating security gaps due to inconsistent patching across a diverse mosaic of devices and operating systems.

Employee workflow disruption, often due to software issues, is one area of concern. The report found that Windows devices were forced to shut down 3.1 times more often than Macs. Windows programs also froze 7.5 times more often than macOS apps and needed to be restarted more than twice as often.

Certain industries were also alarmingly lax in securing Windows and Android devices. More than half of Windows and Android devices in healthcare and pharma were five major operating system updates behind, likely leaving them more vulnerable to errors and malware. More than half of the desktops and mobile devices used for education were also unencrypted, putting students' privacy at risk.

Macs also last longer, being replaced every five years on average, compared to every three years for Windows PCs. Despite a recent backlash against Windows, driven by a push for digital sovereignty in countries such as Germany, Windows use on government devices actually doubled last year. Meanwhile, Macs using Apple's M-series chips showcase a significant thermal advantage, with an average temperature of 40.1 degrees Celsius, while Intel processors run at 65.2 degrees.

Another worrying issue is that employees are adopting AI faster than employers can keep up. Across most operating systems, AI use grew by nearly 1,000%, driven by employer-sanctioned tools and user-installed apps. Aggressive adoption of Gemini and ChatGPT without IT managers' knowledge likely complicates efforts to keep enterprises secure.

Permalink to story:

 
Yes, when your product is on billions of different hardware combinations instead of a curated handful, it's likely to experience more crashes.

This isn't even to defend Windows, it's just common sense. At least most PC manufacturers don't actively prevent you from fixing the product you supposedly own.

And the fanbois are out I see. 🙄
 
Last edited:
Anecdotally, the few times I've actually had to work on macs in college, they crashed on me. Which was annoyingly hilarious, because that was around the height of "it just works".

Which, I'm not seeing a "per capita" type of number in the article. If they do indeed crash 3x as often, but you have 3x more PCs in use, then is it really worth the article?

That said, considering how many hardware configurations Windows is expected to work on (and how much backwards compatibility it still supports), nobody in tech actually expects it to be the most stable OS out there.
 
Only 3X?

Mac OS has gotten a lot less stable in recent years then.

I’ve had a fresh install of Windows 11 crash on the login screen right after completing the initial setup.
 
Only 3X?

Mac OS has gotten a lot less stable in recent years then.

I’ve had a fresh install of Windows 11 crash on the login screen right after completing the initial setup.
Windows 11
Maybe it's a hardware error in the computer (unstable xmp profile).
 
Last edited:
I disagree completely when it comes to lifespan. I have a rack case that has seen gradual upgrades over the past 15 years, keeping it up to date the entire time. There is no similar upgrade path with a Mac (imagine if I had a cylindrical Mac Pro). You get rid of it and buy a new one. The cost difference over time is massive.
 
A very lop sided comparison as Apple has always been a closed architecture with a walled software garden. Where Windows supports an open architecture and a vast range of software.

After installing the big KB5079391 preview my core temps max below 40 C. Most Apple Mac systems are passively cooled so I question the lower temperature average. When I owned one of the original Macs in the '80s, it heated up a lot more than any PC I've owned even with the single exhaust fan air flow of early PC cases.
 
Last edited:
Windows is more permissive. so people do dumb things to crash it.

MAC treats their users like little babies and doesnt let them do power user shenanigans.

Linux is the most permissive and will let you nuke your system without even a warming popup... so does that make linux the WORST..? nooo? well then this report is ffffing dumb and useless ..... NEEEEXT
 
No surprise here, and no need for a 'study'.

Windows is an open-to-everything OS. You can build a Windows PC yourself out of what's in your basement and attach any trinket you like to it, and use any software you want. In contrast, Mac is a severely locked-down, non-modifiable system that supports a very limited set of carefully tested hardware, and a very limited set of software.
Each approach has pros and cons. I'd say a 3x difference shows how good Windows is, not the opposite.

That said, I have not experienced a Windows crash for maybe 7 or 8 years.
 
Yes, when your product is on billions of different hardware combinations instead of a curated handful, it's likely to experience more crashes.

This isn't even to defend Windows, it's just common sense. At least most PC manufacturers don't actively prevent you from fixing the product you supposedly own.

Do you realize that the number of crashes is computed *proportionally*, otherwise, it means nothing...
 
Apple exposing the fact they're desperate for new users. M chips clearly not moving the market share needle.

If Macs and Linux were better, the numbers would reflect that. These advocates are annoying. Just stop.
 
The amount of crashes is meaningless due to the immense amounts of different configurations an X86 system can have, it will obviously have the potential to be less stable when used with a more open to the user operating system.
Windows 11 may crash more than 10 as well, because of M$ pushing buggy updates with no QA and using AI to code their software.
 
Anecdotally, the few times I've actually had to work on macs in college, they crashed on me. Which was annoyingly hilarious, because that was around the height of "it just works".

Which, I'm not seeing a "per capita" type of number in the article. If they do indeed crash 3x as often, but you have 3x more PCs in use, then is it really worth the article?

That said, considering how many hardware configurations Windows is expected to work on (and how much backwards compatibility it still supports), nobody in tech actually expects it to be the most stable OS out there.
Kind of like Win 95, 98, Vista, Win 8 and Windows 11? or are those excluded from your comment?
 
Yes, when your product is on billions of different hardware combinations instead of a curated handful, it's likely to experience more crashes.

This isn't even to defend Windows, it's just common sense. At least most PC manufacturers don't actively prevent you from fixing the product you supposedly own.
Common sense’ explains why it happens, but it doesn’t mean users should just accept more crashes. Supporting diverse hardware is literally part of Windows’ job.
 
This a similar comparison as it is to apple/samsung.
"Apple is the #1 smartphone brand.
Yeah, when you own 100% of the phones running iSO, versus HUNDREDS of brands that
run on android OS, yeah, you would be #1.
There are a TON more PC's running MS than PC's running Apple.
 
Crashes are one annoying thing, but the lack of freedom is much worse. Thanks God, Linux is free, as in freedom, and open source. Lots of servers run Debian and other Linux distros for stability too. I can't imagine internet servers running on windoze 11. It would be a perpetual 404 error.
 
Corporate warfare is in full swing. Unfortunately, the competence of the people involved leaves much to be desired.
In Cyberpunk 2077, everything is much more interesting.
 
Last edited:
I haven't had a PC crash in years. WIndows 7 was the last version that would throw a BSOD cause of some fault. Since Windows 10, the only issues I've had were inside OS due to shitty software.
 
I haven't had a PC crash in years. WIndows 7 was the last version that would throw a BSOD cause of some fault. Since Windows 10, the only issues I've had were inside OS due to shitty software.

I had countless issues on windows and had to do a fresh install on 10 twice mainly due to the the auto update cocking up.
 
Yes, when your product is on billions of different hardware combinations instead of a curated handful, it's likely to experience more crashes.

This isn't even to defend Windows, it's just common sense. At least most PC manufacturers don't actively prevent you from fixing the product you supposedly own.

However Apple is currently running on x86 and ARM where windows can’t get just x86 right. Also hardware doesn’t really matter than much regards windows crashes it’s the actual OS and resource management that’s the issue
 
Back