

Microsoft's Windows 7 Starter is a gift to Google - fromedome
http://www.businessinsider.com/microsofts-windows-7-starter-is-a-gift-to-google-2009-4

======
acangiano
As I commented a few days ago, Microsoft hasn't learned much from the Vista
fiasco. Just deliver two versions already: a home one and a professional one.
The Pro one would cost slightly more and offer more advanced features that the
(average) home user won't care about. Limiting the number of applications you
can run is an idiotic move. Foolish. There is no other way to put it, netbook
with limited resources or not. If they want to create a Windows 7 Netbook
Edition, they should focus on reducing the OS footprint, not imposing limits
on what their users can do.

~~~
latortuga
I disagree with you for the same reason that Apple doesn't allow their OS to
run on any hardware but their own. It's a user experience decision. I'm
willing to believe that Microsoft put plenty of testing into Windows 7 on
suboptimal hardware and determined that performance suffers with more than 3
applications open. I can't cite it at the moment but recall the Google study
that compared user satisfaction with response time versus number of results.
If it's significantly slower, users will be more unhappy with it and will
probably blame Windows and not their applications or hardware, regardless of
the reason (this is conjecture, I'll admit, but conjecture based on personal
experience with people who blindly hate Windows).

In the end, if they limit the number of open programs to three, it's very
possible that users will look more favorably upon the performance/stability of
Windows 7.

~~~
mechanical_fish
_It's a user experience decision_

Maybe, but if so it's a bad branding decision.

The problem is not only that the "improved user experience" looks too much
like "deliberate crippling". It's also that they use the same _name_ for the
crippled version. They will be derided for that, and that bad PR is going to
carry over to the entire Windows 7 brand. What are they thinking?

Apple put a Mac OS with a "different user experience" on the iPhone. But they
didn't advertise that to anyone but developers. The word "Mac" is not
mentioned in connection with the phone. The iPhone has a _really_ different
user experience -- it's not just the Mac OS on slow hardware with a one-app-
at-once limitation, it's a whole different universe. And it is very
deliberately branded, _not_ as a very small, kind of slow portable computer
with no keyboard, but as the world's best phone.

~~~
GrandMasterBirt
This is exactly right... MS is marketing it as windows 7 srtarter.. Should be
windows notebook 1.0, hey 2.0 will come out at same time as windows 8. Cool.
Even nicer if they changed the interface so the "netbook" feels like a netbook
with a different ui and so on. This way nobody feels like they got the crummy
windows and ms is milking em, they just got something different... And ms gets
to sell dumbed down oses. Windows 7 just aint compatable with your pos
notebook. Ok get windows notebook 1.0.

I still feel that selling a crippled os like xp vs xp pro is just plain ol
evil... Vista is worse and no lessob learned

~~~
mechanical_fish
_I still feel that selling a crippled os like xp vs xp pro is just plain ol
evil... Vista is worse_

And that's another reason why this is a bad move: Microsoft has a _history_ of
this sort of thing -- their confusing product lineup has been the butt of
jokes for years -- so the negative stories just write themselves.

Yes, I believe I _was_ hinting that Microsoft should have released the netbook
version of Win7 under another name. But then there's a different problem: It
may be a bit late to introduce Windows Netbook 1.0, because they've already
shipped thousands of netbooks with full-blown XP running on them. It's not a
secret that you can run XP on a netbook. Are people going to trade "up" to
Netbook 1.0 from XP? Only if it's actually _better_ \-- it's not enough just
to change the name.

Once again, we see that one of Microsoft's most serious competitors is itself
from ten years ago. I guess there are worse problems to have in the short run,
but it's a serious problem when you're trying to move forward.

------
eli
I personally don't think we'll see a whole lot of Windows Starter edition. I
think it will mostly be sold in developing countries and on some of the
crappier netbooks. You weren't going to have much fun with Excel, IE, Word,
and Powerpoint open on an Atom processor with 1 gig of memory anyway.

~~~
sadiq
I wouldn't be so sure on not seeing much Starter.

Microsoft needs the Starter edition to sell to Netbook manufacturers at a
price point they'll accept, which is already more than supported Desktop Linux
distributions cost (from say Canonical or Xandros).

The specs of Netbooks are at the moment restricted by the discounted-XP
licensing arrangements from Microsoft (single core Atom processor, 1GB ram,
certain size screen.. etc..).

Those restrictions can't stay in effect indefinately and what with the pace of
semiconductor development, we'll see dual-core processors with a couple of
gigs of ram inside the same price/power ratios we've used to with the current
generation of Netbooks.

It's really lose-lose for Microsoft in terms of Netbooks not cannibalising
their existing notebook OS profit.

They can't charge more than the $15 or so they're currently charging for XP,
for Windows 7. OEMs are gaining more experience with integrating Linux with
their hardware and they'll use this as leverage.

They can't restrict the specs of machines for much longer, or you'll be able
to buy a low-spec Netbook running XP or a far faster Linux-based one for
essentially the same price. Not a good outcome either.

If they don't restrict the specs, they need to restrict the software and hope
they can convert the customers up to a more expensive version of Windows.

I personally think the last strategy, despite potentially playing in to Google
and Linux's hands, is their best one. The outlook really doesn't look good
though.

~~~
Zev
_OEMs are gaining more experience with integrating Linux with their hardware
and they'll use this as leverage._

But users aren't gaining experience in using Linux nearly as fast as OEMs are
at making machines with Linux running.

~~~
sadiq
What I mean by 'integrating Linux' is providing hardware and platforms that
are very well integrated and provide a bit more of a lightweight interface.

Have a look at the stuff HP have done with MIE atop Ubuntu providing a slick
and easy UI for netbook stuff. Some of the work Intel's doing on Moblin too.
Two second boot times are insane.

Of course, there's also a danger we'll have a raft of dozens of half-baked
'easy' UIs running atop of OEMs custom distributions.

------
mdasen
This is just dead on. Microsoft shouldn't be encouraging people to seek refuge
from the OS somewhere else. If Windows 7 Starter Edition is basically just
going to allow you to launch a browser, why not use Linux? Linux can use most
of the same web applications that Windows can use (save for a less-than-
stellar Flash implementation).

Microsoft: your turf is the OS. Many people (myself included) still like the
OS. If you cripple it so badly, the web will look a lot more attractive and
that just won't be good for you in the long-run.

I'm still hoping that Microsoft is more just testing the water around this
limitation than seriously considering it.

~~~
halo
This is a reaction to Linux. This will be sold for basically nothing, and
given the choice between Windows 7 Starter and Linux on the same netbook at
the same price, most people will choose Windows 7 because they're more
familiar with it. This is how they're trying to take on Linux without
cannibalising the sales of the full version.

~~~
latortuga
This is a much better idea than the one I presented in a different thread
above.

------
jmatt
Google Chrome uses separate processes for each tab / window. So I agree that
in some ways it is a gift to Google, but it still encourages use of FF and IE
over Chrome. Assuming Google is planning on expanded use of Chrome, this could
cause problems for their product roadmap.

~~~
prospero
According to <http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=844>, you "can open as many
windows as you want from a single program", which I assume means sub-processes
are not counted.

Also, IE8 creates separate processes for each tab, just like Chrome. Obviously
Microsoft can set whatever double standards they like, but excluding other
browsers would pretty much guarantee the Justice Department re-entering the
mix.

~~~
snprbob86
IE8 actually creates a pool of subprocesses which may or may not be used on
per tab basis.

"It turns out that the vast majority of all IE sessions contain three or fewer
tabs. Accordingly, in Beta 2 we try to give users three efficient tab
processes. This is contingent on the user’s computer capabilities, but the
more capable a computer is, the more processes we will use, up to a point.
Adding more processes gives users much better isolation in the event of a
failure. If each tab is in its own process, websites are completely isolated
from each other."

Source: [http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2008/07/28/ie8-and-
reliabil...](http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2008/07/28/ie8-and-
reliability.aspx)

~~~
ewjordan
_It turns out that the vast majority of all IE sessions contain three or fewer
tabs._

That's only because tab management sucks when you put the tabs along the top
of the screen, and the lack of organization means people feel obligated to
close things out or re-use them rather than popping new tabs.

Since I started using Tree Style Tabs in FF, I'm averaging somewhere around 50
tabs up at a time (of course, I don't even notice this until FF tells me the
number as I close out, since they're all collapsed and well organized).

~~~
raquo
Majority of IE users are 'normal people', they just don't need 50 tabs for
their tasks, they don't live in the internets

~~~
graemep
It is not just geeks who need to have a lot of abs open in their browser.
There are a lot of jobs that involve gathering lots of information, and a lot
of that (intranet as well as internet) is accessed through browsers there
days. Add to that personal and work usage, amusement etc.

------
rymngh
That was dumb. Now people have more reason to choose Linux-based Laptops.

