Microsoft Accommodating Eee With Lightweight XP

KrispyChips writes "In what could be a first Microsoft is working to create a special build of Windows, just because Windows doesn't run very well on a certain computer. ASUS' runaway success Eee PC is now 'officially' available with Windows XP, but (according to APC magazine) is not exactly a great experience. There are none of the nice pre-loaded apps that come with the Linux version, for example. And XP has some real problems coping with the screen size and limited system specs of the unit. As a result, ASUS says it is going back to Microsoft and working on a special XP build that will be lightweight and more suited to UMPCs."

BWAHAHAHAHA!

Man, M$ is running scared on this one...I never though I'd see they day they'd go to intentionally design an OS that works better on a less powerful computer.

Now, will this OS be generally available? It would be nice to be able to breathe some extra life into some of the slower systems I have here at work.

Re:BWAHAHAHAHA!

Yes, it will.

Oh, you meant in stores.

Re:BWAHAHAHAHA!

I like the idea of an "XP Lite" too. But I bet Dell and the other hardware manufacturers (who want to sell you the latest, greatest computer) will raise Hell at the idea of releasing a new OS for old computers. They'll probably raise Hell as it is (since MS has been pushing THEM to get rid of even the full version of XP).

Well, the high-end vendors might be pissed at this, that's true.

But, Microsoft can't ignore the prospect of small, cheap, low-end laptops becoming widespread which are being shipped with Linux by default. An entire market segment devoted to less-powerful machines (which, actually sounds quite cool) probably worries them if they can't play and get people to use their stuff.

They simply can't find themselves being a company which can't provide an OS for the emerging market in less-powerful machines. Of course, the funny thing is, Microsoft has never been optimized for small resource footprints -- they've always required more resources than you have available.

I'll be curious to see how well they do this. Quite frankly, Linux and FreeBSD have always rocked on less-powerful hardware, because they can fit into a smaller space more readily. Retroactively making XP less of a resource pig isn't going to be easy I bet.

Cheers

Why XP

The Eee PC is not really being sold as a desktop replacement but more as a portable supplemental computer, and CE already has a GUI that works with smaller screens. So what does XP do that CE doesn't, thta's needed here?

Re:Why XP

You mean other than not compete with Linux?

Really.. that's the reason. CE is Windows 3.11 with a boob job. You can't pitch that as a Linux competitor and not be laughed out of the room.

Re:Why XP

CE is Windows 3.11 with a boob job.

That, sir, is one of the most expressive and informative metaphors I've ever seen on Slashdot!! I know more about CE than I ever have. :-P

Kudos for that!

Cheers

Re:Why XP

It runs native XP apps without having to get a special version.
You have a whole back catalog running on a cheap UMPC platform.

System design as a whole

Isn't the problem with XP software that most programs now expect to use more than 800*600?
ie: this is not just a problem for Microsoft, but for all app developers.
I know in our shop we stopped really worrying about 8x6 a long time ago since most customers prefer detail over big fonts(low dpi) and scrolling - if we design most windows for use at 8x6 it looks awfully cramped on anything larger.

(having said that I am undergoing a retraining of sorts as I adapt to my n810)

Despite what Microsoft may say...

...I am going to interpret this as a victory for the common user, the ones who are saying no to Vista and yes to keeping XP or switching to Linux, that Microsoft is admitting without saying the actual words that they no longer dictate to the market place what we will use, that we refuse to keep buying every larger and faster PCs when do not necessarily NEED a bigger and faster PCs.

the significant factor here

Microsoft has been desperately trying to obsolete XP. They want it over and done with, gone, Vista is the new OS. But now this is introducing XP as the OS in a whole new class of machines, meaning Microsoft will have to continue to support it.

Now as I understand it, the way Linux is designed, everything is incremental improvements. The kernel is the only linuxy part shared across all linux distros and everything else bundled in is at the discretion of the distro owners. So even if some parts of the distro get a rebuild, there's more incrimentalism here than "chuck the baby with the bathwater" rebuilds leading to Vista-style clusterfucks. Is my understanding correct here?

Logically, Microsoft should have stuck with the incrimentalism. If they wanted a full rebuild of the OS, they should have done so, made sure it ran fast on the hardware out at the time of release, and included a VM-bundled copy of XP to provide backwards compatibility, the way OSX comes with a copy of OS9.

What I'm seeing here is Microsoft is forced to keep XP around longer which means there's less and less reason for people to think about moving to Vista. With all of the web 2.0 apps and things like terminal services, the laptop becomes a powerful dumb terminal. I've seen laptops that crawl running normal apps run like greased lighting once an rdp session is open, they can handle the client just fine. So the Vista upgrade strategy, already suffering from massive consumer blowback, is struck another blow. XP remains viable and on the market and Vista remains the "Now why the hell would I want to do that to myself?" OS. XP will continue to sell as machines wear out but there will not be the huge windfall of the entire install base making a migration to a brand new OS over the next several years. Seems like a proper marketing disaster here. Interesting.

quite nice though

I just bought the Eee with Windows a few days ago here in Tokyo. Actually I havent really closely followed the story, but I think I already saw it here in the stores with Windows XP at least 1.5 month ago.

Anyway, just to comment on the usability: With the preconfigured Windows setup the small screen is really not used to the optimum. But if you tweak a little bit (like hiding the startbar, setting the Desktop environment to maximum performance etc.) things turn out to be quite ok. I also installed the 'hacked' scaling video driver, which works nicely and allows me to run my VJing application at 1024x768. So far without crash.

I would have preferred to buy the Linux version of this machine, but couldn't get it here at Big Camera. So the Windows version was more of a second choice. No proper command line but, anyway, I dont regret it.

Oh, and Microsoft/Asus does deliver some bundled stuff with the machine. Some LiveBlabla (office suite or something). I uninstalled it without looking at it though (for openoffice).

To conclude I dont think the normal Windows XP is such an unpleasant experience on the Eee. Of course a version with a smaller harddisk footprint might be nice.

Lightweight XP

A lightweight version of Windows XP sounds like a wonderful idea. Perhaps they could then port it to desktop computers so they will be really fast!
(reality sinks in)
Wait, standard XP was lightweight when it first came out. It was also horribly insecure, that's why the service packs came out. The service packs made XP slower and of course your going to need an antivirus...

Never mind, it's a horrible idea. They might as well start from scratch on a whole new OS.

Eee pc can do without XP

I've been using my Eee pc for a few months without a hitch. The standard OS is good, plus installing something like Ubuntu is a breeze. I've had random people asking me to show them how to use it, where they can buy it and so on. Nobody , and I mean nobody has asked me : Can I install windows on it ?

In my point of view, this article shows how desperate Microsoft is in the light of newly educated consumers making a valid choice to go with a free and friendly OS over their bloat-OS.

Not to take anything away from XP, as it has its place in the desktop arena and runs just fine for me as a gaming rig.

Re:Open Source CD

ASUS is trying to get Microsoft's help. Your plan does not make that likely.

Re:Open Source CD

Haha. Looks to me like Microsoft is trying to help themselves here. :)

New cut-down version of XP when they're just about to drop XP completely for normal systems?

I smell fear of linux gaining market share. Looks like it's already the year of Linux on the desktop. :p

Re:Open Source CD

Why should Microsoft dictate what ASUS preloads on their PCs?

Oh, yeah, forgot. Convicted monopoly, never punished due to new Justice Department attorneys installed by corrupt new Attorney General. Nevermind.

Hey, those Justice Department attorneys came pre-installed.

Re:Open Source CD

I have a dumb question. Why didn't MSFt create a special version of Windows XP for UMPC's back when UMPC's were brand new? Why did they limit the devices potential trying to run a full desktop OS on a 7" screen? Why the change of heart all of a sudden? Is it because suddenly real competition showed up?

UMPC's were a great idea running shoddy software. Nokia's n750/n800/n810 the iPhone, and a few others are showing that you can get lightweight device with decent battery life if you use lightweight software. what's even better is that people are willing to buy them if the price is right.

Re:Why special version.

Vista was still in development when UMPC's and even tablet PC's where first released. XP, Vista, and yes even OS X make poor tablet and small screen interfaces. Even Windows Mobile has a poor interface.

Apple was smart when they designed the iphone. there is no dock in sight anywhere. Nokia created a new interface for the N750/800 that is simple to use, and yet is easily adapted to older software interfaces.

MSFT has everything so bundled into each other that putting a new interface on windows becomes a pain. let alone taking out the stuff that isn't needed to improve speed and performance.

Re:Open Source CD

ASUS is a business not an evangelist. They used linux because it was cheap and ran well on the hardware they are trying to sell, not because they want to push some agenda. Every time I hear someone talking about a company pushing Linux on the desktop over windows I think of this woman I worked with who was having an affair with a very financially successful married man. Every few months she would get all excited because the divorce papers were finally coming through and she would be recognized as his wife. Then a few weeks after she would be crying because it was going to be "just a few more months". Instead of recognizing the situations for what it was; She was just a cheap, easy lay and he was never leaving his wife, she clung onto the idea that she would eventually be his wife. Linux on the desktop is the mistress, windows is the wife, big business is the successful husband and unless the mistress puts a bullet in the wifes head the husband isn't voluntarily divorcing his wife anytime soon.

Re:Open Source CD

I don't agree with this. OEMs HATE Windows, they would rather have their own system like Apple does. They would love to be able to ship Linux, but Microsoft's monopoly prevents them from doing so.

There is a decreasing momentum with Windows, however, the EeePC sales without Windows has caught the attention of OEMS and don't be surprised to see more Linux based "small" systems.

The ironic part is that this is how Linux will beat Microsoft, just like Microsoft beat others decades ago. P.C.s were small and unnoticed by the likes of DEC and Wang until there were too many of them. Linux is doing the same thing to Windows.

It is a slow process, but in the last 5 years huge but subtle progress has been made. Sooner or later, people will realize they've been using Linux for a decade.

Re:Open Source CD

This, of course, is pure FUD.

Linux is far easier to support than is Windows. Have you seen the EeePC?

Linux is far more modular, offers far more diagnostic tools, and is far less brittle than Windows.

With Linux you can troubleshoot a bad video driver for X and still have the system workable. Using ssh you can administer the machine remotely.

Windows sucks to support, the answer is always the same "Reboot." It works now? OK, good by.

Re:So special and different, it already exists!

...it can't even run Windows...

You say that as if it's a bad thing.

Re:So special and different, it already exists!

Ok, I'll bite. I bought the EEEPC 5 months ago specifically for one reason: it was small enough to fit in my s.o.'s handbag. [wordpress.com] Yes, you will ask yourself why people make acquisitions purely due to design and dimension of a laptop, but Apple for instance has been winning in this category for decades. The fact that it ran Linux satisfied my inner geek and that my partner didn't have to lug around a laptop case and the ubiquitous female handbag made it perfect.

And you know what: it's been absolutely perfect. Equipped with an SD Card, an USB mouse and a set of headphones it's a beautiful, tiny, unobtrusive office laptop during working hours and at home fast enough to comfortably use the BBC's iplayer, watch an .avi of a good movie and hook it up to the inhouse Ipod. All for ca 250 pounds. Yes, you get a normal sized Dell for that these days, but that's not as small, hence not fitting the criteria.

Re:Pre-loaded apps

Firefox and Openoffice.org have _earned_ their place on a desktop. IE or Mediaplayer didn't: MS used his OS monopoly to push them in the desktop. The same with Apple: they have a _almost_ monopoly for music players, but using this to push Quicktime ( = crap ) on everybody's desktop should not be allowed.

Canonical != monopoly

jamincolins is correct, and to add to his argument: canonical bundles software that is actually useful to the end user. If MS really was serious about making life easy for the customer they would've bundled MS Office and a decent mailing client to name a few.

Anything and everything bundled with Ubuntu (using it as an example since Canonical was named) is actually useful to most PC users (there are a few apps that some will use and some not), AND all applications can be removed and replaced with something else. Let's look at web browsers as a for-instance: don't like firefox? Uninstall it and load something else, even IE should you wish to do so (it comes with wine) whereas I dare you to try and completely remove IE from a windows installation. You just can't.

The way I see it Canonical makes it as easy as possible for developers of open and proprietary software to add/install their products to a Ubuntu installation.

No way MS does that.