Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Will Microsoft blow its netbook lead with Windows 7 crippleware?

When netbooks first came along, they almost all ran Linux. Microsoft, which was stuck with the resource pig known as Windows Vista, simply couldn't compete. So, reluctantly, Microsoft gave Windows XP Home a new lease on life and sold it below cost to OEMs (original equipment manufacturers) to kill the Linux desktop at the root. For this cost, Microsoft was successful, but now Microsoft is about to blow it by replacing XP Home with Windows 7 Starter Edition, which is crippleware by any other name.

Microsoft has been selling crippleware, software that's deliberately had features removed, for some time. The only real difference, for example, between XP Home and XP Pro, besides the price-tag, was that XP Home couldn't handle business domain or AD (Active Directory) networking. To get this one feature activated, millions of business users paid an average of $80 more per PC.

Today, Microsoft continues to sell XP, but the company really, really doesn't want to do this. Why? Because Microsoft is losing money, especially on netbooks, when you buy XP. According to the Wall Street Journal, "the company takes in less than $15 per netbook for Windows XP once marketing rebates are taken into account -- far less than the estimated $50 to $60 it receives for PCs running Windows Vista."

Actually, my friends at the OEMs tell me that it's not even $15. Try about $7 a copy. At either price, Microsoft is losing money every time you buy a copy of XP. Is it any wonder that Microsoft is laying off employees and admitting that its client (Windows desktop) revenue declined 8% as a result of PC market weakness and a continued shift to lower priced netbooks?"

Now Microsoft has billions to burn, but is crushing the Linux desktop worth losing $384-million of revenue a quarter? I don't think so, and neither does Microsoft.

This is why Microsoft has been claiming that Windows 7 will run just great on netbooks. Except, now they're not. Now, Microsoft is telling us that instead of full-strength Windows 7, you'll be getting Windows 7 Starter Edition instead.

Windows 7 Starter Edition limits you to three applications running at once. That's not quite as bad as it sounds.

For instance, an anti-virus program running as a service doesn't count against the limit and neither does running multiple tabs or windows with one application. Of course, if you're like me and you're always running a Web browser, an e-mail client, an IM client and a word processor, you're out of luck. I can see users throwing their netbooks in sheer frustration against the wall when they try, and fail, to run four applications at once.

You also won't get Aero Glass; remote desktop; network domain or AD support; and BitLocker/BitLocker to Go encryption on the Starter Edition. In short, it's crippleware.

So, will users want to pay $100 more per netbook just for Windows 7? I doubt it. So does Intel blogger Josh Bancroft, who wrote, "adding, say, [US] $100 to the cost of a $400 netbook just to pay for Windows 7 is going to be a tough proposition all around." I strongly suspect Microsoft will ask less than a $100 per copy of the Starter Edition, but even so it's hard to see someone wanting to buy this version.

I mean, come on, on the Dell Mini 9 with Ubuntu 8.04, I get not just a full desktop with no limitations, but I also get an office suite and a slew of other applications as well. Heck, I even get a remote desktop, thanks to VNC; Windows AD and domain networking; and disk encryption. These are all features that Microsoft offers, but not on Starter Edition.

Doesn't this Microsoft move tell us what we all really know about Microsoft if we're honest? That Microsoft is in the business of ripping off its customers for every dime they can, and if they can fool people into buying a high-priced, defective-by-design version of Windows they're going to do it.

Just remember, you do have a choice. You can buy desktop Linux. Or, if can't break yourself of the Windows habit, at the least, go for XP, instead of Windows 7 Starter Edition. It will still be your better, not to mention cheaper, netbook choice.

What People Are Saying

put down the pompoms

Mr. Nichols

Shame on you. Put your pompoms down for a minute.

MS will do what is necessary to prevail. They will put out a half-decent product... something overpriced but adequate... and market it successfully. They will make money because they're cheaper than Apple and because Linux will not provide an equivalent option.

The problem is on the Linux side. Linux enthusiasts, such as yourself, are generally satisfied with too little from Linux. They chant about choice and freedom and how Google is their friend and expect mainstream computer users to suffer through command line sessions, and operate without easy access to popular functions, codecs, etc.

5 years ago I thought the Linux was one year away from making an impact on the desktop. Now I know it will never happen. It will not happen no matter what MS does. If MS disappears, 90% of the computer base will simply spend a bit more money for Apple.

Linux is relatively unpopular because the Linux community would rather rant about proprietary software than implement the kind of changes that mainstream computer users need to see in Linux.

And you know all this. You saw it all with netbooks. Yet you'd rather wave your pompoms than deal with the facts.

What do users need?

joejones writes:

"Linux is relatively unpopular because the Linux community would rather rant about proprietary software than implement the kind of changes that mainstream computer users need to see in Linux."

I have never understood why there are still people out there who don't like Linux except for the fact that, of course, it won't run Windows applications, especially the ubiquitous MS Office.

What are those "changes that mainstream computer users need"? As I said, the problem lies in the applications, not in the OS. Most people I know won't switch to Linux simply because they need MS Office (especially for collaborative work when files get edited by multiple users).

So it is not Linux that needs to change, but the software companies who should make Linux versions of their software (MS has Office for the Mac, why not Office for Linux?)

"MS will do what is

"MS will do what is necessary to prevail"

Try telling us all something we didn't already know ?

"They will put out a half-decent product."

I suppose you'd call Vista half decent as well...

"Linux will not provide an equivalent option"

You're right, popular GNU/Linux distributions like Ubuntu WON'T give you crippleware. Instead they will give you something much better, with a nice suite of software as well.

"The problem is on the Linux side... expect mainstream computer users to suffer through command line sessions, and operate without easy access to popular functions, codecs, etc."

Ah, there it is, the usual mantra from Microsoft trolls. What's the matter ? Having trouble clicking that "add and remove software" icon ? There's no need to head for a bash prompt but hey, if you prefer that to a few mouse clicks don't complain that anyone forced you. Popular codecs are a few mouse clicks away too. Seriously, what year do you think this is ? You really need to do better than this tired old argument.

"Linux is relatively unpopular"

Actually I find it is quite popular. Where I work our customer base is still predominantly Windows XP users, but our Linux customer base outnumbers Vista users. Maybe you just hang out with the wrong crowd, or maybe where you work, you just aren't attracting Linux users. They are out there, and if they're not your customers, they're ours. Sucks to be you I guess.

"And you know all this. You saw it all with netbooks."

Actually, here in Australia (and elsewhere) the situation with netbooks is being investigated because the way Linux netbooks have become almost impossible to get in a relatively short time is so on the nose that everybody knows Microsoft has monopolised the market through the major OEM's. In less than 12 months we've gone from a market where Linux based netbooks were actually quite popular (customers are in fact still requesting them but we can't get them), to a market that is completely monopolised by Microsoft products. In a truly free and competitive market this simply does not happen. You will be hearing more about this in the future.

You really should get yourself a clue about Microsoft's continuing anticompetitive behaviour. Read the ECIS paper that was submitted to the European Commission, it is titled, "Microsoft - A History Of Anticompetitive Behaviour and Consumer Harm". Google it, read it, you might actually learn something.

Dream

I think we should not dream. MS will act if numbers are starting to turn against it. It will adapt his decisions and work on the soft. Extend XP more? Sell less expensive? Make the starter edition run faster on netbooks, even if it would internally look like XP? Or like something else?

But on one thing they have no answer. The price. Many more features are needed for a higher price than they get now for their Netbook XP. And features that can't be matched. That will be hard.

Why anyway did they lower the price so drastically now? Will they be able to create a standard that will make it very hard for the common user to use an alternative so they can increase prices? Will the consumers stand by this time?

I really don't get the point

I really don't get the point of the whining. If you go out and purchase a cheap crappy netbook/web book, of course there are going to be limitations. Those who are generally purchasing these types of machines are usually only light users who don't need a high-power machine. And let's face it - most netbooks struggle to run more than three aps at once anyhow - thus the low price tag!!

As to the debate on Windows v's Linux - to each their own I guess. Personally I think Ubuntu is nothing more than the idiots version of Linux - certainly NOT for the serious Linux user... that's more the realm of SUSE. I once considered the move to linux, but being a graphic artist I was not happy with the choice of either Gimp Shop or a seriously outdated version of Photoshop ported to Wine.

As to one turkey's comment on there being less need for a desktop OS... what planet are you living on?? Ever tried teaching the older generation how to use a PC without an OS?? Most ppl simply want to turn on their machine and get on with things - thus the requirement of an OS so this is actually possible!!

Most netbooks...

"most netbooks struggle to run more than three aps at once anyhow - thus the low price tag!!"

The low price has nothing to do with the ability to run more than 3 applications (Centrino era Celeron 900 clocked to 600MHz for battery life- should be able to do quite a bit of things since that was the median only about 4-5 years ago...) especially non Vista stuff. The XP based machines have 1Gb of RAM and seem a bit sluggish without proper swap. The Linux ones initially came out with 512Mb and were actually snappy with or without swap turned on. My eeePC 701 4G stacked out with 2Gb of RAM can do much more than the 3 apps simultaneously- it could do it with the 512Mb as long as I wasn't trying "fancy" things. But then, I don't do XP, either. More entertaining is that I can do more than just the much ballyhooed Aero stuff on it with Compiz turned on. Can't do that with Vista or Windows 7.

No, the low price has more to do with using a generation back hardware that is waay dirt cheap. XP can do "okay" with 4 or more apps on the things, Linux does it well.

No I suppose you wouldn't

quote:: - most netbooks struggle to run more than three aps at once anyhow

Rubbish, I'm running a 10 inch netbook, a BenQ with Ubuntu 9.04 UNR, and it runs 6 or more seperate applications without breaking a sweat. Those applications include the GIMP, Firefox with multiple Tabs, Open Office.org, gtKam, Evolution Email, an image viewer in slideshow mode, Skype. I've even managed to run Windows XP in a VirtualBox Virtual Machine, while running some of those applications.

Why bother?

Why would someone as adept as yourself with computers use such a limited set of hardware. Purchase prices for netbooks are attractive to people who might only want one for occasional use while traveling. If you intend to do so much computer intensive work, why not simply get a used laptop on eBay for even less money and with more capacity. Better yet, if you have to travel, just enjoy the opportunity and leave the computing for another day when you can return to a more productive environment?

Why Bother?

First, because it's not a bother. a 10 inch netbook, running Ubuntu Netbook Remix, is actually very pleasant to use, can't say the same about using it with MS Windows, so perhaps that's what you are referring to.

The 10 inch net book with UNR is a very pleasant experience, I can quickly run up documents in Open Office.org (default install), touch up my photos, or even do some serious editing, using the GIMP, I can put together a newsletter or presentation using Scribus or OO.o Presentation, all while travelling to the meeting.

On a plane a full size laptop, besides being a pain to carry around, is difficult to use you almost always end up with the machine jammed up against the seat in front of you, the net book doesn't have this problem, and did I mention, it's nice and light, I can carry it like a clutch bag, in fact it's probably not as heavy. I can pull it out an edit documents whenever I have a free moment.

There are lots of advantages to using a Linux powered netbook, these just scratch the surface.

One thing though, It's no bother at all.

Why Netbooks

"Why would someone as adept as yourself with computers use such a limited set of hardware." - How about over 8 hours of battery life? How about a package that weighs under 2.5 lbs? I don't want a used POS 6-lb. laptop (plus power brick) with under 2 hours of battery life. I want something I can leave on all day, and carry with me, that has a decent (10+ inch) screen and a usable keyboard and trackpad. That is why.