Microsoft is finally putting Windows on a diet. After Windows Vista proved too bloated for low-end PCs and netbooks (sub-notebooks), the Windows 7 public beta appears slimmer and optimized for lower-end hardware. Clearly, Microsoft hopes to fend off competition from Ubuntu and other Linux distributions optimized for Netbooks.
Admittedly, The VAR Guy soured on Microsoft during the Windows Vista debacle. Our resident blogger lives on Mac OS X and Ubuntu. Back in March 2007, The VAR Guy described 10 ways Microsoft could fix Vista. Alas, Vista’s problems never did get fixed.
But The VAR Guy is willing to keep an open mind with Windows 7. Already, Gizmodo reports that Windows 7 “runs so much better than Windows Vista on a Netbook.” And OSNews offers this first look at Windows 7 on a Netbook.
How the Netbook War Started
Throughout 2008, there were multiple reports that Linux-based netbooks pressured Microsoft’s market share and profitability. Clearly, Microsoft is not ready to cede the Netbook market to Linux, nor is the software giant proud to offer Windows XP as a stop-gap Netbook solution until Windows 7 ships.
Looking ahead The VAR Guy might wind up eating some crow. In late 2008 he predicted that Microsoft would not have Windows 7 ready in time for Christmas 2009. But the early buzz around the Windows 7 public beta seems generally favorable.
The VAR Guy is updated multiple times daily. Don’t miss a single post. Subscribe to his newsletter, RSS feed, Twitter feed and Resource Center.
Read More About This Topic
Share This Post
Interact: Add a Comment | Trackback Link | Permalink
Subscribe: RSS Feed
Don't miss Charlene O'Hanlon's weekly columns...
The general buzz seems favourable. Most people are reporting that it’s faster than Vista. Well all new installations are faster than the clogged up version you’ve been running for 6 months. Although strangely Ubuntu doesn’t seem to suffer that slow grind to a halt. But still manages to feel faster when installed a new.
As Microsoft don’t really have much of a selling point for Windows 7. There’s really not much else to say.
Aikiwolfie: The VAR Guy did wonder if it’s “news” that Windows 7 slimmed down. After all, is it possible for Windows 7 to be fatter than Windows Vista???? Had Microsoft made that mistake it would have been game over for Windows.
I’m not sure….
There’s an in-depth review over at Ars Technica that was also discussed on Slashdot the other day:
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/windows-7-beta.ars/6
“Let’s just cut to the chase here: Windows 7 is built on top of Windows Vista. It doesn’t roll back the major changes that Vista made; it doesn’t reduce system requirements (for example, it still needs Direct3D graphics and 1 GB RAM to be worthwhile), it doesn’t undo security decisions like UAC, and, except for specific scenarios like booting, it doesn’t really perform significantly better. If you have software or hardware that’s incompatible with Vista, it’ll almost certainly be incompatible with Windows 7 too.”
Sure, netbooks will get more powerful over time, but there are also companies trying to stay below the $200 threshold and those will be underpowered for Windows for several years.
Also, if your hardware costs $200-$400, a $50-$70 Windows license fee makes a significant difference.
I took the beta for a test drive this weekend. It’s an old machine, Sempron64 2500+, 1GB RAM, 128MB Radeon 9250 video card. Overall, being a TOTAL linux user at home for the last 5 or 6 years, I’ve got to say … NOT the worst Windows ever.
No, not exactly a ringing endorsement, but 7 is FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR better than Vista IMO, although it inherited some of Vista’s annoyances. (UAC anyone?) My only BIG issue is that it wouldn’t recognize my old Radeon 9250, so I got Basic (no Aero) decorations and it defaulted to 800×600 on my 19 inch 1440×900 widescreen LCD. Wasn’t pretty. Ubuntu not only got the CARD, but the resolution correct, right off the live cd. AND give me all the compiz goodness I could handle. In all it’s transparent spinny cubedness.
What impressed me most, even on my old, modest hardware, was the responsiveness and the memory usage. It felt ALMOST as snappy as Ubuntu on this machine, and with antivirus and web browsers running it sat comfortably between 490 and 510MB of RAM in use. I was amazed by that.
For a slap-dash, strung together from bits of Vista OS, Microsoft may not have hit a home run, but they may have made it to first base. Vista was a strikeout.
The REAL question is: Will 7 be good enough to beat out XP? Possibly. But they’re going to have to beat out the same gripes that kept people off Vista for the most part. It’s STILL going to come down to new OEM sales over off-the-shelf sales for existing machines. Although with a capable video card, those requirements aren’t too steep. A machine with 512MB of RAM could theoretically run Windows 7 fairly well. IF you’re just using it for basic tasks.
Henaway: Thanks for your early perspectives on the Beta. If The VAR Guy was Microsoft, he would recommend NOT promote any Windows 7 upgrade packages. Rather, only offer Windows 7 as a preload on new, well-equipped PCs. Keep people happy. Avoid the upgrade compatibility issues. And for those who insist on an upgrade, communicate clearly that the best path to Windows 7 is simply to buy it preloaded on new hardware.
The VAR Guy: I understand your angle regarding upgrade vs new hardware. But, Microsoft cannot afford to try and force people to upgrade their computers like they did with Vista. If they try and pull that stunt again then, truly, it is game over. Especially in this current economic climate!
They are again going to have to risk the good ‘ole upgrade path – which will be easy to do from Vista, but not so easy from XP.
I am going to be interested to see Microsoft’s pricing structure this time around. The reaction and subsequent fallout of Vista has awakened Microsoft to this reality: it has competitors.
Socceroos: The VAR Guy isn’t suggesting a forced hardware upgrade. MSFT should offer one solid desktop version of Windows Vista … none of all this nonsense about home, business, power user, etc. One solid version. Then let Windows users decide between buying PCs with XP, Vista… or 7.
Numbers. There was, at some point close to 1000 million PCs running XP. Many of those are still running well. If M$ cannot produce a product that will run on existing PCs well, people will not upgrade the software.
Where I work, we have many old and older machines. They barely run XP/2000 fully patched and virus-scanned. With GNU/Linux, they are like rockets. As thin clients, they have warp drives. My employer hates to spend money on IT. What is my employer going to do when the troops finally revolt and demand a refresh? Not Vista. Not Vista II.
I am in education where M$ has sworn not to lose to GNU/Linux. They have essentially committed to giving away their products to education when the organization has the spine to demand such treatment. With Vista X, one still has to spend so much more on the hardware to get any improvement that even free is too high a price to pay. They have nothing that can compete with a powerful GNU/Linux terminal server running a bunch of cheap fanless thin clients. Their products take about twice as much server to do the job that way.
Maybe it does indeed run better than Vista on Netbooks. But Netbooks are all about cost-effectiveness. Low-cost, very usable, ultra-portable, robust little machines that can be tossed in the bag and will easily survive a drop to the floor (simply because it has no HDD). Can Microsoft compete on that?
Remains to be seen really. And I’ll believe it when I see it.
Once a “Netbook” exceeds a certain maximum price-point, it is no longer a Netbook but a compact laptop. A NetBook is different. So let’s see if Microsoft can compete at the low end of the market.
As an aside, disruptive technologies always address a new market-space (e.g. the ultra-portable, robust, low-cost netbook), do not compete against established market segments initially, but with time, simply replace established market segments.
Microsoft is behaving reactively – but is doing well to be scared. Historically though, Microsoft has failed to address the GNU/Linux threat adequately on many levels.
It’ll be interesting indeed how this turns out. But I wouldn’t expect Microsoft to be a viable contender in the low-cost space. I mean, you do have to factor in the license costs of the OS and the Office Suite – unless you’re suggesting that Microsoft pre-install OpenOffice on their Netbooks…
G Fernandes: No doubt one of Microsoft’s biggest challenges remains the “price” of Web 2.0 applications, OpenOffice, etc. Pretty ironic, considering Microsoft used a “free” business model to destroy Netscape a decade ago.
[QUOTE]Pretty ironic, considering Microsoft used a “free” business model to destroy Netscape a decade ago.[/QUOTE]
Indeed. The ghost of the Netscape debacle has come back to bite them in their complacent and unsuspecting gluteus maximus.
In that instance they could afford to give away IE. In this instance the choices are harder and more painful: keep reducing the prices of their highly profitable Microsoft Windows/Office franchises. Which of course, eats into profit margins and hurts them across the board – all large licensees use GNU/Linux to indulge in some very serious Microsoft arm-twisting.
All good for the customer of course. Which is why I love Free Software
. Personally, I neither use nor endorse software not covered by a GNU or OSS-certified license.
Actually, I would say they would do okay in the upgrade market with 7. (And I say this as a linux guy!) The only gotchya is to make sure your system has supported graphics.
I’m pretty sure that the only reason I had what problems I DID have was trying to force unsupported hardware to work with it. Granted it SHOULD be supported, but that was ATi’s decision not to create drivers for my old 9250 even for Vista. Any machine that was “Vista CAPABLE” should actually run 7 fairly well. Even on 512MB of RAM, even though at least a gig makes it comfortable.
It pains me to say it, but they’re at least on the right track with this one. Still a LONG way to go, but on the right track.
Except maybe the new taskbar. They’ve finally dumbed it down enough that it’s truly stupid.
Let’s not get too excited about this, all right?
I’m an Ubuntu user and when I need to run Windows I try to do it on a “VirtualBoxed XP”, having said that…
Microsoft Windows IS NOT fading away!, it’s not “Game Over” just because Vista IS a crap, or even if W7 is Vista II.
Most of the Netbooks sold today are sold with, guess what? yes a Windows OS?
Ok, yes it is XP most of the time, not Vista, so what?
It is embarrassing that Vista is so crap, but maybe even more embarrassing for us, the Linux users, that we are still competing with XP, an OS from 2002.
I don’t see Linux eating up the desktop market anytime soon, and it will have to ask Apple permission before becoming the first alternative to Windows.
On the Netbook market, just the same. Most people will hold on XP till they can ‘jump’ to 7 o whatever makes for a “better than Vista” OS.
MS Windows will fade a way some time, makeing M$ loose its monopoly out of self-complacency, but it will be more slowly, or maybe it’ll be because desktops get replaced by or transformed into a totally different thing.
Will Vista 2.0 (aka Windows 7) still have that most used Windows ‘feature’ – the Blue Screen of Death?
josvazg: I don’t think anybody said that Windows is dying – or even that it GNU/Linux will take over the desktop market.
What I asserted is that Windows 7 is NOT a contender in the low-cost NetBook market. For the simple reason that a GNU/Linux equipped NetBook offers more software for less money.
What I also asserted is that Microsoft is well aware of this and is quite right to be scared about it – Microsoft have shown commendable fore-sight in picking up threats. They have however, historically, not always done the right thing to address said threats.
And finally, I asserted that Microsoft is being hurt by whatever numbers of GNU/Linux NetBooks are being sold – they may be a small percentage when compared to the Desktop and Laptop markets. But what they do is make consumers aware that it is possible to get a low-cost, ultra-portable that is very capable at browsing, VoIP and offers a high level of compatibility with Microsoft Office (via OpenOffice) at a fraction of the price (when you add Microsoft Office license costs to a NetBook, the GNU/Linux option starts becoming very compelling indeed).
And in times like these, cost is an important factor for everyone.
josvazg, no reason to be embarrassed. Let’s face it, XP is a serious client OS, with a HUGE userbase (someone told 1G?), developed by an IT giant with an almost unlimited budget. Of course it’s a formidable contender, which was forced though to trim its margins to limit losses in market share. May we be honest? The most important Linux feature is by far … its ability to keep Windows license prices within almost reasonable limits (I have my fire extinguisher handy
Hardware wants to sell for less than $200.
People want a computer that is “good enough”. a 1024×768 display that can play full speed video and run FireFox at a decent speed meets that spec.If you can run flashplayer and web 2.0 apps on a piece of hardware the computer is “good enough”.
So computers have been good enough since 2003/2004. As 2004 technology gets older, the price drops on it. There will always be a market for more expensive computers that can do more.
But there will also always be a market for a sub $200.00 netbook that is “good enough”. Micorosft will have to make some serious concessions about XP to get into that market. If Adobe gets the FlashPlayer 10 running on an ARM cpu and $100.00 netbooks are possible.
What will Microsoft do to stop some Chinese knock off cell phone manufacturer from selling an ARM based 1 gig ram, 16 gig ssd, 1024×768 10″ form factor laptop for $125.00? Microsoft has NOTHING that will run on that hardware. WinCE is called wince for a reason. Linux will provide a full desktop experience and can be customized. A non-computer company that is not beholden to Redmond for advertising money and has already been selling these things in China for a year will be hard to stop.
At $100-$125 it would be hard not to keep a few of these around the house.