Microsoft removes key limit for Windows 7 Starter
Microsoft confirmed on Friday that, with Windows 7, it will lift the limitation that the entry-level "Starter Edition" run no more than three applications at a time.
With Windows 7, Microsoft is for the first time allowing the product to be used globally, as opposed to just in emerging markets. In particular, Microsoft is positioning it as its lowest-cost Windows 7 option for Netbooks.
Initially, Microsoft said it would maintain that restriction that users run no more than three programs at a time, however speculation has been growing that it would lift that limitation.
"We believe these changes will make Windows 7 Starter an even more attractive option for customers who want a small notebook PC for very basic tasks, like browsing the Web, checking e-mail, and personal productivity," Microsoft said in a blog posting on Friday.
Although Microsoft is lifting the three-application limit, it notes that there are still a number of other differences between Starter and Home Premium, including the former's lack of support for Windows 7's cool graphics, multiple monitors, Windows Media Center or XP Mode, among other features.
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina. 
This is for netbooks. there isn't that much hardware in netbooks, so your assertion is a non-issue.
And FYI, I am running Ubuntu-Eee fine on my Asus EeePC...
It has all apps that could possible make sense to run on a netbook: browser, email, word processing, webcam, networking (both wired and wireless), IM, even a Terminal Service client.
Just like Microsoft's tech support...
Yup. In particular, since running Windows without a virus scanner is a bad thing, it would actually have meant two real applications only, i.e., browser and email client. Trying to run Word? Sorry, have to exit your browser to do that...
It is good that they lifted the limit, but it is amazing and a sign of how far detached from reality they are up in Redmond that they even got the idea of this limit.
Apparently, living with the 3 app limit is not as bad as it sounds:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=844
but I can see how Microsoft would have had a hard time convinving people of that.
However, I wouldn't be so quick to dismay Ubuntu, or other Linux OSs (i.e. Moblin), as being the main reasons for Microsoft ditching these restrictions.
"Just like Microsoft's tech support... "
www.microsoft.com, thousands of service suppliers and hundreds of thousands of technicians worldwide.
Costs money.
Support for Linux is free, at thousands of newsgroups, and lots and lots of local user groups.
Smartest decision they have made in a long time.
If a netbook costs $300 and a smartbook $100, then Windows 7 Starter will have some competition with Android, Ubuntu, and other Linux' distros.
Consumers have already shown that they care a heck of a lot more about their netbooks running their familiar Windows applications, than about anytrhung else. That's why Windows managed to grab 90% of the netbook market in just one year, after startng from close to 0% market share. Plus battery life on the intel Atom is actually very good.
@ t8:" instant on and off"
Why would instant off matter to anyone using a computer?
And please show me any ARM netbook that has real instant on will you?
@ t8:"and it will be much cheaper as the OS is $0 and the ARM chip is cheaper too."
There have been free versions of linux out there for over 10 years now, yet consumers regularly reject Linux laptops/desktops and buy Windows /laptops/desktops over 90% of the time.
I think instant off would be very important for the netbook crowd. I have to imagine that netbooks get a decent amount of work by users who are waiting somewhere, on airplanes, on the bus, taking notes in class, etc, so the ability to hit the power button, shut the lid and go would be a great advantage.
Windows has "instant on and off" built in. It is called the sleep function and it works quite well on both desktops and laptops. (netbooks too)
We are not talking about the same thing here. Any computer can be shut down instantly by hitting the" power off" button . You don't neeed Linux or ARM for that. What that guy was talking about was clicking the "shutdown" option in the operating system and getting your computer to power off instantly.
"That's why Windows managed to grab 90% of the netbook market in just one year"
Except that it didn't. You seem to have had too much of the MS Kool-Aid.
And Windows doesn't even run on ARM processors.
@soonerproud:
Linux also has sleep and hibernate. So, what was your point again?
Instant-on is about fast booting, not sleep or hibernate. Big difference.
Duh, the comment I was posting about did not mention Linux, now did it?
Don't be so sensitive over a darned post. I also use Linux too and will correct false information about that too if some one else has not beat me to it.
This is software people and not a d*mned religion.
I just don't understand why people are will to pay for this? It's just so costly i really see windows future is with companies that can pay, and not with the home use.
Also, what about all those old PC's, with XP going away. The only thing left is to go to open source or trash them?
ps
Ubuntu support is here http://ubuntuforums.org
Of course, at that price, if it doesn't come with PowerDVD or LinDVD out of the box I'll be even less impressed.
While file/program compatibility is still an issue, I suppose it's worth it to get Windows and drop Linux on as a dual boot option. Now, if only it could be bought configured like that.
How does the average customer who doesn't read a ton of tech websites even know the option is there to search for? Hmmm? You got a smartarse answer for that as well? They supposed to just guess at whether the option's even available? You still going to be a smug prick if you reply to this?
Of course this must be Dell's fault because Linux has no means of marketing their os?
But of course, in Monkeyfun's world MS should have all their marketing done for them (as is done by Dell and others) as is their due while everyone else has to do their own and the hell with whether this benefits the customer.
Thankyou for demonstrating the totality of your ignorance with regards to that which you criticise, you flaming moron.
what kind of trash is that?
Not. A. Full. Desktop. High. Powered. Graphics. Processing. Machine.
Most don't even COME with an outgoing graphics point, and if you use a USB adapter, it would manage that seperatley and therefor go around the limit.
that means no connecting it to a LARGER MONITOR, you freakin morons
Ah, that makes more sense. :) Thanks for clearing it up.
With Windows 7, Microsoft is for the first time allowing the product to be used globally, as opposed to just in emerging markets. In particular, Microsoft is positioning it as its lowest-cost Windows 7 option for Netbooks. "
Excallent decisions by Microsoft on both counts.
Microsoft cannot afford to cede the low end netbooks/nettops to anyone.
They already did. Game's over. Vista and its descendant Win7 are just too big and heavy to run on a netbook. XP was still working, but MS doesn't want to sell that anymore.
Tests have shown Windows 7 running perfectly on netbooks in fact better then XP
Nonsense.
Windows just clobbered Linux on netbooks over tha last 12 months, by taking obver a massive 90% share for Windows, to only 10% share for linux. It's game over alright..for linux
@ JoeF2 :"Vista and its descendant Win7 are just too big and heavy to run on a netbook"
Win 7 was specifically designed to run very well on netbooks, and Win7 RC1 runs better on netbooks than Vista does.
@ JoeF2:"XP was still working, but MS doesn't want to sell that anymore. "
Like the previous poster said, Win 7 beta already runs better on netbooks than even XP does. It's game over for Linux. Go spread your disinoformation elswhere will you?
I am running Windows 7 on a netbook with 1GB RAM...its currently using 450 MB with a browser window open and 3 downloads going. Compare that to vista (needs 1.5 GB RAM just to run), i think its pretty reasonable.
So, you confirm that you are an MS employee then...
Windows 7 isn't out, so normal people can't run it on anything.
Figures that MS employees are trolling...
And further, MS seems to do some "creative renaming" to keep up with their lie that Windows has taken over the netbooks. They rename netbooks to "low cost small notebook PCs": http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/03/microsoft_low_cost_small_notebook_pcs/
Anything not running Windows is then by definition not in that category, and voila, 100% market share...
Seems MS is really hurting big time, if they have to invent such a term that no real person would ever use. Supports my point nicely that MS netbook market share is dismal and way off from what they claim.
Um, you DO realize that a Windows 7 Release Candidate is publicly available now through July, do you not? Pray tell, why does someone have to be an MS employee to have their hands on Windows 7? You would do well to do a little research before you cram your foot in your mouth, baselessly accusing people of trolling and being MS employees.
You have been acting very unreasonable in this forum, while adding nothing of value to it. Anyone interested in enrichment stands to be disappointed or even confused when reading your posts. You give us no technical information, no statistics, not even a link. All you are posting are subjective, ad hominem attacks on other members.
I couldn't possibly accuse you of being employed by Canonical or any of the other sponsors, because you've gotten too many facts wrong for an IT professional. What I see is a religiously zealous Linux user with a hot temper. And your temper betrays you; if you don't know when to walk away, you'll be wrung out and hung out to dry by those of us who know computers better than you do. You can either be humble, or be humiliated. The choice is yours.
May I ask what part of "Release Candidate" you don't understand???
Windows 7 is going to be release on October 22, according to another article here.
So, if the other poster stated that the RC worked on his netbook, that would have been one thing.
But the poster didn't. The poster stated that "Windows 7" has certain performance characteristics, and nobody outside of Microsoft can state something like that without lying.
End of story.
It is very obvious to anybody who uses his or her brain that MS has been forced by competitive pressures, including the availability and performance of Linux, to remove the 3-app limitation of the Windows Starter edition.
That shows, again, to anybody using his or her brain, that MS is deeply concerned about the market share of Windows on netbooks, which further indicates, again, to anybody using his or her brain, that the publicly claimed market share is not overly accurate. Nobody who has 90% market share would care much about competitive pressure. So, the move by MS shows that their claim of 90% market share is likely wrong.
And the force with which the MS fanboys came out here also indicates that the MS market share isn't what they claim.
Case closed.
"May I ask what part of "Release Candidate" you don't understand???"
>>>>I'll tell you what I DO understand, and that's the fact that final releases tend to be faster than betas, and that RC is representative of what we can expect to see.
"Windows 7 is going to be release on October 22, according to another article here.
So, if the other poster stated that the RC worked on his netbook, that would have been one thing.
"But the poster didn't. The poster stated that "Windows 7" has certain performance characteristics, and nobody outside of Microsoft can state something like that without lying."
>>>>Actually, by your logic, nobody in Microsoft could make such a statement either. However, at worst, it's a lack of explanation by sharmajunior. There is no indication that the poster is employed by Microsoft.
"It is very obvious to anybody who uses his or her brain that MS has been forced by competitive pressures, including the availability and performance of Linux, to remove the 3-app limitation of the Windows Starter edition."
>>>>I think you meant to say anticompetitive. And unless MS has a contract with Linus Torvalds or some number of distribution vendors, I don't see anybody taking them to court (unless of courst it's in Europe, where frightening the pigeons is a formal charge).
Remember that people have been rejecting Linux because they don't like it. Every Linux user I've spoken to says it's just "different;" I say it's outright harder to use. Less maintenance, perhaps, as long as you're a download junkie and use a PS/2 mouse. But if this is the case, then one cannot claim it's easier to use, as they would have typed plenty of commands into the terminal.
"That shows, again, to anybody using his or her brain, that MS is deeply concerned about the market share of Windows on netbooks, which further indicates, again, to anybody using his or her brain, that the publicly claimed market share is not overly accurate. Nobody who has 90% market share would care much about competitive pressure. So, the move by MS shows that their claim of 90% market share is likely wrong."
>>>>I don't sell netbooks, so I can't verify either way. But pray tell, what reason have you or I to assume they're lying?
"And the force with which the MS fanboys came out here also indicates that the MS market share isn't what they claim."
>>>>LOL, the only thing this proves is that you have a big imagination and a slow wit. What the fanboys (including yourself) say is not representative of Microsoft.
"Oh, and santuccie, it is people like you who are obviously trolling here."
>>>>Between you, sharmajunior, and me, the one who has found it necessary to resort to name-calling, and telling someone to crawl back into their cave is the troll. Which one would that be?
Win7 is pretty much just Vista 2nd Edition. Both are way too big and heavy for netbooks.
And MS usually needs three tries to get things right, so we may have to wait for Win8 to get another decent OS out of Redmond.
Windows 7 runs fine on netbooks. Do a it of research
Win 7 is much faster, and runs much smoother and better on the same hardware as Vista does.
@ JoeF2:"Both are way too big and heavy for netbooks"
Win 7 runs better on netbooks than even XP, and XP has already clobbered Linux on netbooks.
@ JoeF2:"And MS usually needs three tries to get things right"
3 tries at what?
Win 7 is the 7th iteration of Windows, and every single version of windows has easily clobbered Linux and the Mac OS in the market and in market share, which is what matters.
@ JoeF2:"so we may have to wait for Win8 to get another decent OS out of Redmond.
Naaaah.
But you may have to wait till you develop a brain before you post here again on this matter.
"Win 7 is much faster, and runs much smoother and better on the same hardware as Vista does. "
That doesn't change his argument. Lots of software runs faster and more smoothly in an updated version without needing a full upgrade.
"Win 7 runs better on netbooks than even XP, and XP has already clobbered Linux on netbooks. "
Please show me where XP clobbered Linux on netbooks. The numbers of netbooks sold with Linux preinstalled are still well above current accepted marketshare for Linux on desktops. In fact, in order for XP to compete on netbooks, the price has to be dropped to pretty much zero and include better hardware (the reason many Linux users buy the Windows version of netbooks and install their favorite distro on it).
"3 tries at what?
Win 7 is the 7th iteration of Windows, and every single version of windows has easily clobbered Linux and the Mac OS in the market and in market share, which is what matters. "
There are more Chryslers on the road than BMWs, which car would you drive if you had enough money?
If you were provided the ability to learn freely how to work on your own car and you had the choice between one you're not allowed to fix on your own and one that you are, knowing that the second one would cost you less in trade for slightly more work (it's actually less maintenance but for this example it's slightly more) and would mean you'd never get stuck on the side of the road and not know what to do or have the legal right to fix it on your own, which would you choose?
Now, Windows has more market share and percentage but Linux users are more empowered and tend to be happier, users of OS X also tend to be much happier.
Higher market share doesn't mean better OS, it means better marketing in the areas that purchase the most machines, that's it.
By the way, notice I made an entire comment without resorting to personal attacks? Try it next time.
I hope M$ is paying him well for his advertising, but fear they're not getting their money's worth.
The Windows fanboys are obviously out in force.
Win7 being the 7th iteration of Windows is of course complete and utter BS.
It is the second iteration of Vista, which was a major rewrite of Windows.
And it can only be "slimmed down" so much. It is still a dog, in particular on netbooks.
It is of course faster than Vista, simply because Vista is about the slowest OS to ever come out of Redmond.
With Vista being a complete failure, things can only improve with Win7. But that doesn't mean it reaches Linux.
As somebody else said today: MS is like GM, arrogant, and making inferior products.. And look what happened to GM...
"Windows 7 runs fine on netbooks"
LOL. Try running it on this upcoming one from Asus:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-10253474-64.html?tag=newsLatestHeadlinesArea.0
You are just another clueless Windows fanboy.
Research doesn't mean mindlessly repeating MS marketing BS.
MS would have a chance if they hadn't dropped support for non-x86 CPUs a long time ago. Windows is a desktop OS, and putting it on a netbook is akin to trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.
But since MS can't afford to lose the netbook market, they feed the fanboys.
Soo transparent,...
Do a little research before you open your mouth. Have you ever seen Windows 7 running on a netbook??..I think not. So keep your opinions to yourself. UNless you have significant evidence to back up your claims, don't spew empty facts.
and another thing....no ones comparing it linux....the debate is over xp vs vista vs windows 7 being fit to run on a netbook and which one is better excluding vista.
"Please show me where XP clobbered Linux on netbooks. The numbers of netbooks sold with Linux preinstalled are still well above current accepted marketshare for Linux on desktops. In fact, in order for XP to compete on netbooks, the price has to be dropped to pretty much zero and include better hardware (the reason many Linux users buy the Windows version of netbooks and install their favorite distro on it)."
>>>>Here are a few examples for you...
http://linux.slashdot.org/firehose.pl?id=1232503&op=view
http://blog.laptopmag.com/ubuntu-confirms-linux-netbook-returns-higher-than-anticpated
http://www.itpro.co.uk/611224/retailer-pc-world-drops-linux-netbooks-for-windows
http://eeepc.net/hp-drops-linux-for-its-mini-1000-netbook-in-the-uk/
http://www.liliputing.com/2008/11/carphone-warehouse-drops-linux-netbooks.html
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2008/03/11/wal_mart_stores_drop_gpc/
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20090317PB210.html
"If you were provided the ability to learn freely how to work on your own car and you had the choice between one you're not allowed to fix on your own and one that you are, knowing that the second one would cost you less in trade for slightly more work (it's actually less maintenance but for this example it's slightly more) and would mean you'd never get stuck on the side of the road and not know what to do or have the legal right to fix it on your own, which would you choose?"
>>>>The average user will choose to have the mechanic do it for them. As honorable the efforts to produce user-friendly distros have been, Linux remains too geeky for most people. And the fact that Linux is an "unfamiliar environment" is only part of the equation. It really is harder to use.
Most Ubuntu-based distros do not retain WiFi configurations upon reboot. Sure, you can save a profile, but Windows users don't have to. And for those whose WiFi device is not supported, setup with NDISWrapper is a daunting task. Those of us who remember DOS don't remember it fondly. Technology has advanced since then.
If you want to watch DVDs on your computer, you'll have to look online and see if you can find a site that tells you how to get the CSS libraries for your particular distro. Then, you open a terminal and type the command that downloads and installs them. All this because of a conflict between open source and proprietary codecs.
A lot of hardware is NOT supported. Canonical and several other sponsors claim that their distro works on AMD64 and other processors, but all too often AMD users find their units to be exceptional, generating some unexpected error. I tried three distros on an Acer 5050-5430 laptop about a year ago, and only three of them would actually boot. And of those three, only one recognized my Broadcom WiFi chip, and it STILL couldn't surf with it.
While a generous variety of printers are supported, most scanners are not. A software suite is a LOT of code to write, and most hardware vendors will not waste their time for such a tiny market (call it greed, they'll call it business). And while I've seen a troll here and there cite an individual compatibility problem with a hardware driver in Windows (convenient how they always blame it on Microsoft, rather than the OEM who wrote the thing), issues arising from drivers written by second-rate programmers in their spare time tend to be more pervasive in nature. ATI drivers for Linux stink! USB drivers for Linux stink even WORSE!
Even when an OEM does port one of their products over to some distro (a netbook, for example), other OEMs are taking different distros under their wing. Most PC users are not switch hitters; you can't sell a person on a new flavor every time they buy a new machine. The reason the operating system was invented was to get past all that, and give users a standard interface they could get comfortable with. This is why Linux-based netbooks are returned at rates so much higher than their Windows-based counterparts.
Bottom line, Windows works on all hardware, and is easier even for first-time PC users, not just Windows loyalists. You don't have to be a nerd to get online with Windows, and you know you will always have growing room. Linux can't do everything Windows can do, even with Wine.
All these things could change if Linux's market share grows. But it has a lot of speed bumps in its way, and after 18 years, Linux has yet to blow Big Red out of the water as promised. And consumers aren't waiting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_Unified_Kernel
In dreamland perhaps. This happens to be real life.
@ queticomn :" M$ will not be receiving anymore of my money for defective products."
That presupposes that Microsoft was receving any any money from a linux fanatic and Microsoft-hating jihadist of your sort in the first place.
Given that linux has been out for over 15 years, and you swear by linux, I don't see that Microsft os losing any money or any sleep over folks like you. It's perfectly ok for a measely 1% of PC buyers to make themselves miserable using linux.
Fortunately, most consumers don't give 2 hoots about linux, with over 90% of consumers chosing to buy Windows PC's instead of Linux ones.
In real life, Linux already recognizes close to 100% of hardware immediately, no driver installations necessary. The rest are either proprietary such as NVidia graphics cards or Belkin wireless.
For a real life example, my neighbor had a laptop he had to reinstall the OS on, could get every driver but the sound. Thought he'd just live without it until I installed Ubuntu on his system. Everything worked right after one wired update, zero problems. He'd never used Linux before and he had no trouble switching.
To your other response, if he needed certain apps for work which required him to be using Windows and he did any work at home then yes, Microsoft would have been recieving money from him even if he didn't want to use Windows.
@odubtaig, I completely agree.
No it doesn't
Not to mention the orginal post from "queticomn", claimed Linux installs "better then windows an recognizes all hardware during install" which is patently false, and an obvious Linux trolling.
@ tm_anon:" Everything worked right after one wired update, zero problems"
That proves abosultely nothing. it's like claiming your Linux installed ok on one computer with a particular configuration, so therefore every linux will install hitchfree on every computer which come with literally hundreds of thousands of different configuratuons and hardware. It a strawman's argument.
FACT: Window support for accessory/hardware device drivers is a heck of a lot better than that of Linux. Even thye most exotic pieces of hardware have e very high probablity of having Windows device drivers. you can't say the same about Linux. With Linux you are reduced to relying on a wing and a prayer.
@ tm_anon :"In real life, Linux already recognizes close to 100% of hardware immediately, no driver installations necessary"
No it doesn't
------------------------------------------------------------
Do you have any evidence for your claims, or just a paycheck stub from Ballmer? Hint: I have Ubuntu installed at home alongside ex-pee on the same machine (it's called "dual boot") and I can attest that Ubuntu has fewer problems than winblows does on the same hardware. So much so in fact that an older 32X CD-ROM I still have in the machine works great in Ubuntu, but hasn't worked for years with ex-pee (SP2 killed it). I have a new 23" LCD monitor that occasionally flashes dark with ex-pee, but worked steady and perfectly with Ubuntu.
Are my experiences with one machine evidence that Linux is more trouble-free than winblows? Not really, no. But it IS evidence that your claims are pure lies, put forth by a slave that's purely owned by M$.
I know, I know, I'm feeding a troll. But hey, even trolls need to eat!
That's one machine. How many people out there use ATI graphics? Guess they're all pretty SOL if they want to play 3D games (and if they run under Wine). And for those of us who use portable applications, best we copy them to the hard drive first; Linux's USB drivers will crash under too much strain. How about scanners? Oops, let me boot back into "Windblows," as you call it.
Those who have followed my posts on CNET know that I have cracked the "malware problem," while Vista (and the upcoming Windows 7) have done it for us. This eliminates a major "one-up" for Linux, one that had to be chosen over choice and even functionality altogether (unless you want to dual-boot). Realize that you can now surf with impunity while eliminating antimalware, that resource-hog that hooks the kernel and registry, and causes the machine to lag or lock up while intercepting other processes, and another major "one-up" for Linux flies out the Window (pun intended).
BTW, weren't you a Mac fanboy last week?
On a netbook???
Get real. Geez, the MS fanboys can't even get such things right...
So, USB and scanners don't apply to netbooks, is that it? Oh, I'm sorry; guess you were trying to divert attention away from the indefensible points. So much for that.
Asus, on the other hand, have a different view with the numbers to back it up: http://ostatic.com/blog/asus-ceo-says-linux-netbook-returns-on-par-with-windows
Couple that with problems I've never even heard of, never mind experienced and I think it's clear what the agenda is here.
- by jardimcamburi July 2, 2009 7:01 AM PDT
- great post!
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(106 Comments)http://www.jardimcamburi.net