Microsoft reportedly bans netbooks with hybrid storage systems, MSI's Wind U115 caught in the middle
By Darren Murph 
posted Jun 6th 2009 5:41PM
posted Jun 6th 2009 5:41PM
Read - MSI Wind U115 on sale
Read - bit-tech report
Please note: If you're a current Engadget commenter, you do not need to re-register. Simply login and you will be prompted to select a username.
I try not to be a Microsoft hater (or any hater for that matter), but this is fucking ridiculous
Just a monkey w/glasses here but don't get why Microsoft would have a problem with hybrid storage system? Can someone explain?
Maybe they realize it will help their OS perform better. Sometimes I think that Microsoft has an extent to how well they want their OS's to perform.
Why is this so hard to understand? Douche-Microsoft doesn't make enough money on XP. They don't want anything really great on XP because that reduces your pressure to pay them serious money for 7 or Vista. They limit netbooks to protect the high-margin business. It's that simple.
And yes, they are MUCH more evil than Apple because it's easy to avoid Apple if you don't like Apple. Try avoiding Douche-Microsoft. They simply count your processor orders from Intel and demand a payment. They are EXACTLY like a government tax because you can't avoid it. And because they are as big as a government, they can afford to have Douche-shills show up here and act all puzzled.
"We've never been fans of Microsoft's ability to put hard limits on netbooks with Windows XP; it's this fact alone that has kept the entire sector from moving forward in terms of specification advancement"
Umm, what about the restrictions that Intel impose?
Ubuntu FTW
It's funny. If it's with Apple locking Mac to their hardware, it's fine. They created the software, they can dictate and completely close availability of their OS. Now, Microsoft imposes two and a half rules...
this report is simply not true at all. this was placed to generate comment. pure and simple. show a microsoft source for this please. i don't think so !
lol...sheep.
exactly.. it's like scaring away business
The Netbook makers need to tell Balmer and Co to jump off a tower block. But they don't have the balls to face down MS.
I'm happy that Microsoft and Intel are doing this.
All it does is speed the demise of the duopoly.
This kind of practice is just the kind of shot in the arm that Linux and ARM based platforms need.
Also, hopefully this will solicit another, bigger fine from the EU.
@Victor:
I agree with you, and that's why I run Linux.
If I got a netbook Windows would be the last thing I put on it anyways. I have no desire to play games on a little netbook and I dont want to wait long for it to load. The point in having one is to jump online and do quick notes on. It's perfect for for general college use because of that.
Ubuntu or other distros would be the ONLY smart choice to begin with.
Or everyone could just stop complaining and buy the full version for Windows 7. This restriction is on the STARTER edition. If you want the luxuries of a more powerful netbook, the OEMs can just use the full version. It's like complaining that your free cell phone from Verizon doesn't have a 5 megapixel camera in it.
@Shadow08, No, it's more like complaining that you phone with a 5 megapixel camera has a restriction artificially imposed on it so that it only captures 640x480 unless you pay extra.
Microsoft and Intel are hurting innovation with their monopolistic tactics.
so... putting xp on SSD is bad for MS? how so?
I think MS needs to rethink their control strategies. MS is doing a lot of nonsense this days. Try bringing down the prices of Windows 7 and you will see the hybrid system will be a problem for not much longer.
I've been using 7 lately, on a broad spectrum of hardware. From an old IBM Thinkpad A31 with the original Pentium 4 and ATi Radeon 7500 32MB, all the way up to a Phenom X4 955 (OCing 4+GHz), twin HD Radeon 4890 2GB, 4GB DDR3-2133 machine, and it is incredibly powerful. It performs amazingly across the board, and hardware support is surprisingly well covered. When I get around to figuring out how to put it on my intel celery stick based EEE 4G, I think that'll be the ultimate test.
if it performs well there, I'm waiting till 7 comes out and buying the best netbook on the market preleaded with Linux, and putting 7 on it. Windows XP on an EEE sucks ASS though, so its 7 or Linux.
And yes, I am eagerly awaiting giving Microsoft however many hundreds of dollars they demand for 7. I have historically hated MS, and used Linux wherever I can, and pirated anything I need. Of the 60+ computers that have made their way through my home network, I think 1 MIGHT have been legally licensed. The way I see it? One legal license, one person, many computers with that. I know that's not how MS looks at it, but I'll be more open to buying 7, so I may have a few legal copies.
@Summertime
Here's your proof...
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2009/06/04/microsoft-no-netbooks-with-hybrid-storage/1
For those that didnt get any explanation out of the comments, the article linked above me said it perfectly.
"Hybrid storage works in the Wind by installing the OS onto the SSD portion of the U115, then offering 160GB of standard 2.5" hard drive as additional mass storage which can be turned on and off on a whim to save power: it's just like having a big-ass USB key, but built in. And faster."
Whats the problem here ?
I don't see a problem with it and I don't see a reason to make a fuss over it either. Just move on. Life goes on, with XP or without it.
the problem is that Microsoft sells OSes, they have no business telling OEMS how to build computers. OEMs are innovating, and Microsoft is changing the terms of selling Windows after the fact. Any other company couldn't get away with that.
Stop hating on Apple because Apple sells computers...and makes their own OS to put on there. They don't tell anybody ELSE what to do an that's 100% legit. Complaining about OSX is like complaining that BMW won't sell engines in Fords.
Microsoft is selling operating systems, yes. Thus they get to tell the OEMs exactly what kind of hardware their OS gets installed on. If they don't agree to the terms then they can't use their OS. It's simple really.
And when the suppliers screw up the hardware or drivers, Microsoft gets the flak for it. Hence, why apple gets to decide even the power cords they use.
I have trouble seeing what Microsoft is gaining by doing this.
Perceived control. That's what. They have no actual control, of course, and this will simply catalyze the development of a cheap, Linux-based alternative.
They want to ID lock our computers. Next will be weapons.
@Haikibutsu
great mgs reference!
i lol'd
It's ok, Im good friends with a PC launderer. lol
Eye Have You..
rrrrrrrhghghgg Drebin .. stop your monkey from stealing my smokes..
Simple. Microsoft doesn't like netbooks.
Netbooks dragged the bottom spec right down to below Vista's minimum usable spec. So MS were forced to keep XP around for much longer than they expected. It was supposed to be end of sales last year.
XP could be sold for next to nothing, as the development costs were paid long ago. Not so with Vista and 7. And people are beginning to get the idea that they are not bound to take what they are given these days. Many have expereinced the pain of OS upgrade for the first time, and the unavoidable orphaned hardware and software.
Netbooks are so much cheaper than a laptop that it is next to impossible to hide the cost of Windows in the price. Especially if the same maker decides to sell a Linux version, so MS must provide a special netbook version. Ever wondered why it was so hard to find a Linux netbook and an XP netbook of the same spec at the same location?
Problem is.. What is a netbook?
Unless MS defines exactly what it is, they risk the OEMs defining more and more powerful netbooks, and putting the cheap Windows version on them.
Personally, If I was an OEM, I'd mention my plans to have a 12 inch netbook with hybrid storage, 4 gig memory and a dual core processor running Linux ready for the Christmas sales period, and see if they shifted their position. This could get interesting. Especially if the OEMs smell blood in the water.
"12 inch netbook with hybrid storage, 4 gig memory and a dual core processor"
How could that be considered a netbook by any stretch of the imagination?
And people bitch about Apple's iron fist and regulations on certain things.
...
Like not being able to (legally) put their OS on any netbook at all? That is a tad bit more extreme than what MS is doing...
Absolutely, but it doesn't make their actions any better. I'm not saying that Apple invented corporate doucheness or are the only practitioners, but Microsoft doing this doesn't help anyone
Um, doesn't Apple stop people from using their OS on ANY system that isn't theirs? This is lame, but doesn't even COMPARE to Apple's level of doosh-baggery.
I don't think you have to sell an OS to OEMs, what I do find a bit galling is manufacturers being told what to do with their licenses after being sold them.
I don't, in fact I never think about Apple until someone mentions them here or on Giz. I use Windows7/xp on all of my comps. and think MS will make a great addition to our(USA) socio-facist government. But right now I'm writing this via my Ubuntu Live USB....suckers.
I have a problem with this, and I don't have a problem with Apple's policy on OS X. Let me explain.
Windows has always been sold to run on any reasonably current x86 platform. As an OEM you could basically configure any machine, anyway you wanted and sell it with Windows, and as a consumer you can purchase Windows and install it on anything capable of running it. This is what is what I like most about windows. The problem for Microsoft is that XP is a really good operating system, and Vista is not. I don't want to get into a Vista / XP discussion, but for most users XP is better than Vista simply because most people are very familiar with it, and it does everything they need it to do (browse, email, solitaire), and Vista is just different enough and slower enough as to be frustrating to the average user. This configuration basically means that there is no reason for the average consumer to upgrade to Vista or probably Windows 7, or even have a desire to get it.
I am OK with Apple restricting OS X because, A, Apple makes computers (where as Microsoft does not) and B, OS X is not, and never has been sold as stand alone for any computer. It is sold for Macs, period, compared to Windows which is sold for anything. Now, some of you may not like that fact, but Apple hasn't arbitrarily changes the rules with OS X, where as Microsoft has. IMO Microsoft is the bigger douche in this case. Instead of restricting the sales of XP, they should make an operating system that people actually want to upgrade to. We will see if Windows 7 is that OS. Forcing you customers to do something they really don't want to do, but have no choice, is a great way to get them to buy a Mac...
Goddamn, I'd hate to be the an SEO in charge of marketing douche or douche-related products the way you all talk.
Good English.
GayLord Perry
M$=B$
That's right, lets fuck MSI for trying to make our software run faster. All in sake of, I don't know, forcing them to OEM a Vista Starter or something?
Sometimes MS acts all tyranny just for fun, it seems.
I had initially read your last line as "act all tranny." LOL
And I'm not that great with the working of computers. How does the hybrid storage make the software run quicker? I thought that was a function of RAM and processor speed.
Flash drives have faster read speed than normal hard drives. So by putting the OS files on the SSD, it allows for faster boot times and makes background routines a bit faster. Considering this is a netbook, those little increases add up to a nearly usable experience.
So really, Microsoft is making no sense here.
M$ doesn't want anyone buying XP. That's all there is to it.
I personally think MS should have killed xp a long time ago. But with the whole 'downgrade' bullshit, they crated the problem and now they don't have a solution (apart from "just wait for 7!"). And really, a decent running xp on that MSI is better than no Windows at all on it for MS, but apparently they rather stay in they're shit bath and not realize that there are alternatives.
They want only the slower machines running Xp so Vista seems faster. Easy.
Are you kidding me? This is amazing! This should be on every computer!
Fuck!
Sell it without an OS or with Linux (Android, Moblin, or whatever) problem solved.
Problem NOT solved if you actually want to sell the damned things. The return rate of Linux based netbooks clearly shows that the AVERAGE consumer wants them with Windows.
MS knows this, and they don't want to lose revenue by selling cheapo licenses of XP. I agree it's annoying but it's not exactly "it's this fact alone that has kept the entire sector from moving forward in terms of specification advancement." which is absolute BS on the part of Darren Murph.
"without an OS or with Linux"
Did you read the first part or did you just jump in without any clue as to what I posted when you saw the word "Linux"?
Reading, it's what grown-ups do.
Way to stop progress Microsoft.
Here's my advice, go illegally download Intels Moblin Linux V2.0, then illegally install more than 1GB of ram, also why you are at it illegally bathe in your virus free freedom as your netbook boots in 8 seconds.
I was thinking of that but right now at least, Moblin sucks.
Im torn. Microsoft are a business, without them we wouldnt have Windows at all, they should be able to do what they please. On the other hand it inconvineances us, the consumers.
Sometimes capitalism is a bitch.
Anticompetetive much?
I really enjoy reading everyone's twin black streaks that are the result of spinning their wheels!!! I am not a computer whiz kid, facts be known, I,m not a kid, but that's getting away from the real thing. NOW, BACK IN ANCIENT HISTORY (1970's), THERE WAS THIS OPERATING SYSTEM KIND OF SIMILAR TO WHAT IS TODAY's VERSION OF UBUNTU. YOU KNOW, FREE TO BE USED AS THE INDIVIDUAL WISHED TO USE IT. THEN, ALONG CAME THESE COLLEGE KIDS THAT MADE A FEW CHANGES TO THE BASIC PUBLIC DOMAIN OPERATING SYSTEM AND CALLED IT "WINDOWS", HAD A JUDGE SIGN OFF THAT IT WAS TOTALLY DIFFERENT THAN THIS PUBLIC DOMAIN PROGRAM, AND A WHOLE NEW BUSINESS WAS STARTED. FIRST CAME WINDOWS 3, THEN VERSION 3.1, WHICH WAS SOLD ON THESE WIERD FLAT THINGS CALLED 3.5 INCH FLOPPIES BESCUSE THEY COULD HOLD MORE THAN THE ORIGINAL 5 INCH FLOPPY THAT WAS REALLY APTLY DISCRIBED BECAUSE YOU COULD REALLY BEND IT (JUST NOT SO FAR AS TO PUT A CREASE IN IT). AND NOW YOU KNOW WHY YOUR HARD DRIVE IS ALWAYS DRIVE 'C', BECAUSE YOU HAD TWO FLOPPY DRIVES, ONE FOR 5 INCH DISC'S AND ONE FOR 3.5 INCH. THEN WINDOWS 3.1 WAS SELLING LIKE SOMETHING THAT EVERYONE HAD TO HAVE, SO DEAR MICROSOFT HAD TO UP THE ANTI BY 'INVENTING' A NEW OPERATING SYSTEM, WINDOWS 95. NOW BUSINESS REALLY IMPROVED, SO THINGS HAD TO CHANGE, THUS 'WINDOWS 98', THEN 'WINDOWS 98 SECOND EDDITION' , WHICH BRINGS US TO ALL THE VERSIONS OF 'WINDOWS 2000, 2K, THEN XP, AND NOW THE PRESENT BIG TWO THAT ARE BEING REVISED TO WIN 7. I HOPE YOU REALIZE THAT THE ABOVE TOOK PLACE IN LESS THAN 40 (FORTY) YEARS! Now, we seem to have a little rumble about how 'Win 7' is being stuffed down our throats, because Microsoft wants to continue being the primary operating system of choice. Who really cares that an operating system is written and compiled in what language, so long as it is easier and more loaded with useless trivia than the last operating system! I , WHO NOW OWN THE LATEST ADDITION TO THE OPERATING SYSTEMS OF THE WORLD, NOW CAN BRAG ABOUT HOW I OWN MY COPY OF THE LATEST RENDERRING. I AM NOW THE BIG KID ON THE BLOCK, even though my mind is still trying to grasp 'Windows 3.0' and I haven't a clue about the new system, I OWN MY COPY, SO THERE!!!!
The news in the article does indeed suck but I'd be very interested to learn how this has an "anticompetitive" angle. Frankly, if anything, it makes Windows-based Netbooks less competitive against alternatives because Microsoft won't allow it to run as well as it could for a given price.
this goes to show you why it is so fucking important to row your own
damn boat. And as you can clearly see, there are
restrictions to licensing Microsoft's shit. Ha!
Na na!
I would love Apple to do ads where the generic pc, which is so very
cheap, can't do jack shit to the OS cause they don't have daddy's
permission.
Oooooooh!
Somebody got schooled!!!
What the fuck are you talking about? At least Microsoft allows you to build a system yourself from components you choose and put their software on it. Hell you can still even buy netbooks with Windows on it, this only effects some.
Still much better than Apples OS bullshit.
@The Walrus
This is slightly worse: Apple lets you know right out of the gate that you can't use it's OS on non-Apple hardware. What Microsoft is doing is, mid-stream, changing what it allows you to do with Windows. That's like having you build your computer from scratch, putting XP on it, and then having MS tell you that a >250 GB Hard drive and >2 Ghz processor aren't allowed.
It's not though. From this, it seem Microsoft still allows the individual persons to put it on what they want, just not OEM. Apple allows neither.
What MS is effectively doing is anti-free market: they have a few products XP, Vista, Windows 7, that are all offered at different pricepoints (or will be as Windows 7 is rolled out, and the name Vista is removed from the MS Website/Internet, etc) Vista and Windows 7 are the same thing, its just overall a better marketing campaign/product with Windows 7.
OK. So what MS is doing is saying, "see all these price points? we don't want you to buy the low end stuff. Yaya, we know its good enough for you, but it shouldn't be, you should buy our more expensive products."
The fact that people dont WANT to buy their newer, better products, is THEIR fault, not the customers' fault. And it sure isn't the OEM, who's basically listening to their own sales teams on what people want.
No it would be like,
"Hello, I'm a Mac"
"and I'm a PC"
"And I'm PC's father, and I don't want to go to a retirement home...!"
Mac "What, what's going on PC, this is your dad?"
PC "Some crazy retro freaks are using Windows XP instead of Vista.. I think its time to put dad in an old folks home.."
PC's Father "But I'm just as useful as I was in 2001~"
PC "That's nice dad, but you're only 15 bucks a lisence. Time's have changed... The big guy upstairs (Ballmer) just wants you to be happy, and you know, we don't want you overworking yourself..."
And after all that, you can still buy XP and put it on whatever you want.
why should MSI care about this? they can just sell it with out a pre-loaded OS if microsoft doesn't like anything
First they set limit on what a netbook can be, now they ban the best thing used in laptops in years? Pff.
No, they're just not allowing it to have Windows XP. Microsoft is trying to phase out XP, and shit, it's been 8 years, they *should* phase it out. Obviously, the only reason they were still licensing XP is because of netbooks, but the idea is that if a netbook exceeds certain specifications, it should come with Vista or 7 instead of XP. I think using the word bans is a bullshit term in this situation since it does NOT describe what's going on here at all, and of course as I check the top of the page I can see why that word was used in the headline without mentioning XP at all.
I'm not saying that this particular move is good or anything, but someone does need to start defining what a netbook is. Microsoft setting certain minimum and maximum specs is one good way to do it and keep OEMs from blurring what is a great market of computers. The average consumer should be able to clearly see the differences, or else it's another clueless decision added to the mix.
It's a laptop. There. Done. No more confusion. No more M$ bullshit constraints.
No, this is not "a good way" to define anything. Definitions should come from social norms and values, not from corporations looking to profit in a certain sector. Let each company put out what it wants, market it, and see what the public wants. These are all small/portable computers... eventually people will buy what appeals to them with the form and features that they happen to want.
why should there be a definition of a netbook? especially one that relies on how fast it can perform? If we have the technology to make a notebook that is lighter, smaller, and faster than some huge 7-lb 15" clunker, i sure as hell don't want some monopolistic corporation imposing some arbitrary "definition" to help sell its shit. even if we're not there yet, these stupid rules are preventing innovation that could get us there one day.
It's like Obama and the car company's.
No.
Wow, full of fail.
Amazingly so.
can't someone just dump a hack on it? I doubt its gonna be a big deal.
This has got to be bull. I can see them barring XP from future hybrid storage netbooks, but forcing MSI to pull a product off the shelves by leveraging their monopoly on the OS market is nonsensical. I just don't see their legal department allowing it (unless they're too busy dealing with all the rest of the antitrust oversight they have on them already).
I wonder what the legalities are here - how does this licensing work? If they produced the product without MS saying there was anything wrong I should think there would be potential damages here... if they've designed and marketed a product that they had no idea would later be rejected by MS. I'm kind of hoping this does become a legal issue just to see where this goes for OEMs in the future. This could set some huge precedents. Imagine if suddenly OEMs had to OK every product with MS to see if the license would be extended (like the iphone app store). This would squash many innovations because companies wouldn't want to develop something it couldn't use.
Thats fine, can they sell it without the OS at a lower cost? Then we can run linux, or just pirate windows for free
Anyone want to stick it to Microsoft?
Give me 500$ and I'll buy one of those laptops! That'll teach them!
Give me your name, account and social securities number with your bank name and I'll wire transfer the money to you.
Someone mind explaining how Microsoft is "banning" them?
Sounds like Apple fanboyism has a part in this.
They will not allow the OEM to obtain a license of XP for cheap since it is no longer a "netbook" and must pay the same price as any other laptop. Microsoft sells licenses for cheap if they are to be installed on a netbook and they don't want the netbooks to be too powerful so that if people want power, they have to get a computer whose windows license cost more.
Simple: The reason they are doing this is because the price paid for buying Windows XP for a netbook is much lower than buying it for a normal laptop (i.e. the price paid by Asus, Dell, etc.); somthing like $60 compared to $10. So Microsoft needs some way to differentiate the two, and this is one way (another is max 1 GB RAM, and some other stuff).
And really, I think this is not unreasonable for Microsoft since they want to be able to continue charging the $60 for normal computers, and therefore they need some way to still be able to sell Windows for netbooks (if they charged $60, Linux netbooks would possible make a comeback).
Note that at their latest financial report, they actually said that they had sold a fair amount of Windows licenses, but that the profit margin was down due to the price for those licenses being lower than normal, i.e. netbooks.
@ S
This is the price they pay for trying to compete with Linux by so drastically reducing their prices, they're either going to lose money hand over fist or their going to look ridiculous in the process (or perhaps both). Really MS should be in the game of making something people want to pay the extra $60 for, rather than trying to force a broader split in the netbook/laptop markets. They certainly have the resources to do that - and W7 is looking nice. Turn that into a really optimized netbook contender, with specific features designed to take advantage of the small form rather than cope with it, and MS could stand to make some money. What they're doing now is just using their clout to keep a grasp on the market. I don't think that ever works in the long run... look at GM and their initial response to electric/hybrid vehicles.
so this is life without walls?
I think you hit the nail on the head.
The fact that there are no walls completely makes me forget that there is an 800lb gorilla chained to my leg
Hein!? Quoi?! De kesser qui se passe?!
... this is uber lame. oO
Did I read the article correctly? Microsoft doesn't want XP on a HDD? Specifically a SSD? Uh...ok?
No, you didn't read it correctly, and this isn't the whole story.
How does adding a faster SSD to an atom powered machine make it not a "Netbook"?
Seems like engadget left out some details in their report to get extra anti microsoft comments. Seems the MSI U115 is the only one effected at the moment, and as far as i can tell it's only for XP Home. So technically they could install XP media center edition, or XP pro and all is well. If it were me, and I bought one with XP home, Id buy a copy of XP pro to install anyway.
Engadget, if you're going to put up new on your site, maybe you could include the whole thing, instead of whatever suits your agenda.
What a great decision. Stellar job there.
hay if they keep it throw Ubuntu or Moblin or Jolicloud on it and drop the price to $350 and I'd buy that
coffee next to lappy = spill waiting to happen.
shweet
If they wanted me to switch from XP, they should have made an OS that I could use and enjoy. But instead, we just get limits and more limits. I'm quite fed up with them imposing restrictions on an operating system I'm more comfortable with. I was considering buying Windows 7, as it does look nice, but I have changed my mind, just to "stick it to the man."