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."

Pre-loaded apps

[elrous0]

So we complain when MS bundles in a bunch of apps that it's monopolistic. Now are we going to complain that it sucks when they don't?

System design as a whole

[LiquidCoooled]

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)

Re:Open Source CD

[Bartab]

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

Re:Pre-loaded apps

[morgan_greywolf]

No, we're complaining that it sucks when the OEM doesn't. We don't have a problem with OEMs bundling apps with their hardware (something that major OEMS like Apple, Dell and HP do all the time), we just have a problem with OS vendors who are convicted monopolies with 90+% of the market bundling a bunch of crap in an attempt to put their competitors out of business.

Re:BWAHAHAHAHA!

[elrous0]

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).

Despite what Microsoft may say...

[Ngarrang]

...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.

Re:BWAHAHAHAHA!

[gstoddart]

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

...first?

[SilentBob0727]

In what could be a first Microsoft is working to create a special build of Windows

What the hell was Windows CE?
What's running on the XBox?
Is OP being facetious or an idiot?

Re:Pre-loaded apps

[jotok]

Oh, the iPod works wonderfully with other online stores.
But iTunes is worthless for other music players.

ITunes itself is not the store. It's just a manager (and not a very good one).
If it were a commercial offering, then I would have an issue with it conflicting with other music managers or even WMP. But it's not, you can get free ones anywhere.

It seems like your objection is based on the fact that iPod has been successful. The weird thing to me is that iPod is inferior in many respects to other players in terms of UI and battery life--but people love the wheel thingy so they keep buying them.

Re:Pre-loaded apps

[jamincollins]

Minor difference here, but MS was bundling applications that they made and abusing their monopoly position in one market for an advantage in another. Perhaps the same could be said for Apple as it is bundling its own iTunes software along with a variety of other applications. However, I don't see it as the same situation with Canonical as they didn't write most of the software they are bundling. They may have added to the software but much of what they distribute is the creation of others.

Re:Pre-loaded apps

[CastrTroy]

They bundled DoubleSpace/DriveSpace because it was a useful thing that they felt many of their users would benefit from. Same goes for EMM386, IE, MP, and all the other stuff. They've added a lot of features to their OS, without charging much more for it. Do you really want to pay to have support for extended memory? Or for browsing web pages? or for playing video files? Because until MS came along and started including it in the base cost of the OS, a lot of this stuff did cost extra.

Re:Open Source CD

[Chineseyes]

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.

If you were doing it right

[Anonymous Coward]

You wouldn't be designing your pages "for" any resolution. Your webpage is information. Their web browser is formatting. If you start formatting your information, you're doing what they should be free to do.

Re:Pre-loaded apps

[jotok]

Windows should only be bundled with non-competing, non-commercial apps.

That is, it's cool if Dell bundles MS Office, but it's not cool if Microsoft forces them to do this so OpenOffice can't compete. Most customers will want an office suite so something should be bundled, but it should be the decision of the manufacturer, not the OS provider.

You are really hitting on all the "misinterpret the argument" cylinders today, you know that?

Re:Open Source CD

[Atti K.]

Or at least the year of Linux on the UMPC ;)

Canonical != monopoly

[AndGodSed]

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.

So why did they steal Stac tech?

[Anonymous Coward]

If it was purely because the users would like it, why did they steal doubledrive?

IE was TOTALLY to kill netscape. The Halloween documents say so.

Media Player is to push Windows Media (which has MS protection and can only be streamed by servers that run MS's software). Else why would they leave out DVD playback? That's a hell of a lot more useful to people than playing WMP Pi version.

And as to costing extra, the real cost of Windows has kept going up, but when this is pointed out, you and people like you say "ah, but how much more do you get now with windows than you did before? You get WMP, IE, ....". So we ARE paying for it. 100% of windows computer owners are paying for it. Even if they got their media player free with their graphics card or DVD drive.

Re:Open Source CD

[mlwmohawk]

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:Eee PC a runaway success?

[MightyYar]

HP and Dell each sell about 11 million computers total per quarter. So that's about 3 million per month. Roughly half are laptops - 1.5 million. How many different models of laptop does Dell have? A dozen? At least 7 (from their home laptop page). If the low-end laptops sell better, let's say their inspiron line accounts for 70% of sales volume - about a million units. They have 4 inspiron models, so that's roughly 250,000 units/month per model for the largest PC maker in the world. On average, they sell

Asus is not even in the top 5, and maybe has a 5% market share to Dell's 15-20%. So for them, a laptop that sells 100,000 units a months is indeed a runaway success.

Re:Open Source CD

[plague3106]

Fear? How about just normal business? Yes, they want to keep or grow their market share. That's a shock to you? Really?

Re:So special and different, it already exists!

[Noodlenose]

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:Open Source CD

[mlwmohawk]

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.

The best suited OS will make the year

[slocan]

If it was the year of the linux desktop (finally) then why would ASUS be making such an effort with MS to get rid of the linux on their EEE PC?

Because ASUS wants to sell eee PCs (make money), with whatever software people are willing or wanting to dump their money for -- even if it is Windows, if it runs slower than Linux on the eee, if it is only because of FUD fed fear of Linux, etc.

ASUS may have concluded that Linux was the best suited OS for their PC, performance and feature wise. But if a Windows version will be bought by people that wouldn't buy it otherwise, then ASUS is more than likely to welcome Microsoft and ship a WindowsXPLite version of the eee.

They chose Linux not because it was free software, but because it was the best suited OS. And that may be a reason to consider that it is the year of Linux, on the eee PC at least:

1. * Linux is the best suited OS for the platform, performance and feature wise;
2. * The dominant OS developer is playing catch up, and still not delivering the goods.

Cheers,

Re:Open Source CD

[geekoid]

Historically, MS has never been really good at seeming trends in their infant state, much less responding to them.
No, not a troll, just a historic fact.

MS isn't very good at building operating systems, Vista being the first in house from scratch attempt.

Re:Open Source CD

[mlwmohawk]

How does MS prevent them from doing so?

Hmmm, maybe you've not been paying attention over the last 20 years?

How does Microsoft, a company convicted of illegally maintaining their monopoly on operating systems on "personal computers" in the U.S. and Europe keep "personal computer OEMs" from using a different OS?

Is that the question you are asking?

Not so

[Stephen Ma]

I do not see MS having an issue with these "Less" Powerful machines. In a year these machines specs will be well within what XP will need to run.

Sure, eventually technology will make even a fat pig like Vista look small and svelte. But Linux will still be slimmer -- and therefore cheaper. If people have the choice between a $200 machine and a $100 machine that does as much or more, guess which one they will pick.

Another problem for Microsoft is that people want their computers to be useful. Windows by itself is rather worthless, unless all you want to do is play Solitaire. People who have Windows will need to spend extra for applications, and that will easily double or triple the cost of their tiny laptops.

In contrast, Linux comes with a full suite of very functional and powerful applications -- and all of it is free.

Of course, Microsoft could upgrade Works to match the functionality -- and price -- of Linux's applications. But if Works became that powerful, who would buy Office? Nobody. MS is in a bind, they know it.

Conclusion: Linux will always have a giant price advantage over Windows.

Re:Why special version.

[Anonymous Coward]

All they would need to do is add Outlook Express

And having opened the floodgates, it will be as virus-ridden, spyware- and malware-laden as the regular desktop.

Re:Hardware can't ignore the trend, either

[turing_m]

"Neither can Dell, HP or any other hardware manufacturer. This trend impacts them every bit as much as Microsoft, although on the whole I think hardware manufacturers should be able to adapt easier than Microsoft. "

I think both MS and the hardware manufacturers have known about this for a long time. The eternal upgrade cycle was driven by obsolescence. The moment that faster CPUs would not obsolete older, slower CPUs because of the lack of killer apps requiring faster CPU speed, the profits would drop off. Changes would have to be made to the business model. It could go several ways, and no doubt there have been contingency plans drawn up on this very subject.

If you've ever seen "Letters from Iwo Jima", you will see that MS, Intel and the like are in much the same position as General Kuribayashi, facing the inevitable defeat at the hands of commoditization. If they are smart, their goal will be to bleed the consumer for as much as they can on the way down.

Intel will be trying to beat Via and AMD with just enough performance increase with a reduced power requirement, but not to produce something so good that they can't make something a bit better in another year or two. Eventually I would expect them to look for a way to start increasing obsolescence in other ways. e.g. CPUs will be designed to fail after a minimum number of years. It's tough though, as the technology plateaus they won't be the only one manufacturing CPUs and by doing this they will get a reputation for reduced reliability which will feed sales of the competition.

Another way is of course to include a Microsoft operating system that will be overcome with malware given enough time. This is probably more likely.

What has Microsoft done? They have waited until someone forced their hand. Microsoft has retooled XP and is ready to sacrifice their margins for increased volume. Once the market really takes off, I would expect them to drop the margins of Office as well in order to properly compete with something like Ubuntu that includes OpenOffice. If they don't do this, Ubuntu will be perceived as more useful and gain adherents. The last thing MS wants is a large consumer base happy to buy from a hardware manufacturer who is unwilling to sell MS and Linux systems for the same price (likely by paying MS a drawback for Linux installs).

If I were a greasy monopolist in the shoes of MS, I would see Asus and cut a deal with them. You either install XP on some of your systems and pay us a small fee for ANY sale of a computer (including that of Linux, perhaps even more in the case of Linux), or we will partner with your nearest competitor and subsidize them until you are making no money on your Eee PC. Do we have a deal?

This bluff might be called. I can see that it would be in the long term interest of a country like China to subsidize Linux in a price war until they gained enough mindshare, and then their hardware manufacturers would be free of the Microsoft Tax.

Unfortunately, the biggest problem Ubuntu faces is being in opposition to the long term interest of manufacturers, software vendors, and MS. It might be possible that given enough marketshare, spyware on Ubuntu will become rampant (more money in exploiting vulnerabilities than finding fixes) and people will buy a new computer rather than reinstall. This would be good for the hardware manufacturers and ironically increase support of Ubuntu.

Traditional software vendors (those that sell the install rather than the support) must see the repository as a threat, since the repository is just so much easier and also safer. Most of the large vendors devoid of FOSS religion (e.g. Adobe) will see the threat of their mindshare being eroded more easily via the repo and instinctively avoid encouraging Linux by making their software available. (The exception is the gaming company that sells content that is much more expensive to create than the Open Source community can compete with. e.g. WoW.)

Certainly interesting times.