Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft's Windows 7 Starter is a gift to Google

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 53 posts

Re: Microsoft's Windows 7 Starter is a gift to Google

#31

Post by nazgulnarsil »

ewjordan wrote: post #24
snprbob86 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 us…

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…

thanks, tree style tabs is clearly the way the internet is supposed to be browsed (non linearity is the original innovation of hypertext)

Re: Microsoft's Windows 7 Starter is a gift to Google

#32

Post by dhimes »

prospero wrote: post #25
dhimes wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your point makes sense, but but I suspect that if they were doing it for that reason the number of allowed processes would depend on the machine and configuration.

They can do variable configuration for a wide range of machines, or they can create a static configuration for a narrow range of machines. They've done the latter.

They can do it dynamically, which is what I would think they would do if they had user experience as their motivation.

Re: Microsoft's Windows 7 Starter is a gift to Google

#33

Post by axod »

latortuga wrote: post #27
catch23 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Why not just limit it to zero? If you don't run anything, it doesn't crash. But all it takes is one buggy piece of software to bring the whole thing down. I don't think reducing the load would help anything. IE7 with a bunch of tabs open can sometimes co…

I can't tell if this is flamebait but I'll bite. Limiting to a small number has the effect of minimizing the probability of performance problems from running out of memory and thereby improving user experience. Limiting to zero obviously makes it unusable. I see power users being a lot more upset about this limitation than, for example, my mother who uses her PC for email, internet, and word docs. I also think Micros…

>> "Limiting to a small number has the effect of minimizing the probability of performance problems from running out of memory and thereby improving user experience."

I don't buy that at all. One bad program can still eat all the memory. The number of apps has little real bearing on anything. It just makes ms look like fools.

Re: Microsoft's Windows 7 Starter is a gift to Google

#34

Post by Zev »

sadiq wrote: post #16
eli wrote: post #3

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.

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 scre…

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.

Re: Microsoft's Windows 7 Starter is a gift to Google

#35

Post by mechanical_fish »

latortuga wrote: post #17
acangiano wrote: post #12

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.…

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 respon…

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.

Re: Microsoft's Windows 7 Starter is a gift to Google

#36

Post by latortuga »

axod wrote: post #33
latortuga wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't tell if this is flamebait but I'll bite. Limiting to a small number has the effect of minimizing the probability of performance problems from running out of memory and thereby improving user experience. Limiting to zero obviously makes it unusable. I see power users being a lot more upset about this limitation than, for example, my mother who uses her PC for email, internet, and word docs. I also think Micros…

>> "Limiting to a small number has the effect of minimizing the probability of performance problems from running out of memory and thereby improving user experience." I don't buy that at all. One bad program can still eat all the memory. The number of apps has little real bearing on anything. It just makes ms look like fools.

I don't work for them, I'm not trying to feed you a line. I'm just trying to see it from their perspective. I'm not presenting facts, merely ideas.

Re: Microsoft's Windows 7 Starter is a gift to Google

#37

Post by latortuga »

halo wrote: post #29
mdasen wrote: post #13

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 y…

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.

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

Re: Microsoft's Windows 7 Starter is a gift to Google

#38

Post by twopoint718 »

calambrac wrote: post #30
tomsaffell wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may be right in saying they haven't learned much from Vista, but I think your 'just have two versions' argument is overly simplistic. Today MSFT sells Windows Home/HP for $x to lots of OEMs, who don't like paying that price, but don't have much choice, as their users 'want' Windows (want='think they want, because they dont know anything else'). OEMs say to MSFT 'we wont pay $x for Windows on netbooks, it's too ex…

Why would shareholders suddenly jump ship if MS came up with a price for Windows that kept them on netbooks? Wouldn't shareholders be more scared of the prospect of seeing netbooks switch away from Windows en masse? And why would setting OEM netbook pricing to a specific value imply a loss on non-netbook pcs? It's not like they'd be dumb enough to set price $y without a contract forbidding the manufacturer from dropp…

Don't let me put words in other mouths, but the reason tomsaffell is saying that if MS sells a $y-priced version of Windows for netbooks that they'll end up losing $(x-y)(# of non-netbook PCs) is this: if there is a fully-functional* Windows version on the market then all contemporary Windows versions will tend to that price. Users will say "why do I pay $x for Windows when John Q. Otherguy got it for $y on his netbook?".

The only way that users won't say that is if the "Windows for Netbooks" is lousy in some way or another.

*(Means something like "works the same, except for feature Z" where Z is sufficiently obscure)

Re: Microsoft's Windows 7 Starter is a gift to Google

#39

Post by sadiq »

Zev wrote: post #34
sadiq wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 scre…

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.

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.

Re: Microsoft's Windows 7 Starter is a gift to Google

#40

Post by aneesh »

twopoint718 wrote: post #38
calambrac wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would shareholders suddenly jump ship if MS came up with a price for Windows that kept them on netbooks? Wouldn't shareholders be more scared of the prospect of seeing netbooks switch away from Windows en masse? And why would setting OEM netbook pricing to a specific value imply a loss on non-netbook pcs? It's not like they'd be dumb enough to set price $y without a contract forbidding the manufacturer from dropp…

Don't let me put words in other mouths, but the reason tomsaffell is saying that if MS sells a $y-priced version of Windows for netbooks that they'll end up losing $(x-y)(# of non-netbook PCs) is this: if there is a fully-functional* Windows version on the market then all contemporary Windows versions will tend to that price. Users will say "why do I pay $x for Windows when John Q. Otherguy got it for $y on his netbo…

Most users have no idea how much of their PC purchase went towards a Windows license.
Post reply on HN