Comments on: Microsoft Recommends Windows 7 Home Premium for Netbooks

By: Anti-TurtleWhisperer

Anti-TurtleWhisperer — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:58:37 +0000

TurtleWhisperer,
Why would you read and then comment on an article that you don’t care about. Clearly your not only unintelegent but your not very knowledgeable about technology. The different versions of windows are very important to tech savvy people because the technology in them differs so greatly (ie windows 7 starter can only run 3 programs where windows 7 ultimate can run a multiple operating systems through a “virtual PC”) If you dont care about the content of the article and your not smart enough to realize the significance of the content then dont post a comment.

There is also nothing offensive in the article or the posts.

By: JT

JT — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 06:00:39 +0000

Kevin, you’re just buying spin here. “Microsoft recommends you run Windows Home Premium” can be easily reinterpreted as “Microsoft recommends you buy our $75 product instead of our $25 product.” Really!

Starter Edition is obviously a steaming turd that will frustrate experienced users and confuse (and frustrate) inexperienced users. In fact, the only way SE is usable is if . . . you run all your apps through a browser! An amusing side effect of Microsoft’s money grab here.

The other interesting thing is that XP Home, an 8 year old OS is just fine with most consumers. That won’t change with Win 7–there’s still nothing there that makes users say “I need this over XP”. Wonder how long before they take away the XP Home choice, which will be likely be favored by for most netbook buyers at $50-$75 less.

By: j.steven livacich

j.steven livacich — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 04:11:10 +0000

Whatever happened to”Vista”, it seems to have only supplanted “XP” these last eighteen months or so; and is Windows 7 going to have the same irksome tool-bar change that led to so much criticism. This does seem to be a good market to ask consumers to make many market change in operating systems–especially as there is so much “2000″ and “XP” in use– I see no real demand for it.

By: allancj

allancj — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 08:42:26 +0000

I’m curious to know at what level the tablet and touch facilities become available.

When Vista came out I bought the Home edition expecting to use it on a tablet, but, of course, tablet facilities not available on that edition.

Also, I’m curious to know whether there have been any further tablet refinements in Windows 7.

By: Luscious

Luscious — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 05:55:15 +0000

No offense Kevin, but my aim was not to lecture you at all.

I agree with you concerning OS efficiency – a lean and compact install is so ideal for the limited storage space on the cheapest netbooks. But even on the strictest systems an OS can get bloated over time thanks to windows updates, registry nuisances, hidden cache files, restore points, etc… You know the drill.

XP sure may work on a 4GB drive, but considering that OS was released over 7 years ago, when Joe Average’s notebook sold with a 20GB 4200RPM drive, I’d say the storage requirements for XP were very lean, especially the streamlined installs some folks did using the first USB thumbdrives. Personally, I would not struggle with 4GB to install XP, and I would feel too restricted to see much real use from a system with that little storage headroom.

I can understand your uses differ from mine, no arguments there, but considering the cheap cost of notebook (and netbook) storage today, that extra 1GB or so an OS might use for overhead will only make a very negligible dent on your system drive, and shouldn’t impact at all the way you use the device.

And while you and I can both delve deep into the OS and tinker to our hearts content, many users don’t have that knowledge and may simply choose a netbook with a bigger drive, especially after they have experienced the compromises they’ve had to make by using a 4GB netbook.

Sorry for going so off topic here, I just don’t think 1GB more or 1GB less is an issue when the requirements mention 16GB. Windows 7 will require a netbook with greater storage than XP, it was to be expected.

By: Sheila

Sheila — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 04:43:59 +0000

Jake, The Windows 7 Starter is the version that can run only 3 applications. This version WILL NOT be sold to consumers. The two versions that WILL be sold directly to consumers are the Windows 7 Home Premium and the Windows 7 Professional. With these two versions you can run as many applications as your memory will allow.

By: gmazin

gmazin — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 02:34:25 +0000

Also for clarification XP licenses are sold for $10 for netbooks

By: gmazin

gmazin — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 02:32:35 +0000

$50 is a lot for a $300 system.

By: GoodThings2Life

GoodThings2Life — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 00:53:12 +0000

Let’s face it… despite the “retail” pricing of Windows, no one has EVER paid retail price for Windows on a new system. OEM’s always get significantly discounted pricing on Windows, often as low as $50-60/copy.

Upgrade costs are never completely unreasonable either, and there are tons of ways to find inexpensive copies (and even legitimately free copies in some contest giveaways).

The only people who are going to be spending a fortune are the ones who have a system that doesn’t have Windows at all or just doesn’t bother to shop around, and you can’t reach out and slap every consumer for being stupid.

Anyway, I think encouraging Home Premium is the right move. It’s probably going to be the same pricing structure that Vista Home Premium and XP Home have been. I still think there are too many editions with unnecessary distinctions, but despite the disapproval, Microsoft is moving forward with that plan. At least they’re playing it smart and only pushing the ones that will really matter.

By: Kevin C. Tofel

Kevin C. Tofel — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 00:09:30 +0000

Luscious, considering I used to use an XP netbook with a 4GB SSD module, I can easily get by with less storage. ;) My point wasn’t about netbook storage capacity or penny-pinching. I was simply thinking about efficiency in terms of what needs to be on the drive and what doesn’t. If something doesn’t need to be there, I personally don’t want it there. It’s the same reason I remove the various language support files from OS X. Don’t want ‘em and don’t need ‘em wasting space. Thanks for the budgetary lecture though! ;)