So now that the nine-inch Eee is
officially available with Windows XP pre-installed, people are wondering the obvious -- why XP and not Vista, since XP is being
discontinued in June and Vista can kinda-sorta be made
to run on an Eee? The answer, direct from Microsoft, is both obvious and a little surprising: Given the Eee's "other requirements," Asus and Microsoft "couldn't go the Vista route," presumably because the Eee doesn't really have the horsepower for it. Sure, but what caught our interest was that Microsoft is "in close discussions with Asus [regarding] how to take that forward... in regards to the
Windows 7 Europe timeframe." Windows 7, you'll recall, has that
lean new kernel, which would presumably make building a stripped-down version specifically for Eee-class machines easier -- but the last we heard, Windows 7 wasn't due until at
least mid-2009 (and possibly not until 2011), so either Microsoft is planning to continue shipping XP after June or Windows 7 is coming much earlier than we thought. Our money is on XP continuing to soldier on, but here's hoping.
[Thanks, Omar]
posted Mar 5th 2008 5:22PM
link?
Hahaha, MS didn't want to get sued again for providing a subpar Windows experience.
Yeah, but that Acer is way bigger. this isn't about power it's about size.
Its about weight not power sometimes. I would rather have something that is like 1kg then 2-3kg.
Hmmm, no thanks. I will stick with the Linux flavored models. I wonder how much a Windows loaded model would bump up the price?
less than $40. it's been well-reported.
$40? To the end user price? Not to flame it up or anything, but I would be shocked crapless if that was the case. Maybe $40 for something like the 3rd world Vista package Microsoft worked out, but for something at least on the "Vista Home Premium" level? I don't know...
http://members.forbes.com/global/2007/1112/024a_2.html
I kid you not: straight from Forbes Magazine. Read it and weep.
Funny story but a true one:
Why XP install BSODed on me after many months of usage and after a new install, BSODed again. My ASUS EEE 4G also had a fatal error (running XP) both on March 1st.
I installed Vista and I've yet to see my machine BSOD. I don't know what's going on.
I haven't had a BSOD in years...
I've had one when I took my 2.13Ghz COre 2 Duo to 3.5 Ghz :)
Not in years? Seriously? You are quite lucky.
Try combining two sound cards in one machine (e.g. Creative and E-MU) or anything else involving slightly out of ordinary hardware setup (e.g. plug in a lot of USB devices, preferably through a hub, have multiple PCI slots occupied, use brand new video cards such as original version of Galaxy 8800GT, set up RAID etc.).
While almost all that I get are caused by bad drivers or bad hardware (even "top" VGA manufacturers such as EVGA sometimes release cards that are FACTORY overclocked beyond their capabilities and are prone to freezing) and can't be contributed to Microsoft, that's beside the point. BSOD happens still, with new hardware from brand names and not with any less frequency than on XP.
i saw a BSOD on a dell optiplex at my school. it was funny.
no one knew what was going on and were pressing space and enter and all of the function keys. i chuckled at the whole ordeal
Isn't that because Vista is a little smarter about keeping drivers away from the critical bits of the OS? While the last time I saw a BSOD was back on Windows 98, I would not want to try installing two soundcards on one machine. That's like asking, no begging, for trouble.
I have. Decided to overclock my e6600 (2.4 ghz stock) to 3.8 ghz (stock cooler). Apparently it wasn't smart. Then I had one one when my videocard randomly started heating up to ~80 degrees Celsius (not my fault that time). Then there was the time that it was 40 degrees in my condo cause the air conditioning broke. Then... no, I think that's pretty much it.
I don't see too many BSOD's either....
But I guess that's just another thing they left out of Linux!
my hp laptop hates the video drivers for the 7600 in here and BSODs almost every day at least once
makes one want to cry really. :(
though if vista worked (using less then 8 million gb of ram) it would be quite pleasant i suppose.
The only comp I ever used to see BSOD was my friends, and that was every 4-6 months of never being turned off. He upgraded to Vista at some point and I've yet to see any freeze up, even with his ridiculous never-turn-off-the-comp attitude.
BSOD? XP still has these? I haven't had a BSOD since Windows 98SE. Definitely never had a BSOD on a NT-based OS.
Smoke and mirrors. By the time windows 7 is ready, the 7 and 9" eeepcs will be insignificant as the hardware would have moved on by then. probably the last generation of viao C1's will be cheaper than the $500 theyd ask for the 9" version because they would have been bundled with oem windows.
Last generation C1s were complete crap compared to the Eee, no matter what the price.
I had Vista on my EeePC running fine, I stripped it down with vlite. Got rid of A LOT of useless junk, and it ran smoothly. But after stripping it down it was not much different from XP.
But currently I have a stripped down version of XP (using nlite), and it just flies. Boots up completely in under 35seconds, but you can start launching programs in less then 30 seconds after hitting the power button. The size of the installation CD was less then 170MB, yet I still have all the features you would want for everyday computing.
How easy is nlite to use?
I'm planning on getting the 9" Eee, and would prefer to have XP installed. But that would take up more SSD space than Linux, and would increase boot times. If nlite cuts down the size of XP, and will work with SP3, then it'll calm my fears.
iiyt: It's loads easier than doing everything by hand (making the install instructions file, trimming the files, integrating files, appplying registry hacks, etc), however you will probably need quite a few installs to get it right. If you remove something that you actually will need, often there is no way to just install it back in there so it means making a brand new install and reinstalling again. This is not as bad as it seems since a really slim nlite'd XP will install in minutes (about 15 minutes for my older laptop) and the whole process is automatic (no dialogs to answer as you do it all in nlite), but it gets annoying and aggravating. It's definitely definitely worth it though. There isn't a non-nlited XP in any of my 4 computers at home today.
do they have a microsoft office version that would work with the linux os installed on the eee pc?
Open office come pre-installed. Its a bit slow but works well and has a whole lot less weirdness than work and excel.
No, but the included OpenOffice is (mostly) Office 2007 compatible. This includes nearly all Excel functions, macros, ect. Some PPT templates don't carry over. For 95% users, this is fine. If the full office is necessary, CodeWeavers allows you a native install of Windows Office 2003 (and many other win apps) onto a Linux OS. Its costs $40 though.
What does that start button say? Does it say start...? It looks all funked up.
I'm guessing it is start in Mandarin from the names on the icons in the one window. It looks like "N" then something that resembles a x or w.
Actually that's simplified Chinese (I think?). Mandarin is a spoken variety of Chinese, you write it the same for all variants, its just that mainlanders are taught simplified usually, whereas others such as the inhabitants of Hong Kong use the traditional variety.
It's indeed "start" in traditional chinese (in a skewed "italian" font).
@Mr. Stranger
Asus being a Taiwanese company it's natual that XP in traditional chinese is installed.
To be more precise, traditional Chinese characters are still used in Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan and Korea. (Though Japan has made a few modifications in their Kanji characters, but still not as radical as simplified Chinese.)
Microsoft should not discontinue Windows XP. What Microsoft should start doing is instead of playing catchup with Apple, they should be fixing XP and adding more features to it. Sure, Aero is nice and whatnot, but thats pretty much the only thing they are pushing for in Vista. Microsoft should maybe add that in Windows XP, maybe fix permissions & things and go that way. Its somewhat sad when people still want XP over a new OS like Vista, then thats telling you something.
"Its somewhat sad when people still want XP over a new OS like Vista, then thats telling you something."
You mean like how people still use Tiger instead of Leopard? Or are you going to lie to us and say that all Mac users upgraded?
"Its somewhat sad when people still want XP over a new OS like Vista, then thats telling you something."
It certainly is. It's telling you that people are ignorant and run away from positive change.
Vista is a superior OS to XP. But because XP was around too long, people got extremely comfortable with it and became fearful of change.
But change is inevitable. Within two years, I'm sure the vast majority of XP-worshiper whining will cease.
Rollins, is it possible Vista doesn't suit all scenarios. As you know, and as the leaked Microsoft suggest, Vista has a number of issues which may or may not matter to you depending on your hardware, software and the way you use your OS.
The fact is that Vista has to mature quite a lot before it could replace XP in all scenarios, and I'm afraid this won't happen before Win 7 (which is, more or less, Vista Reloaded).
XP also has a number of issues before SP1 and SP2, and keep in mind it was a relatively small incremental change over Windows 2000, while Vista is trying to redo a lot of stuff, which takes time to get right.
Man the MAC vs PC hating makes me crazy. Maybe Ma5t3rw1tt is just saying... its sad that people are preferring XP from Vista, or even downgrading after the 'fun' experiences that Vista has to offer. I've recommended strongly to my office and anyone else looking for a new PC to make sure their purchase comes with XP, not Vista. Yes, I am a mac user, no I have not upgraded to Leopard. Thats more out of sheer laziness. I've only heard good things and no one rushing to downgrade back to Tiger.
That's because people hate change and at least on the outside leopard feels more like a patch and a couple new programs than a new OS. Vista is an entirely new os, with new advantages as well as new problems, and it's adjusting to those changes that people don't like. When XP came out I remember people saying it sucked and that they were sticking to 2000. I doubt any of those people still use 2000. Give it time.
I agree with you, people hate change. But I think the real problem is that Microsoft releases OS's before they are ready and it takes them two years to fine tune them. XP was also terrible when it first came out until SP2. Now that its been 5 years, XP has become a strong OS. Unfortunately, its time for the cycle to start again.
You sir, are missing the point of th eee entirely.
That's funny. I have a feeling that many people are going to want to upgrade to Windows 7 (from XP) instead of Vista due to how "minimal" it is.
These mini laptops should get a "Windows XV"... A stripped down version of XP but with a Vista skin. That would be killer.
Also, you losers need to stop complaining about Vista. It's nothing new that no one wants to upgrade to a new OS. It happens every time a new OS is introduced. Don't bother upgrading, just get Vista the next you buy a new computer. And do your homework and make sure you get enough Ram from the beginning.
Have you considered OpenOffice? www.openoffice.org
Cross platform, reads and writes MS-O files, and free, how can you beat that?
The Micro kernel that everyone thinks will debut in windows 7 is already present in Windows Vista, if the Mac fan boys of endgadget would stop sucking From Steve Jobs Tit and free themselves from the reality distortion field, you might learn a thing or two.
Why does MS always have to get into the act?
there you said it yourself 'monster'
we buy eee to get a cute and smart puppy that follows us everywhere not a monster :p
hope that brings some perspective for ya ;)
We're at a crossroads here and its not looking good for MS. For the people installing XP or Vista on your eeePC, why? What is it you want to do that you can't do with the original Linux setup? The same question applies on larger PCs now. But unfortunately there *are* real answers to that question. There's still an awful lot of hardware drivers and software that is Windows only.
But this leaves MS in a pickle. If they really do discontinue XP then they have nothing between Vista and Windows Mobile. One needs heavyweight hardware, the other is a toy. Which leaves them with no operating system for mid to low end hardware. And that's not just the eeePC.
Rant.....
I wanted to love linux, I really did. but when i don't have the time to learn a new system and i wan't things to work NOW, then windows is, for most of us, the easiest and best bet.
Real answer.....
I wanted to use vpn with remote desktops for work on my little geeekbook.
4 days later and many forums trawled i finally had it up and running using repositories not designed for the system. It would work for up to around four hours before it would crash and i would have to restart.
Ok not the most enthralling of answers but i experienced many of these little niggles, which i knew how to edit and fix under windows in 5mins but now took at least a day per issue. Asus screwed up by not offering a full linux repository when they launched the eee.
The reason i got pissed and put XP on is that i had convinced myself to buy this on the proviso it was useful.
With the linux installed it was not able to do the jobs that i needed it for.
(if they could be done i would still not be able to as i would have spent the last two months setting everything up and hunting down information).
Don't get me wrong, for a home user... Wimin, Grannies, kids, non-geeks etc This machine is awesome and they will never need windows again.
For me and many others out there, there was no option but to change OS. I am feeling tempted by eeebunto though, might have to go grab an sd card for it.
Zing!
VPN, Remote Desktop? That'll be MS Windows then. SSH and VNC is more straightforwards and more widely supported but I do understand that needs must when the remote end is all MS. Hence my point about software that only runs under MS altogh I was really thinking about all those little utility programs that seem to be Windows first, Mac maybe and linux never.
...its not about the size, its how you use it! lol