Windows 7 Sets Direction of Low-Power CPU Market 369
Vigile writes "News is circulating about Microsoft setting hardware limits for the Windows 7 Starter Edition rather than sticking to a 3-application limit. With just a few simple specifications, Microsoft has set the tech world spinning — not only is Microsoft deciding that a netbook is now defined as having a 10.2-in. or smaller screen, but by setting a 15-watt limit to CPU thermal dissipation they may have inadvertently set the direction of CPU technology for years to come. If Microsoft sticks to that licensing spec, then AMD, Intel, VIA, and maybe even NVIDIA (who might be building an x86 CPU) will no doubt put a new focus on power efficiency in order to cash in on the lucrative netbook market."
Might wait to see if this turns out to be true (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't see a whole lot of netbooks selling with the starter edition in the developed markets.
Or... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:lacking info (Score:5, Insightful)
the article didn't explain how they were going to improve the BSOD
That's not all they wouldn't explain:
Would Microsoft charge PC makers less per copy for Home Premium than it charges to run the exact same Home Premium SKU on a full-fledged notebook or desktop system? Would Microsoft attempt to establish itself as the judge of what is a "netbook"? Microsoft officials had nothing more to say about my questions.
The problem has become that there is simply nothing left to improve in a typical OS for the vast majority of users. If you have a browser, an spreadsheet, and a wordprocessor, you cover 95% of your users' needs. So what can you do for sales? This seems to be the plan: (1) Increase general shininess and bling. (2) Reduce essential functionality relative to earlier distributions. (3) Price the OS on tiers based on restoring the essential functionality. You are seeing the self destruction of an antiquated business model, namely that OS sales should be profitable.
Here is a hint to all of the companies in the OS market: give your best distribution awayand use it as a client for services that google can't profitably provide for free.
That's the future.
That's bass ackwards (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Might wait to see if this turns out to be true (Score:4, Insightful)
The only worry here is that they are going to offer Win7 Starter for sooo cheap that we will end up with pretty much every PC, be it Netbook or low cost desktop, that would have come with XP Home or Vista Home Basic end up with Win7 Starter.
On the bright side, when installing Linux on those machines we'll waste much less money on the "Microsoft tax".
Windows users may not be getting a great deal though.
windows 7? (Score:3, Insightful)
most of the netbook still have options that use some flavor of linux as OS, so who cares if it runs Windows 7 or not? Personally I don't want my netbook running Windows 7 or even XP because it's not designed for it (consuming too much resource).
"new" focus on power efficiency? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:And how do they go... (Score:4, Insightful)
Why can't I just go and install Starter Edition on my Pentium D?
Oh i'm sure you will be able to install it if you get your hands on a non-vendor specific copy or a vendor specific copy of the right brand.
MS doesn't really give a fuck if some masochist geek installs starter on a higher powered machine though. This is about what the big OEMs that use bios locked copies of windows and follow the rules because they are big enough that breaking the rules would be an unacceptable risk.
Just like now you can't buy an XP home netbook from the manufacturer with more than 1GB of ram but there is nothing technical (and I don't think anything legal either though IANAL) stopping you ripping out the 1GB stick and dropping in a 2GB or on some models even a 4GB one.
Re:And how do they go... (Score:3, Insightful)
They don't have to. This is the OEM pricing contract for each specific computer model. The manufacturer provides the model specs and has to sign off that it is truthful. If Microsoft later finds the model did not meet specs (by someone that works for Microsoft buying one and testing it, some day) then Microsoft comes back to the manufacturer and demands payment for the pricing difference multiplied by the number of models sold.
You might not be able to buy a standalone full install copy of Starter Edition. It will probably be OEM only, for pre-installation on a PC meeting the specifications.
This would be great for Linux (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:lacking info (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Might wait to see if this turns out to be true (Score:3, Insightful)
It grieves me immensely to say this, but nothing Microsoft does will stop netbooks from shipping with Windows installed. No amount of self-inflicted sabotage can compensate for the irrational loss aversion [wikipedia.org] that characterises most computer users. They just don't feel they can afford to be without Windows.
... And for the next few years, 'Windows' will mean Windows 7.
Not lawsuits - workarounds. For those of us who remember, multi-tasking (after a fashion) was made possible on Windows 3.1 via the TSR - Terminate-and-Stay-Resident programs that left a stub, inert but still in RAM - that allowed a limited task-switching capability.
In Windows 7, I expect we'll see 'broker' services, similar to the ones that some software makers (e.g. Adobe) use to break themselves out of the IE sandbox and to interact with the system. A small broker service that maintains state for a given application will be enough to allow fairly quick task-switching while fooling Windows 7 into believing that there are only 3 apps running at a time.
For my part, I find this scenario repugnant. Whether I like it or not, though, spending time and effort working around designed-in technical limitations that have everything to do with marketing and nothing whatsoever to do with actual technical capability... well, that's been the geek's lot in life ever since login limits on the old proprietary Unix mainframes.
And as much as I decry such phenomena, I still think it's important to recollect that it's circumstances like these that led to the creation of the Free Software Foundation. We will see salutary side-effects in such an environment. If all goes well, it might well fuel an entirely new generation of Stallmans.
We shouldn't need another generation of Stallmans. But if history is any guide, they aren't obsolete yet.
Re:The question is (Score:3, Insightful)
MS has no right to decide which part of their operating system I am "permitted" to use
Why not? As you say, it's their operating system, not yours. If you only pay $15 for a cut-down version of the OS, why do you think you're entitled to more than you paid for?
Re:The question is (Score:2, Insightful)
How, under any interpretation of "Informative" is the above post just that? It's a rant about how he doesn't like business practices, and then uses that to justify his decision to break the law.
Let me rephrase:
I don't like how the GPL *forces* me to share any code I build out of other code I took. I'm just going to strip off all the GPL headers and ship my code/product without giving anything back! Damn the OSS movement and their greedy practices!
Re:Might wait to see if this turns out to be true (Score:1, Insightful)
Not "upgrade", uncripple
Re:Might wait to see if this turns out to be true (Score:5, Insightful)
The lowering of the bar (Score:5, Insightful)
.
If Microsoft is successful (through marketing "incentives") in strong-arming hardware OEMs to lower the hardware capabilities of future netbooks, that is nothing less than an enormous win for Microsoft.
I am nothing but amazed that the hardware OEMs do nothing but roll over and say to Microsoft, "please, Sir, may I have another."
Re:Might wait to see if this turns out to be true (Score:3, Insightful)
Since Microsoft has imposed an artificial limitation that was not previously present
On their product, that they sell. I understand the frustration, but not the sense of entitlement.
We have other options, after all.
Re:Lucrative Netbook Market? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, it's software. Even if you get $0,01 per copy you're still better off than if you wouldn't be in this market at all. Remember, an additional copy still comes to no additional cost.
Perhaps though it is lucrative as in "lose this market to Linux and it will be the beginning of the end". So even paying OEM's to install Windows could be profitable because such move secures desktop OS monopoly further.
Microsoft Must Die (Score:3, Insightful)
And cloud computing could make that happen because it should make the client OS irrelevant. We don't have to do anything "to" Microsoft. Just build world-class productivity apps that use open standards and run in the cloud. This forces Microsoft to compete on a more level playing field as it can no longer leverage its OS hegemony because Firefox on Linux works exactly like Firefox on Windows XP/Vista/7.
Google Docs is one potential Microsoft killer. Unfortunately, Google Docs is _still_ in beta (after how many years? -- if we count Writely, and I think we should) and you'd better believe it's "beta" because its still feature poor (which is more an "alpha" characteristic) and buggy (I just lost a document I was working on last night). OK, Windows users will be used to that behvior, but that's not the point. Google, perhaps the most of all the major cloud computing vendors (e.g., Amazon, Yahoo!), has the best chance to finally put Microsoft in its place by making the OS irrelevant.
And, that's how you kill Microsoft.
So, what's the problem, Google? Why aren't you throwing everything you have at making Google Docs a world-class, cloud-based productivity application suite? Or, at least, making it a priority project (which, at present, it obviously is not)? As it currently stands, the Google Docs mini-suite is a good start, but its apps are not yet good enough to get hardcore users of Microsoft productivity apps to switch. Until that happens, Microsoft is going to continue to attempt to control the "cloud threat" using its Windows OS. When netbooks can access powerful applications in the non-Microsoft cloud, it won't matter (for a large portion of the netbook owners/buyers) what OS is running on their cloud client. And, that is Microsoft's worst nightmare.
In closing, I would be remiss to not point out that the cloud already is helping make Microsoft's OS-enforced "app limit" irrelevant. Firefox only counts as one OS application. But, Google Docs is actually three applications (writer, spreadsheet, presentation tool). So the "three app" limit is relatively easy to get around when you're working in the cloud.
When cloud-based apps get good enough and the other cost-reducing advantages (especially to business owners) of cloud computing are considered, there will be no rational reason why Microsoft doesn't become "just another cloud computing vendor."
Re:lacking info (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem has become that there is simply nothing left to improve in a typical OS for the vast majority of users.
"Everything that can be invented has been invented."
Re:Might wait to see if this turns out to be true (Score:2, Insightful)
If ANY program (or OS) has artificial limitations deliberately put in place with the ONLY reason being to increase the developers profit, that is the very definition of crippleware.
Re:lacking info (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, there's plenty to improve in a typical OS: making the OS more componentized, programmable, adding new layers of APIs for different functional domains, and otherwise supporting the developers that write code for that OS, so that they can be more productive and write more functional code in a fraction of time. For example, things like COM, WMI, DirectX, .NET, or the new WDF toolkit for driver development in Windows Vista. I don't see how you can separate any of this from the rest of the OS.
You don't see how it can be separate? Like GTK, OpenGL... shall I go on? I hope you mean that you CAN see how it could be separated, but Microsoft WON'T separate it. They make too much money when people can't take the DirectX modules from Windows and hack them into OSX/Linux. Technically, or legally.
Re:lacking info (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:lacking info (Score:2, Insightful)
A note to net.libertarians (Score:4, Insightful)
This is proof that corporations that arise from your beloved "market" can be every bit as evil and draconian as the government.
And don't even give me that B.S. that monopolies wouldn't arise if there was less government intervention in markets, Stadard oil arising when there was NO government intervention in markets ring a bell? In short Ayn Rand fans time to find another paradigm that maps the real world.
A smart person questions BOTH concentrated public and private power which is why I hope OSS wins in the long run as it's inherently decentralized and avoids BOTH public and private monopolies on production that lead to debacles like this on private side and debacles like the "v-chip" on the public side.
Re:Microsoft Must Die (Score:3, Insightful)
...And cloud computing could make that happen because it should make the client OS irrelevant....
This might be true for those who have a VERY fast Internet connection. If everybody's Internet connection were as fast as the average hard disk access and at least as reliable, universal network computing, as you describe it will still not kill Microsoft. Even if I had such a connection, I would not trust some outside company to house all my data, ready to give it at the drop of a hat to every Tom Dick and Harry government agency or other legal demand without me even ever knowing about it. At the least, as long as the data is under my control, anybody who wants it has to come to me (possibly with a court order) in order to obtain it. Most large companies may feel they have some responsibility to their stockholders, but not necessarily to their customers. I do not think that anyone at Microsoft is having nightmares about cloud computing happening in the near future.
Re:lacking info (Score:3, Insightful)
Except that few people in the developing world will really be interested in being limited like that. Its only a matter of time before they all run Enterprise. And yes, I live in Africa.
The reason I can't give you a price for "Starter" is there is absolutely no market for it here. Dirt cheap is meaningless compared to free. On top of that a lot will stick with malware target number 1 (XP) because it runs fairly well on low spec machines (think P2-P3).
Then there are the few that have gone or are going the linux route. Nope, no market at all here.
Re:lacking info (Score:1, Insightful)
I'd prefer they make standards like OpenGL, the STL, that sort of thing.
Re:Lucrative Netbook Market? (Score:3, Insightful)
What's lost in margin can be recovered in turnover or volume. With such a low price of around $300 for a netbook, customers can easily justify purchasing one.
It's still risky territory - make it up in volume, and you might just see support costs skyrocket, especially with cheap netbook components. Or if you have a major product recall due to faulty batteries. It doesn't take much to go from making a slim profit to losing substantial amounts of money.
You make a good point about Dell. Nobody's really that interested in their stock anymore, are they? People don't really associate Dell with positive thoughts. It's a stagnating company with not much upside.