One step forward, one step back: just as we were getting ready to celebrate Microsoft's decision to
remove the three-app limit from Windows 7 Starter Edition, we're hearing that Redmond is still planning to impose strict limits on what types of machines get to run the stripped-down build. Just like today's max XP specs, things are pretty weak all around: Window 7 Starter machines will max out at 10.2-inch screens, 1GB of RAM, 250GB hard drives or 64GB SSDs, and single-core processors under 2GHz. Of course,
Microsoft's told us all along that it thinks lots of OEMs will ignore the max specs and just ship Windows 7 Home Premium since it runs way better on netbooks than Vista, but we'll see how this plays out at Computex -- we're expecting a wave of 10.2-inch netbooks with 2GHz procs and 1GB of RAM in the near future.
[Via
ZDNet]
posted May 22nd 2009 7:42PM
whatever happened to just having ONE reasonably priced OS....
then sell addon packs for whatever extra features you want... jk lol
That's the plan, I think- with Windows 7 Microsoft is indeed going to start selling upgrade packs between the versions, since each builds on the previous in terms of features... the whole point of crippling Starter was to convince people to buy the Starter -> Home Premium upgrade, making Microsoft a bit more money.
Someone (apparently enough of them) with a laptop, about a decade ago, complained that they do not need all that trash during installation of Windows and wish for a smaller one. Voila! We can get a lot less trash but a lot more money paid.
Isnt that kinda illegal? they are trying to control the whole net book market i mean thats SILLY
why only 250GB HD and not 320GB? why 1GB ram and not 2GB, microsoft sell your OS and fuck off about telling us what type of net book we get
AND no i wont want to pay premium price for another windows OS which i ALREADY have for my netbook , they dont allow you to share your OS between your desktop/netbook meh i want cheap windows 7 home basic for my net book but dont tell me that i cant get 12.1 net book without paying another time for windows you greedy bastards
@Dr House:
Why would it be illegal?
They aren't stopping you from using something higher. They're setting maximum specs for the manufacturers that they license THEIR software to.
"whatever happened to just having ONE reasonably priced OS...."
Working on it.
Actually there is one reasonably priced OS ... OS X ... but then you end up with quite high price of the hardware and it pretty much evens itself out ...
Oh and way to go MS. After all you guys just could resists screwing us again, right? Just a though but exactly how is windows 7 supposed to replace windows xp on the netbook front with stupid restrictions like that? And how log do you think it will be before the netbook CPUs are over 2ghz? 1 year? Would you actually have released the retail version of 7 by then?
Want a reasonably priced OS use Linux... the price is very reasonable. Want features from a different OS, well then pay the license fee. Personally i don't know what people are complaining about, yes the OS's are getting more expensive, but that is what inflation does. Unlike hardware, software tends to follow the CPI.
Personally I find the new stance much more user friendly than the three app limit. Additionally most OEM's get very steep discounts, so yes you may pay an extra $10 to buy a netbook because it has a higher edition, but it isn't that big of a difference all things considered.
I was wondering about this as well. I mean, upgrades and multiple editions of Windows is hardly anything new.
Wasn't Windows 7 supposed to be 'highly modular', and allow the user to buy premium features one at a time?
There was quite a lot of buzz around this following the announcement of Windows 7, but it has died down. Perhaps they couldn't find any simple (and profitable) way of implementing it.
Oh dear.
It's not as bad as you think. Microsoft is seeking to clarify the division between netbooks and full-on laptops. Maybe MS will make a bit more money in the end, but who cares? This business of people buying netbooks thinking they're full-features laptops is only harming the industries rep.
And by industries I mean industry's.
Damn it I feel stupid.
What the hell? You think it's okay for MS to decide what's a netbook and what's not? Why not let the customer decide what specs they want in their hardware?
I've never seen something so stupid as MAXIMUM requirements.
I haven't seen anything quite this stupid either. It's like they are totally oblivious to the existence of Ubuntu Netbook Remix and other netbook-friendly Linux distros. They're just about signing this entire market over to Linux in ~1 year, because then you'll have the options "souped-up fully functional Linux version" or "year-old crappy tech with crippled Windows." Even Joe Sixpack is going to start asking questions then.
Biggest problems I see in that list are the 1GB of RAM and the screen size. They are really screwing themselves over here.
I see this as a good thing, myself. It'll limit the spread of the crippled version of 7.
You guys are making a mountain out of a molehill. There's nothing stopping manufacturers from building netbooks with better specs but they just need to include a more expensive version of Windows. Linux doesn't pose any threat in the Netbook market as history has shown that customers will shun it in favour of Windows and there's no reason why Microsoft should lose money just to maintain low Netbook prices.
I don't see why you people are all complaining. Remember what a netbook was supposed to be? Something small, cheap and easy to use. Lately, what have manufacturers been doing? 12 inch "netbooks" with the price of a full laptop.
So Microsoft is just trying to help to keep a limit on the real netbook market. Then there's Home Premium for the manufacturers willing to make something between 10 and 13 inches (aka the ultra portables!).
I hope OEM's just flip the finger to these requirements. To stomp out dual-core Atoms would be an abomination.
Right. They could always use Linux instead. Well they could if anyone actually wanted it.
So, yeah, it'll be W7HP on machines costing more money and since people buy them as a fashion item rather than for reasons of economy that's not going to be an issue.
Mark, right, sure no one would want a netbook with a dual core Atom and a lightweight version of Windows 7...
Well they're not getting it.
All three of them.
I think it's because:
a) Netbooks are a fad.
b) It'll be subsidised.
if netbooks are a fad, it has lasted way too long.
If you don't like it, don't buy it... why is this such a problem with you? Let people that want a small portable laptop have them in whatever color, size, shape, smell and flavor they want. I think setting maximum requirements and making it a violation of the EULA is a bit anti-competitive. MS strong-arming the hardware net book industry. I hope they see another courtroom for it.
I don't see why this is a big deal. They are selling basically a beginner edition of their O/S meant for non powerful computers, and they don't want this cheap version of their O/S to be used on much more powerful machines.
Why shouldn't customers who purchased the software be allowed to run it on powerful hardware so they have a nice snappy experience? Microsoft owns the IP, but when you've paid for the use of the software, where you put it is none of their business.
This market engineering is a joke. Remember when Microsoft was a good brand? Now it's a byword for oppressive licensing and bloat.
Yem, what in the world makes you think Starter Edition would be far snappier than Home Premium on powerful hardware? If you have powerful hardware, use a proper version of 7, not a crippled one just for the sake of having something speedy. If you want that you can just bypass Windows altogether and use Linux, or upgrade your RAM for a couple bucks. And if the cost of Windows is your issue then, well, you shouldn't even be considering Windows.
Seriously, Microsoft has put a lot of effort in making Windows awesome once again with Windows 7. If you're still believing the bullshit anti-MS statements that predict it will run like a turtle, try it for yourself.
"when you've paid for the use of the software, where you put it is none of their business."
Yes it is. It's part of the terms you agreed to when you've paid to use the software. If it was told to you *after* you paid, that would be a different story.
They forgot to release how much it's going to cost you. As long as it is way cheaper than home version I guess it beats getting xp
Oh for fuck's sake, Microsoft.
What? It's not like the manufacturers cant just use Premium, as pointed out in the article.
And besides, isn't this what Apple did with Psystar?
If the manufacturers can just use premium then why does this version exist at all? Artificial limitations based on different hardware configurations are exceedingly stupid. Hey Microsoft here's an idea: Windows 7 for PCs, and Windows 7 Server for servers. And WinMo 7 for mobiles. How hard is that?
Because some companies may want to put out stripped down, light machines at a low price, maybe? Remarkable, I know.
I don't understand how this could be a weakness for all, it is just more choices for manufacturers to look at and offer to consumer.
The idea that simplicity is needed is ridiculous when it comes with a compromise of choice.
Hardware limitations based on imaginary bags of pain are the real stupid ideas.
Zak, it exists for low cost systems, that might otherwise use Linux.
Not everybody needs all the functions of HP, and don't want to pay for features the can't or won't use.
Because apparently in order to get Windows XP onto netbooks they had to sell it for like $15.00, which is part of what makes those netbooks inexpensive. Presumably without that move, Linux would have gained more of a footing.
Which was fine when it was just XP, but now they want everybody to move to Windows 7. Either they have to sell all versions of 7 for $15.00, or they need to segment the market.
Personally, I could have cared less about the 3 app limit. And yes, I still want my $15.00 Windows 7 netbook version. Too bad it won't be viable on 11.6" netbooks though... Oh well.
"Zak, it exists for low cost systems, that might otherwise use Linux. "
Can you say predatory pricing? Welcome to anti-trust!
How can the pricing be predatory when the product they're competing against is free?
@Epsilon-not
Haha! +1 to you.
ecause they are specifically pricing their good to compete with another product. It doesn't matter if the product is free.
They're pricing their product to compete with another product? Isn't that how pricing works?
Now, it's possible that the low price amounts to selling Windows 7 "at a loss", but that's hard to tell really- it's probably still more expensive than the actual physical components involved, (disk, box- since its an OEM copy will there even be a box?) after all. And again, the competition is free, so it's not like they're under-cutting the competitor's price, they're just limiting its advantage.
Having a majority market share and selling your product (Windows 7) at a cheaper price to discourage people from purchasing competing products (Linux) is predatory pricing. It doesn't matter if one is free. It's not about undercutting. It's about charging people with money (real computers) more to subsidize the underselling of the netbook version to limit competition. With 90% market share, cheap is basically free. Products sould be sold at a reasonable price to cover the cost of developing, marketing and selling said product. Selling your product for less than this amount and charging more for the same thing on other markets is illegal. If, for instance, Windows 7 only costs Microsoft $7 per copy to make, sell, and profit (as the netbook price would denote) then that should be the cost of all versions. Period.
1 GB of RAM sucks. 2 GB RAM shoulda been the limit. M$FT can never figure out the appropriate amount of RAM it's like they load the OS and no applications and then say "ok, looks like there is enough RAM .. hmm 640K oughta be enough for everyone" ..
So get one with W7HP installed.
More room for Android 2.0 and 3.0 to take off on netbooks.
Yeah right.
Up the RAM to 2Gb and the screen size to 12" and all's fine.
I Can see why they did this though, not wanting people to cheap out and buy the notebook version for their PC. They're going to have to restrict something.
QFT, I'd still consider the Samsung NC20 a netbook due to its low-cost internals. And RAM is dirt-cheap nowadays, and W7 runs great with 2gigs. So why is Microsoft incentivising manufacturers to make netbooks with only 1GB of RAM?
It's to keep manufacturer's from beefing up specs (and charging accordingly) but keeping it cheap on the Windows license by bundling Starter/Home Basic. Microsoft wants to see more $$$ per license on the better hardware. Otherwise, seeing Starter/Home Basic on a decent notebook would remain a possibility. Manufacturer's aren't likely to do it because they might have enough sense to anticipate that users want Home Premium+ but still, if MS hadn't put these limits it would have remained possible. Then MS would take shit from end users because Starter/Home Basic is balls but users didn't know any better when the manufacturer offered it on their non-netbook.
Single-core limitation is balls, though. That rules out dual-core Atom (Diamondville), doesn't it? No dual-core Atom = No Buy.
Why in the world would you want W7 starter?
Anything with a dual core atom is going to have W7 HP anyway.
I'm not sure you guys are getting this. There are no dual core Atom netbooks. There aren't going to be any. The move from Atom (N or Z) is going to be to Pineview, which is STILL single core. A little faster, but still single core.
Dual Core Atom's will show up in nettops and small servers. But not in netbooks.
Ballmer doesn't care about end users period, the end. His customers are the OEMs and they managed to get Monkey Boy to agree to license XPHE on netbooks for the whopping sum of $7 per. He agreed to this awful deal because he's paranoid as hell about Linux and Vista was DOA for netbooks. But this stupid move absolutely killed profits and Microsoft could only watch in horror as soaring netbook sales poisoned one of its cash cows.
Now Ballmer is trying to get well and make up for the lost profits. W7 has positive buzz and he is hoping end users will force OEMs to sign a deal that raises the price above the $7 he got for XP. Naturally they don't want to pay any more for W7 than they did for XP, so Ballmer is tellink them, "OK you can have W7 cheap, but it's going to be crippled shit,"
Who will blink first?
I hope the big oems like Dell and Asus tell them to GTFO.
I don't get what all the bitching is about, a doubt anybody posting on this blog would buy a W7 starter notebook, or lives in a country where W7 HB will be available.
If this can't effect you, why the hell do you care?
Plenty of people on this board bought XP netbooks, I presume. (I bought a Linux one myself, though) So that seems to make it relevant...
Plus, this site covers netbooks usually, and there have been many complaints about how they all have the exact same specs- and since MS is continuing with a similar policy, then there are still going to be those limited specs.
No, that's exactly my point, the HW limits only apply to W7 starter, who on this board is going to buy a system with W7 starter?
That made sense with xp and vista, with W7 there is no reason to choose starter over home premium.
As long as I installed W7HP I could make and sell a netbook with 16gb ram and a core i7 proc.
W7 HP being viable on netbooks will mean all kinds of configurations will be possible.
The question is, will manufacturers bother to give the HP models better specs, or just stick to the Starter limits for all models to save a few pennies on manufacturing costs?
Sorry to burst your bubble, but there are some of us who come to this website and actually live in underdeveloped countries.
Naturally, some oem's will cheap out, and some will not, just like today, some netbooks can have ram upgrades, the cheaper ones can't.
Just look at the selection of notebooks available from 11" ultra ports, to 30lb server replacement monsters, it was vista's piss poor performance on netbook hw and xp hw license limits that caused a lot of stagnation, with W7 hp as a real option products will spring up to fill niches just like in more expensive notebooks.
@ Andres
I knew I'd get that response as soon as I typed it, but I stand by my statement, I'd guess 90% of the posters on this board will not be able to buy W7HB.
@ Andres - Thank you. It's like some people on engagdget haven't figured out that the web is global.
Personally, I'm thankful for the ingenuity of folks in the two thirds world - so many great opensource projects...
@Zak ---Above poster +1
My sentiments exactly...
Its no wonder i got openoffice.org when Microsoft Office 2007 came out...
Apple has its own practices i dont support so its reallg Androids time to shine---Cupcake and Linux will be a major force in the future-mark my words!
No offense...but regardless of how much you say otherwise, openoffice sucks. On the contrary, Office 2007 is one of the best software packages to come out of MS.
I haven't used plain vanilla OpenOffice, but I've used Lotus Symphony (IBM's dressed-up OO) and it's really not bad, I would say it reaches Microsoft Office 2003 in quality, for what I used it for anyway. (So more advanced features that businesses need, I don't know so much about... but it is an IBM product)
I just happen to hugely prefer 2007's interface over 2003... I recently got a new job and have to use 2003 at work, I had forgotten how unintuitive that old menu-based system was. But I realize that reasonable people can disagree on this, people have their opinions...
Sorry, but in the enterprise Open Office is a Joke compared to Office 07.
Fine for home use, I guess, but then our company has the Home Use Program as part of our Office licensing that lets employees extend the company license to their home computers. No need to have both installed.
Yah right. I think I've been hearing that for the last 10 years. Any day now. Any day. And no I would not trade Office 2007 /w SP2 for Open Office. Free vs. Paid and I still paid for it. I hate OO's GUI design, but that is my core problem with most OSS. (the exception being FireFox.) People need to hire a GUI designer for god sake.
I think microsoft subside this staff only becouse of linux.
If i want netbook i wold rather have linux one with 12 inc screen.
I dont need windows for browsing the net. I hope that there will be unexpensive linux netbook.
Doesn't anyone else think this is brilliant? They are essentially taking over the lower spec'd netbook market by offering a cheap OS alternative to what would otherwise be loaded with Linux. The lower spec requirements of the starter pack will also help in running the OS stable and relatively problem free.
I think you're missing the point here. The lower requirements of Windows 7 are because they've been working on the code to streamline it across the board. They aren't coming out with a lighter faster version for netbooks with these specs. Instead, they're coming out with a version with less features that's cheaper. These are maximum specs that a laptop can have before it needs to bump up to a more expensive license. They are effectively giving W7 away in this category so that they can get cheap machines out the door with windows instead of Linux. It's good business sense, I suppose, but it feels contrived. I'm guessing this may change if netbook prices vary too much between Linux and Windows when the dual core atoms come out.
I find this quite interesting as Microsoft how has competition (so far) in really only this market (well, and also high priced laptop market with Apple, but that's a different story because Apple makes their own OS).
I'm not even sure if I want Linux to gain market share at this point - it's nice to have added support, but the corporate implementations of Linux haven't been so good. Xandros, Maemo (lack of quick support, buggy), even Dell's version of Ubuntu was wonky.
Dell's version of Ubuntu is generally so old by the time you by the machine that the first thing you do is wipe it for a later version anyways. By the way, check your install media before you partition. Do not skip that step.
Check install media? What does that have to do with the conversation?
I was referring to some junk that came with Dell's 910 (rather than its age). Just wanted a fresh vanilla install.
I dont even think MS themselves know what theyre doing....
lawd
There are no steps forward when "maximum" is involved. FU M$
Here's a crazy idea, faster netbooks get home premium. OMG that is soo crazy! or better yet you can use Linux and really show them!
Right.
These are a bit limiting arent they. Also,
What's the real point of netbooks? If you ask me, they are pushing UMPCs out of the mainstream and by now there could be some reasonably priced UMPCs that are really portable, instead of a netbook that is only as portable as a small laptop, and severly underpowered.
Bring on the UMPC age. Please.
Jeez, you gotta be kiddin' me here, are you serious?!
The last time I checked umpcs like the OQO Model 2 Plus were also limited and underpowered. As a matter of fact, this particular UMPC contains a 1.33Ghz Atom CPU, so it's a little less powerful than current netbooks. Of course, there are other UMPCs out there that have CPUs like the Intel ULV U1500 or a VIA chip, but they don't perform much better than current netbook offerings. As far as price is concerned, UMPCs with roughly the same performance of a netbook still go for a $1000+ nowadays, is that what you consider to be reasonably priced? You could go with a MID if your that worried out bout portability for about $500,but it won't have a full blown OS (which is why they're not considered to be UMPCs).
Because of the size of UMPCs, they will never have more powerful specs than a netbook. The only thing they have over netbooks is that they're a little more portable (although not exactly pocketable ).
The point of a netbook is the ability to do basic computing tasks on a light, portable, functional, and cheap device.
You don't get what im saying here, if UMPCs become more mainstream the price will fall! Then we can have the power of a netbook, in a package that is actually portable, rather than these netbooks which aren't really -that- portable anyway. Take the Fujistu U820/U2010 for example, that thing has a 1.6Ghz Atom processor, and a 1280x800 resolution screen! Thats another thing, why the hell can't netbooks have a proper resolution screen??? It's just silly. It is possible to have portability and usability at the same time, it just needs to become popular and the price will fall.
I don't see this as a step back, considering they did this with XP and Vista, too. So they give specifications - maximums don't seem like a bad idea. It's a guideline for OEMs so that they don't put the netbook edition on machines that can handle more. It's also a guideline for when to ditch the netbook edition as netbooks get more powerful in the future.
The problem that I see with this is that this is another way that Microsoft is trying to exert control over the computer industry. People that have this dangerous attitude of, "if it doesn't affect you, you shouldnt care" are ignorant (no offense). I will compare it to political law.
Lets say a law gets passed that says it is illegal to smoke in your car while driving. Now a lot of you may be thinking, "I don't smoke, so this law doesn't apply to me, therefore I do not care one way or another whether it is illegal to smoke while driving." You are absolutely correct that as a non-smoker this law does not DIRECTLY apply to you. You don't smoke, you never have to worry about getting pulled over for doing it.
Where the ignorance lies is that whether you smoke or not, this is another liberty (or freedom) that has been taken away from you. It's another thing that the government has needlessly limited. Ultimately, its another revenue stream for the government, because I guarantee you hundreds of thousands of people would be ticketed for the violation every week.
The same applies to the computer industry. You won't ever buy a netbook, what do you care? Right? It won't affect you or your computing needs.... so who gives a shit, right?
The problem is that this is a choice that has now been taken away from you so that a company can increase their revenue stream by a few million dollars a year, even though they pull in billions of dollars every year already. Your choice in how you use your computer is taken away just that much more.
Microsoft recently was granted the patent for a tiered operating system. Which means that everyone buys the same OS initially. And if you want the ability to join domains, you pay an extra fee (one-time, or potentially monthly). If you want to use Office, you pay an extra fee. If you want the ability to share your computer resources (files, printers, etc.) that is an extra fee.
I understand that what I mentioned above is probably 2 or 3 years away. But what is happening with Windows 7 NOW is laying down the foundation for people to be used to these kinds of limitations. That way when Microsoft does release that OS that is tiered, we are already used to it and we swallow their bullshit a lot easier.
Yes god forbid a company make a product and only charge me for the features I want and use.
I don't watch golf channel, you can bet your ass I pay for it.
I don't use the pci slot on my laptop, again, paid for it.
I don't always use my cell phone minutes, pay for them too.
If MS wants to offer me an OS and only charge me for the features I choose. I'll give it a shot.
If the pricing sucks, or it doesn't work, I'll go somewhere else.
How's that for liberty.
Show me one time in history where we, as consumers, have had more choice than we have now.
@jon, Choice would be me being able to buy the leanest version of Windows without all the junk included in Home Professional to install on any machine I like. This is not choice. It's market segmentation and predatory pricing.
Adir3.0, go google what Predatory Pricing is. Microsoft is not selling something at a drop dead pricing scheme. XP for Netbooks is costing OEM a whopping $7 per License. If anything Microsoft is forcing these OEMs to buy the more expensive Windows 7 License because they know that their main customer base wouldn't be happy with the limitations of Starter. How the hell is raising the price, predatory pricing?
Market Segmentation, I will agree, but there is nothing illegal with that. It's Microsoft's product. They can put limitations on Licenses. It's just like OEM licenses.
A closer law analogy would be you can't smoke if riding a bike, but you can smoke in your car. Limiting what you can do on the crappier (almost useless) hardware.
Actually, the bike-motorcycle-car analogy works for netbook-laptop-tower better then I thought when I first wrote this. A bike is good for a few small things, but you need the power of the other two to do anything important.
who's going to use ssd on a cheap netbook? i used my ssd on my desktop.(corsiar p256)
Dell mini 9 and HP's netbook all use SSD. Most 9" eeePC use SSD. There are cheaper slower SSD.
What is wrong with you people getting soo mad about this? MS controlling the market, etc? Are you kidding me? If you want a faster netbook with Windows you get premium instead of starter. How hard is that to understand? And OMG they're controlling the market?? Get Linux! Better tell Apple to stop selling OS X on Macs since they're controlling their market!!! Get over it!
Oh. My. God. Thank You.
"Better tell Apple to stop selling OS X on Macs"
NO. They need to license to other OEMs, not stop preinstalling it. OS X is in many ways the best desktop on earth right now. Until that changes entirely, it should be preinstalled on as many computers as possible.
"OS X is in many ways the best desktop on earth right now."
The sentence is wrong in so many ways. I don't know where to start.
Meh, who cares. If I manage to find something I need a netbook for that my iPhone doesn't already cover I'll just get a Mini 9 and run OSx86 on it.
Why should screen size be a factor? I know people with 17" laptops who use it for nothing but Facebook, less than what many people do on their small netbooks.
64GB SSD min for Win7 Starter? Are they drunk?
Win7 ultimate installs fine in 8GB, and if you strip the junk you have 4GB free - enough for everything needed unless it's your primary laptop.
As much as I agree with the first comment, isn't this a good thing? This means any netbook with a screen over 10.2" will have Windows 7 Home Premium and NOT the watered down version. Had they kept with the earlyer specs of Windows Vista Basic, anything with a 12.1" screen and under would get the watered down version.
I dont think win7 basic will run well with just 1G RAM...
Well, actually Windows 7 runs fairly well with 1GB of RAM. However, that doesn't explain why MS put that restriction.
Oh come on, 1GB of RAM and single core? This is 2009 Microsoft. Starter Edition is 32bit only anyway, so it's not like users can use more than 4GB of RAM. This is stupid. I don't see the point of this. And what's with max of 64GB SSD? WTF is that supposed to mean?
is there a reason not to install the full version of windows 7? i have it running on a mini dell and its awesome. (other then the OS taking up about 10% of my hd of course)
It's running extremely well on my Mini 9.
Its takes more the freaking a gig of RAM to run Vista, Ive got 2 and its awful.