Running Windows 7 RC on a netbook

Computers running Windows 7 + XP Mode will need two antivirus?

Interesting article in Microsoft Watch:

"Yesterday I spoke with Jeff Price, senior director for the Windows ecosystem team, about the new feature, which for compatibility purposes provides a virtualized Windows XP environment for running older applications.

XPM comprises "both the underlying virtualization layer that has been updated for Windows 7 as well as a pre-built [version] of Windows XP SP3," Jeff said. He asserted that XPM "sets us up for a smoother migration experience for customers, because it allows them to carry forward compatibility with some older XP apps that provides a good transition experience as they're moving to Windows 7." (...)

I was really curious about security. Earlier in the week, eWEEK colleague Larry Seltzer raised legitimate questions about XPM and security protection. So I asked Jeff and got the answer I dreaded.

"We recommend that you secure it just as if you were running it on a physical PC -- meaning you should use anti-virus software and all the security practices that you would within the VM as you would on a Windows XP PC," Jeff responded. I asked if this would mean running two security software products, He replied: "Yes. Yes. Suspenders and a belt." Cute.

In concept, I think XPM is a great idea. Microsoft should have done something like this years ago. But I wonder how enterprises will deal with the licensing and management logistics."

http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/windows_7/talkin_about_windows_7.html

Netbooks with SSDs are NOT the norm.

When can we get over this? Take a look at any Best Buy or even look through the product lines for the major netbook makers.

The typical 2008 netbook has 60GB to 160GB of HARD DRIVE. Most come with 1GB of RAM. Win7 runs just wonderfully on this configuation for the vast majority of things people are likely to run on it.

This weird high/low game that critics of netbooks and Win7 seem to play is getting tiresome. A netbook is NOT a high performance laptop, so expecting that level of performance is being inane - but at the same time - hamstringing Win7 with a configuration almost no one buys (because it's so bad) is being disingenuous.

Anyone who bought a netbook with an SSD did so because they wanted to run Linux. You made that choice - live with it - but don't complain if that lame choice is inapproriate for Windows.

SSDs are not "there" yet....

The SSDs that come stock in netbooks are pretty bad. They are okay for reads, but writes get slower, and slower, and slower. This is because the controller firmware hasn't been optimized and the OS code doesn't know how to properly handle SSDs. Unless you have the very expensive Intel SSD, forget about it. It will be a while before SSDs are worth the money.

If you read up on how SSDs handle writes, especially of a lot of small files (like Windows does all the time) you'll see why they are not worth the money right now.

Boot time is slower, but that is all.

I loaded the RC today on my EEE 1000HE. It runs just as well as 7077 except that it takes much longer to boot, almost a full minute. This is forgivable for me because I hibernate it unless required to restart. Other than that it seems to be more stable than 7077. I was having hangups when using the magnifier (which i discovered by mistake, I wouldn't ordinarily use it), this issue is gone with 7100. It seems to be a little snappier this time around. Give it a shot.

It Works For Me

Windows 7 7077 x86 runs fine on my Compaq nc6230 with 512 MB of memory and 1.87GHz processer speed. Aero also works. :-)

After reading quite a lot of

After reading quite a lot of posts , I'm starting to wonder what constitutes "bad performance"or "good performance". Personally I have not yet tried windows 7 although I have a Compaq presario laptop running vista. With an Intel 965 graphics chipset, 1GB of ram and Intel duo core t5500 @ 1.83GH + a 130GB hard drive I can have firefox open with 8 tabs and photoshop running and still barely lag even with aero.

Now windows 7 is supposed to run better than vista so I expect that a netbook with an atom cpu and a 945GSE would have pretty good performance especialy since the chipset wouldn't have too much work with an 8.9inch screen. The fact that the mini 9 has 8GB of hard drive space only reflects on that particular netbook. There are netbooks with 2GB's of ram and a lot more hard drive space.

I'd rather see some actual numbers say boot time , application loading times , how long it takes to shut down , how responsive the OS itself is and so on. Perhaps even running some benchmarks on it?

What Win7 ver?

Anyone running a leaked "3 applications" cripple-ware version (aka "Starter Edition") yet?

blogs.computerworld.com/microsoft_well_cripple_windows_7_on_netbooks

I have an Acer Aspire One

I have an Acer Aspire One with the same Atom processor, 1 GB RAM, and 120GB hard drive. Windows 7 runs fantastic on it. I can't say I've ever experienced what I would describe as slowness on it. Sure, my Core2Duo system with 4 GB of RAM is quicker, but there has not been any lag on my netbook that I can remember. I am really impressed with how it performs on that machine. I can't wait for RC1 to be publicly available.

I don't have any experience with the Dell netbook, but it sounds like it has its own performance issues aside from Windows 7.