Microsoft dropping three app limit from Windows 7 Starter Edition
By Ross Miller 
posted May 22nd 2009 4:17PM
posted May 22nd 2009 4:17PM
[Thanks, Stephen]
posted May 22nd 2009 4:17PM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Hey, look at that! They listened!
Well, maybe Microsoft won't fade into irrelevance after all. . . .
listen what? why would you want to have 5 different versions of the same thing anyway? for software the marginal cost to microsoft is always zero once they've sold 1 copy of the software. why differentiate your customers in such a way and why can't your slightly poorer customers enjoy the media centre and stuff like that? you don't see apple asking you to choose 5 versions of os x.
i mean seriously after all most people buying computers nowadays are for personal use and they know very little about all the configurations and features. so why offer some of your customers something that's worse than you can offer AT THE SAME COST TO THE COMPANY?
it's not like that microsoft made the ultimate version out of free range egg or something...
@b
What's the matter, b? One less thing to cry about?
@ b
"i mean seriously after all most people buying computers nowadays are for personal use and they know very little about all the configurations and features."
Really? so those millions of computers bought by corporations, setup on their networks, and manageable through NT software dont exist?
Apple focuses on ONE THING, the personal user.
Microsoft makes (just guessing) most of their money from enterprise solutions and business models. you're a thick one if you think:
A: Mac OS is designed for enterprise use
B: Most ppl buying computers these days are for personal use
Let's use our brains before posting plz
From the look of it though, Ryan, you are fading into irrelevance. Enjoy.
@b:
Apple may not be asking you to buy one of five versions of OS X, but they do force you to buy only their hardware, which they make a nifty premium from.
"so why offer some of your customers something that's worse than you can offer AT THE SAME COST TO THE COMPANY?"
The same reason Apple charges iPod touch users for OS updates even though it was already produced for iPhone users. They didn't have to do anything costly or special to run it on the iPod touch.
Oh, I don't know. I really like the "free range egg" argument. I've never heard it before and I think "b" is to be congratulated for some originality. Now, I just hope I don't wake up at 3:30 in the morning thinking about it ....
@Ryan
I'm loving the irony here man!
@Shadow08, I don't have details at the moment but I believe there is a legal reason they have to charge for the updates on the Touch and not the iPhone.
And yes, Microsoft has the right to charge differently for different versions of their OS. The second they stop making more money that way they'll stop.
"why can't your slightly poorer customers enjoy the media centre and stuff like that? you don't see apple asking you to choose 5 versions of os x"
You're condemning Microsoft for charging too much money for stuff as a way to defend Apple? You may want to think that position through a couple more times before saying it in public again.
We would have just hacked it to run more than 3 anyways.
Interesting thought here: will this move by MS of limiting CPUs by thermal dissipation essentially set the ground work for CPU architectures for years to come?
http://pcper.com/comments.php?nid=7203
Even though Microsoft releases gazillion versions of their latest windows, European Union will gladly multiply that irrelevant number at least by two, so that not only do you have the "genuine" options from Microsoft (Enterprise, Pro, Business, Ultimate, Ubermega etc...), but now, you'll also get Ultimate N (N = no media player, because Microsoft can't put any software IN THEIR FU*KING OWN PRODUCT they like), Business N E A C (No media player (consumers apparently don't like to play their media on Windows), no internet Explorer (coz' Opera don't like it), no Aero (coz' it looks too much like MacOSX), Command line only (for greater consumer experience)).
Good on us, EU citizens, we'll have PLENTY to choose from!
Microsoft seems to have listened to what people have said thus far as far as gripes with Vista to make Windows 7 better, and that said it really is a shame they haven't dropped the multiple versions of Windows...
So what exactly will make Starter different from Home Premium, besides the inability to change wallpaper? (unless they're removing that restriction too)
No Areo, No Windows Media Center, No Touchscreen support...
Windows 7 Starter will be identical to Windows 7 Home Basic (which won't be sold in the developed world).
Without Aero, you miss a lot of Windows 7 functionality that require GPU rendering.
Such as Aero peek, animation, better understanding on what happens when you put a window on the edge of the screen, instead of a blue rectangle that just pop, same for task bar thumbnails and the taskbar thumbnail application integration, and no full screen zoom or magnifying glass with the magnifier. Moreover, Aero Basic, and Windows Classic, uses the CPU (which sucks at rendering anything image related as it was not designed for this) instead of the GPU to render. So that means, like XP and previous version of Windows moving a window or even your mouse while the CPU is at work, will actually slow down your system.
Moreover, you have no DVD playback codec in 32 and 64-bit, among other things, and no Media Center, system backup, Tablet PC support (so no snipping tool, math hand recognition input (which works well when you try and use your mouse to generate nice complex math formulas)), and more... we have to wait for the full list.
So I take it that means we won't be seeing any multitouch Windows 7 netbooks?
@TareX
I don't see why not, the beta Ultimate runs better on my NC10 than XP home, so performance isn't an issue.
A multitouch notebook manufacturer would have to screw up pretty badly to put starter on instead of home premium or whatever they're going to call it.
Honestly, I would probably take starter for the NC10 at release... depending on the saving over home premium. Aero is the only thing that worries me. I could live without the chrome and easier recognition of borders on dragging windows to the edge etc, but the new taskbar is excellent, and I don't know whether losing Aero would mean a return to the old bar.
Wow, color me impressed. This should make Win7 the clear choice as far as netbook OS's go.
I would have installed windows 7 ultimate on my netbook before reading this. I don't really feel any different now. I don't think that people's options of what version to buy will decide how clear a choice win7 is.
ruh roh! The haters just lost their main gripe against 7!
And this is a good thing. I'm a Mac user generally, but I'm certainly interested in Windows 7 as well. Probably the first version since 2000 I'm looking forward to (even if it is just on my work system).
patriotsn1: Not even close. Although I wouldn't call myself a Win7 hater (I'm going to get it too), the stupid arbitrary three app limit in starter edition was not what most people were worried about. It was incredibly stupid, but didn't apply to most people since most people wouldn't be getting starter edition to begin with.
Now MS needs to work on getting it down to fewer versions because the ridiculous redundancy is ridiculously redundant.
Remember, you are only going to see two versions in store, Home Premium and Professional.
As far as you are concerned, there are two versions, since I would assume you are picking up a full install/upgrade disc.
Ultimate is not going to be available in many places, Enterprise is only for business, Starter appears to be netbooks only and not even purchasable, and the rest you will never see here.
You have to admit, they did a much better job with making any higher version a superset of lower versions. That at least makes it much easier to put a dollar value on the features you can get by stepping up, without the confusing task of assigning priority for one feature over another.
Couldn't they just drop the Starter edition full stop?
They should just offer 2 versions; a home version and a business version. Not the 10 or how ever many they have.
That is what it already is!
Starter edition is like almost free Windows for OEM, and no one would actually buy it, as you have nothing. And probably will be charged more if you are not a Microsoft partner (so like if you get it at NewEgg and stuff, you'll pay a lot more).
Home Premium and then Professional edition where the Pro version is above the Home Edition with no loss in feature (we have to wait for Microsoft final decision). Then for those who wants to buy a MINIMUM of 1000 Win7, you have Enterprise edition... but of course you don't have 1000 computer even if you try, so that one you can forget, and finally Ultimate edition, if you want specific special features, that most don't need, and that is why Microsoft will produce it in limited qualities.
They need Starter edition for the netbooks and 3rd world nonsense.
They need a Home edition. Get rid of Home Basic and keep Home Premium.
They need a Professional edition for work.
They need an Enterprise edition for large businesses that want to use VLKs.
They need Ultimate for all of the assholes out there that have to have the biggest and the best. They make money off of these lamers.
They need Ultimate for home users who run a domain and still want Media Center. Non-business SKU's do not let you join an AD domain. For example, I run a business from my home and have countless computers along with an AD server infrastructure and Exchange server that keeps my cell phones synchronized with push Activesync. I know this is not a typical scenario but there are plenty of reasons someone may need or want Media Center on a domain member computer.
Aero should be part of all versions. Here is the logic I place on the various versions.
Home Basic - User does not want to pay for a Media Center he will not use and does not need to join a domain.
Home Premium - User wants Media Center and does not need to join a domain.
Business - Small/Med Biz that does not need Media Center
Enterprise - Large Biz that does not need Media Center but need certain functionality primarily found in very large managed infrastructures.
Ultimate - Anyone that needs business integration and also Media Center. (or just want the biggest/best)
Since Apple does not make a business OS, that limits them to the equivalent of Windows home SKU's (Basic and Premium). Since Apple does not care if you pay for something you won't use, this brings it down to just 1 version, basically Home Premium.
So see boys and girls, this is why Microsoft has 5 SKU's and Apple only has 1. Basically it's due to business support and giving home users some choice.
@Mike
How 'bout this?
Windows Basic(32-bit)
Windows Home and Office(64-bit)
Windows Ultimate(64-bit, unlimited installs)
@Sam
Seriously, is that all you would use to differentiate versions? 32-bit for home, 64-bit for business, and ultimate version with *unlimited installs*? Who would let anyone have unlimited installations of an OS off 1 license. 64-bit is standard on all hardware sold today so why would 32-bit be for home?
Microsoft spends billions of dollars on development efforts geared towards business needs. Should they make home users pay for those efforts when the home user will not get any benefit? Or should Microsoft include the business bits in the cheaper "home" version so that businesses can just cheap out and buy home versions while getting the business bits benefits? There is clearly a need for a home vs business pricing and product differentiation. If you think of the different SKU’s as Home Needs, Business Needs, and All Needs, then you get this.
Home Needs:
Home Basic
Home Premium
Business Needs:
Business
Enterprise
All Needs:
Ultimate
So you can see that in each class of user type, Microsoft gives a couple choices, except in the case of Ultimate which encompasses all feature sets. I don’t see what the uproar is about. Its people that don’t have the intellect to comprehend the differences and target demographics or are just Microsoft haters that have been harping on about this since they first heard of the various Vista SKU’s.
And, yes, I leave the “Starter” edition out of this mix since it is geared towards populations of people that no Engadget reader belongs to, so it doesn’t concern anyone here.
@Jagster
I always thought that Enterprise allowed unlimited installs, my bad if that's a misconception.
But anyways, a 32-bit, low-cost, basic edition would be used for low-powered computers, like netbooks, that usually don't have more than a few gigs of ram.
And idk, I kind of like the idea of a combined home/small-business, midrange cost, 64-bit sku that would meet the needs of, well, homes and small businesses at the same time.
For corporate/big-business purposes, there's the ultimate edition, or professional edition, or whatever you want to call it, which is also 64-bit.
That way, only 3 SKUs are required, and they all tailor to different needs.
Would be nice:
1. Developing world/cheap edition.
2. Home - cannot join domain, has everything else.
3. Business - includes everything, there is no ultimate.
But there's profit loss for Microsoft doing this, if they can get away with more dollars, they will until it no longer works.
As said the consumer only sees home premium and business in the shops anyways.
@Mike and Jagster
Microsoft doesn't "NEED" to create 5 different versions... they're doing it because the marketing department says that they can make more money by differentiating their product for different user groups.
I personally think 5 SKUs should be enough:
Windows 7 Starter 32 (for the developing world)
Windows 7 Home (32/64)
Windows 7 Professional (32/64)
Since there isn't a version of 7 that doesn't require activation (like WinXP) you don't need to really differentiate between Pro retail and Pro VLK.
A no brainer decision. Doing otherwise would have boosted the bittorrent industry.
Oh wait, not another M$ post...
This isn't them jerking off MS or anything, this is news.
"M$", really original... Grab your Crapple, pay your crapple tax and take a hike.
@ Feb30th
"Crapple", really original...
Although I don't agree with qwack, you're post is just as stupid as his. No one even mentioned Apple.
Windows 7 may now eclipse XP in time...
I got to try RC1, but it's sort of a pain partitioning my VelociRaptor, with Vista-X64 already on it.
Good. The 3 app limit is ridiculous in the first place. Still, Starter edition won't have Aero, so none of those UI improvements MS been selling. Without Aero, Windows 7 usability is not the same, so imo this will still be a selling point to upgrade to Home Premium, as long as MS price the upgrade reasonably ($30 to $50) Lack of 64bit on Starter edition might be an issue for few people, but knowing that Windows 7 runs well on 1GB/2GB RAM, this won't be an issue for most. The downside is yet another bottleneck of migrating the whole Windows ecosystem to 64bit.
I couldn't care less about Media Center/Tablet PC support on a netbook. I uninstalled those right away on my Win7 RC install on my Dell Mini.
Home Basic should be Mac OS X. If you want a real OS, then you need to upgrade to Windows 7 Home Premium. ;)
MS is looking for the lowest possible price tag on units with their OS. Their challenge is to make the highest possible profit while doing it and give people a reason to upgrade. They will have to add some compelling reason to go from Basic to Premium. They are plenty of options here: single core support, lower RAM size, no solitaire, no Bluray playback, etc.
I think breaking up the products in 5 parts is silly. I think the OS should not cost more than 10% of the price of the computer. Most laptops go between $500 and $1500. So that would be your reference price for the full OS. For all other options, we could simple go to the MS Store to buy the add-ons - such as Bitlocker or BluRay support.
I never got the big deal with this. Both Windows XP and Vista had starter editions with the same 3 concurrent program limit. Why did people pay so much attention to it in 7 and not the others?
Because this version will be sold on netbooks and netbooks are the hot thing right now (I have one).
No it won't and nobody has ever officially said that it would. Engadget learned of the existence of the Starter Edition(of which it was said from the first announcement that it was for developing countries only, not for netbooks) and automatically assumed that it was for netbooks.
Because starter edition was sold only in development contries that an offord a Windows, and Microsoft doesn't want to lose market share again linux.
Now that netbooks are here and using Linux, Microsoft does like Intel with their GPU. They don't make money.. they just don't want to lose this market share to others
@Mark
Because there's nothing much else to criticise it for. Gotta have something to carp about even if it's meaningless for 99% of users.
Mark, I've been saying the exact same thing this whole time. Starter Edition was NEVER for netbooks. I don't know where people got that idea. The Starter Editions of XP and Vista have never even been AVAILABLE in the United States or Europe, so why would anyone think it's going on a US or European-bound netbook? Microsoft has always said that Vista Basic or Home Premium are the preferred versions for netbooks.
Engadget, this is getting ridiculous. You essentially created this rumor that Starter Edition was for netbooks, and you've perpetuated it in every post. Can anyone cite even ONE instance where Microsoft has said that Starter Edition would be available in the US?