Slashdot Mirror


Windows XP Starter Edition off to Slow Start

An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft may have started shipping its cheaper version of Windows in Asia, but getting support for its low-cost computing vision is still very much a work in progress. It seems Starter Edition has not gained much interest from vendors, nor has it generated much interest from end users." I haven't seen any sort of consumer research, but I imagine people don't like to have their number of possible network connections restrained by the host operating system.

39 of 368 comments (clear)

  1. Bad Marketing by fembots · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe in the coming days of Longhorn, Microsoft should sell a standard Shorthorn version, with built-in limitation.

    I believe normal users don't really know/care the differences, but if you tell them A is a standard version, it has xx features, they can also buy B with x features, people tend to choose former.

    However, if you tell consumers A is a standard version with x features, they can also buy a premium version with xx features, people still tend to choose the former, but some of them will upgrade to the latter simply because it is better.

    Oh by the way, naming it Shorthorn is just as bad as XP Starter, MS should have the standard Longhorn with fewer features, and come out market Longerhorn as the premium.

    1. Re:Bad Marketing by weighn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      surely its all about pricing points.

      Particularly when targeting this cut-down version at the piracy dominated Asian market.
      Features are a second consideration to cost -- even considering how limited the Starter version is.

      --
      Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
    2. Re:Bad Marketing by justforaday · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They should also use the "Pro" moniker on the low end (aka Home) edition and rename "Pro" to "Corporate Edition." There seem to be far too many people that feel that they need the "Pro" version of something, simply because it's better.

      --
      I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
    3. Re:Bad Marketing by Strudelkugel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sort of a tangent, but has Microsoft really done anything significant with Ballmer as CEO? When Gates had the job, they made Windows a success, created VB and the real possibility of RAD development, introduced their first 32 bit OS, began the design of .Net (nifty technology, idiotic name), and launched a very successful update to Windows.

      With Ballmer as CEO, Microsoft lost ground (and certainly mindshare) to Apple, issued questionable statements about TCO, introduced something as questionable as XP Starter Edition, and disbanded the IE developer group, leaving consumers with a bad experience when encountering the company's version of the the most widely used type of software application. The stock has done virtually nothing during Ballmer's tenure as well.

      My guess is Microsoft needs a new CEO if it is to become an interesting company again. I wouldn't be surprised to see Ballmer step down one day after a fight with institutional investors. The big question: Who is the right person for that job?

      --
      Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
    4. Re:Bad Marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Wouldn't this be like XP Home vs XP Pro?

      Yes it would. And that would be equally good marketing, because XP Home vs XP Pro actually makes marketing sense and worked out well.I have Pro at home for Home use, mainly because it's technically better in a number of ways and I'm silly enough to want to pay the premium price.

    5. Re:Bad Marketing by TheGavster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But with XP, you really *do* need the Pro version ...

      --
      "Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
    6. Re:Bad Marketing by TeraCo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's definately a pricing issue. Why would they pay actual dollars for any sort of version (no matter how cheap it is) when they can get the full version for free?

      --
      Not Meta-modding due to apathy.
    7. Re:Bad Marketing by mce · · Score: 3, Insightful
      There seem to be far too many people that feel that they need the "Pro" version of something, simply because it's better.

      It actually is better, but that's not the point I want to make. In my view, the fact that such people are actually buying Pro really is good marketing by MS.

      Many people use Home, which shows that Home is not perceived the same as Crippled or Starter. But those who want Pro "simply because it's better, even if they don't really know why it is better or why they need this betterness", are a real market segment. Such people want Pro in any case "because it's better", no matter what, and MS is rightfully exploiting that market segment just as any sane for-profit company does or should do.

    8. Re:Bad Marketing by Elminst · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why do ma an pa Johnson need Pro?

      They don't.
      IIS and the added domain functionality are completely useless to them. All they want is internet and email. And maybe some yahoo games.

      --
      No unauthorized use. Trespassers will be shot. Survivors will be shot again.
    9. Re:Bad Marketing by EvilSporkMan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Couldn't you just install a third-party VNC implementation instead of using Remote Desktop for the client or the server or both, depending on the policies at your workplace?

      --
      -insert a witty something-
    10. Re:Bad Marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The big difference here is that:

      version A: costs $5 for a pirated Windows XP Pro, if that.

      version B: costs $50, but is pretty much even more hamstrung than Windows XP Home.

      90% of people, even in the US, will buy version A if possible, until the probability for getting in trouble for buying version A becomes perceivable. Because version A isn't readily available in the US, it's a non-option here, but it is a real option in so many other places around the world.

      How many people in the US buy computers with XP Home and later upgrade to XP Pro? I can't see consumer behavior in this case being much different in Asia than the US.

    11. Re:Bad Marketing by Deathlizard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If MS was serious about piracy, and in the back of their mind using this to combat Linux, then they should be handing this out in the streets for free. Period.

      All they have to do is offer this as a free download, or include it with a MSN CD or something, Keep it crippled and stripped like it currently is, and have a icon on the desktop to upgrage it to XP home for a nominal fee. People building PC's on the street would probably use it simply because it keeps them more legal as well as it's totally free to them, and it gives MS a chance to reap something out of the PC's that would otherwise have a pirate OS on it.

    12. Re:Bad Marketing by dtfinch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's often Windows users who do Windows ports. There's nothing wrong with that. For most people and businesses, migrating from Windows to Linux or any other OS is not very wise unless they can be sure that the benefit will outweigh the costs. With Windows ports of OSS software, at least they can safely swap programs out one at a time until all they have left is OSS, at which point switching to Linux is a breeze.

      I got XP, Office, and Visual Studio .Net all legit, could find Windows ports of all the OSS software I needed, have had no viruses or spyware for many years, had many Windows-only programs which I loved dearly, and I still switched to Linux. I still have a Windows system with all the above mentioned Windows software, but it's just been collecting dust for the past year. They keyboard is underneath about a foot of papers and other trash. One of these days I'll cannibalize it for all the expensive hardware I put into it a few months before.

      Aside from a desire to train myself on Linux, anger and frustration might have had something to do with the switch. Microsoft has failed to serve my interests. They've impaired their own products, started this "Get the Facts" campaign which focuses on paid opinions and research biased against Linux, insulted people whom I have great respect for, and invested millions in legal attacks against Linux. Out of spite I wrote some network login scripts to allow the company where I work to use XP home as preinstalled on new systems without the usual problems.

      If Microsoft had just focused on writing and maintaining good software, I'd still have faith in them, and respect for them. But what do they have to show for the last 3 years aside from the usually monthly patches and a couple service packs? Just a lot of deceptive negative marketing against people who write their own software and share it freely. By doing so they've managed to do little more than offend lots and lots of OSS users, most of them also being users of Microsoft software. You don't win a lot of support by launching big marketing campaigns to insult and offend your own customers. They should have seen the trend towards community developed software as a sign that they need to do a better job, if their own users are competing with them and writing better software for free.

  2. it won't work by mirko · · Score: 2, Insightful

    but people still want the big thing so they'll get for "free" the xp os and forget about this "parody".

    --
    Trolling using another account since 2005.
    1. Re:it won't work by bleckywelcky · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Exactly, I wonder who the moron was that thought a stripped down version should limit the number of network connections or simultaneous running programs. They approached the situation from the wrong angle. They shouldn't inhibit base features, but should eliminate the extra features. Having network connections or programs running restricted would just piss me off. But, if they removed "extra" features like built-in games, built-in tools, management features, performance tools, support for multiple cpus, larger hard drives, more ram, etc ... then I would weigh the benefits of having those extra tools to better use the computer with. Even then, in those kinds of countries it probably wouldn't flourish due to rampant piracy, but I think it would do better than their current attempt.

  3. In the One-Copy Country by aspx · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In a One-Copy Country, the full version of Windows is free anyway. Why on earth would someone pay for a crippled version?

  4. The battle goes on... by pulitz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This just goes to show how threatened companies feel about alternatives (read: F/OSS). If you look about it from the global perspective, Microsoft's options caters for just about every audience: from poor to rich, honest and dishonest. Every one of those has a reason to use Windows -- generally it's "but everyone else uses it too!" It's a shame, really...

    1. Re:The battle goes on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, stopping piracy would help F/OSS since having to pay for Windows would make it be more price competitive.

  5. People don't like crippleware. by Coryoth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The restrictions in Starter Edition (low maximum resolution, limited number of applications that can be run at once) are completely arbitrary. Microsoft hasn't put these restrictions in place because it makes the software cheaper, it has put them in place because it wants to force a cheaper version to be less functional.

    The problem is that, regardless of whether users would actually need the functionality that Starter Edition doesn't have, people won't like it. People are simply averse to buying products that have been deliberately crippled. It doesn't matter whether the restrictions affect them, they feel insulted by being offered something that has been willfully hobbled.

    Jedidiah.

    1. Re:People don't like crippleware. by CPUGuy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Many products are deliberately crippled.

      My Geforce 6800, for example, has all 16 piplines , which is what the Ultra have, but 4 of them are turned off, and thus the vanilla 6800 is born.

      Light bulbs are engineered to burn out.

      There are so many examples.

      But really, who would buy this when you can pick up a full version off of your local street corner for $5

    2. Re:People don't like crippleware. by toddestan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oftentimes with hardware, the crippled version is a way for the hardware manufacturers to sell off chips that did not fully pass all the tests. My guess is that many GeForce 6800 Ultra chips fail because they have a bad pipeline or two. So nVidia disables those bad pipelines and viola - you get a perfectly good vanilla 6800. This lowers the cost of the Ultra (since Nvidia doesn't have to absorb the costs of trashing all the failed chips into the price of the non-failed chips), plus it brings a lower cost budget option into the market. Another example is Intel selling Pentium 4's with a bad bank of L2 cache disabled as Celeron D's.

      Of course, many times the demand for the budget version is so high that the hardware manufacturer ends up disabling otherwise perfectly good chips to satisfy the demand.

      Of course, this simply does not translate well to the software world, where it costs exactly as much for Microsoft to stamp out a "starter edition" CD as it does to stamp out an "XP Pro" cd. Even if Microsoft tried to make it as cheap as possible (Windows XP download edition?), they are still going to end up competing with the $5/CD street vendor.

    3. Re:People don't like crippleware. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Of course, many times the demand for the budget version is so high that the hardware manufacturer ends up disabling otherwise perfectly good chips to satisfy the demand.


      Now imagine you're talking about fruit. An orange gets pretty banged up and the grocer sells it for a little less. Ok. But then the grocer decides to start smashing oranges on the ground to sell. Doesn't that seem a little odd? Maybe a little wrong?

      Don't even try applying this analogy to apples, everyone knows that never works.
  6. Linux Starter Edition by the_other_one · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Linux Starter Edition

    Same price as full edition.
    Same features as full edition.
    Same amount of source as full edition.

    --
    134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
  7. much cheaper` by baojia · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I prefer to turn to linux for such a price`

  8. Network connections??! by Herr+Joebob · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The summary comment about users not wanting to have their OS limit network connections is a bit of a red herring... The average user doesn't really even know what a network connection IS, much less care about how many their OS allows. As long as it can browse and get e-mail (usually not even at the same time) they're happy with it. Starter Edition may be a silly idea, but at least be realistic about why it's silly.

  9. Not surprising... by CyanDisaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm not surprised that XP SE is off to a slow start. I mean, which is cheaper: a legit version of XP SE ($32), or a pirated copy of XP Home/Pro (~$5)? Also, should people want to upgrade to a full featured version of XP, it's still going to cost them an arm and a leg, isn't it? As best as I can tell, this is just Microsoft's way of saying "They can afford Windows now and have a perfectly good reason not to pirate it."

    Hope be with ye,
    Cyan

  10. Well duh... by Malor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Very few people are going to choose a 'cheap', but brain-damaged operating system, when they can get a more sophisticated one for free. They'll either (illegally) copy XP, or (legally) copy Linux.

    Further, if Microsoft manages to talk OUR government into pressuring THEIR governments into cracking down more on piracy, this will probably increase sales for them a little bit. It will also increase Linux adoption a very great deal.

    The dirty little secret that Microsoft has been hiding all these years is that piracy was GOOD for them in creating their monopoly. Now that they have a monopoly, however, they believe the illegal copying does them no good, so they are trying to stop it.

    But in many of those foreign countries, they do not yet have a monopoly. And the concept of serving the customer has been absent from Microsoft for so long that they actually think people will buy this brain-dead crap. Instead of doing the RIGHT thing by the customer, which is dropping the price on the normal product to something the local economy can supporty, they're trying this racket to protect their home monopoly pricing.

    Ultimately, it's just not going to work. They may eventually figure it out. I'm not convinced of this, however. They have been a monopoly for too long and fear losing that power more than they want to get into new markets.

  11. in Brazil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft tried to push the Starter Edition in Brazil, to replace Linux in a government-funded program to combat the digital divide.

    Brazilian representatives refused the offer, because they didn't want poor people to have a second-class computer, as if they were second-class citizens.

    With Linux, people have everything: the operating system, OpenOffice, Firefox, Gimp, programming languages and hundreds of useful software.

    (BTW I think it's revolting that MS put money to create a "worsened" version of Windows, instead of improve the "real one".)

    1. Re:in Brazil by compm375 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree for the most part, but keep in mind that in most cases the only software cost needed for Windows is the OS itself as there is a lot of F/OSS for Windows, such as "OpenOffice, Firefox, Gimp, programming languages and hundreds of useful software", exactly what you stated as everything a Linux user could need. There are great advantages of Linux over Windows, but the amount of free software available isn't really one of them.

  12. Well... Think about it. by dauthur · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I imagine people don't like to have their number of possible network connections restrained by the host operating system. Well people wouldn't get this OS if they want to start a server. Or download music. I assume they want to pretty much learn what a "pointer device" is.

  13. Let's Look At This by ToAllPointsWest · · Score: 3, Insightful

    1) Is the countries MS is seeking to market this product, illegitimate full copies are already sold at a cut rate 2) Since prosecution of the criminal copiers is nearly non-existant, why would a customer purchase a legal crippled version of the software vs, a fully-functional illegal version? On another note: This is a wonderful opportunity for Linux to make a good foothold.

    --
    They came for the Communists, and I didn't object - For I wasn't a Communist; They came for the Socialists, and I didn'
  14. Re:I thought windows WAS a starter system by pg110404 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's the difference between a kid's bike and a kid's bike with training wheels....

  15. THE INVISIBLE HAND OF THE MARKET AT WORK by mcc · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ASIA: Your products are too expensive. We aren't going to give you money for them.
    MICROSOFT: Hm. How about we give you a version of our product that does less, and you give us less money for it?
    ASIA: How about we use the version of your product that does more, and give you no money for it?
    (And they all lived happily ever after.)
  16. Re:They could just sell win2000 for $5 by NatteringNabob · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ummm, WinXP already is Win2000 with a different theme. The only difference between what you propose and what Miscrosoft is actually doing is the price.

  17. No one will actually use SE. by highfreq2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    My understanding of the Thai market is that most computers come with Windows Me, because it is cheap. Very few people actually use Me. Instead they wipe the drive and install a pirated version of XP.

    So Microsoft just went to all this trouble to develop a whole new OS version that people are just going to wipe and replace with pirated XP. Why make SE, when Me was aleady allowing MS to making a small amount of money on the sale new computers.

    It is odd.

  18. Re:I thought windows WAS a starter system by skingers6894 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes Patronizing is what the whole concept is.

    This is intended to combat piracy in those countries where it is rife.

    It goes something like this:

    Users - "We would like to buy your software but since you are charging the equivalent of a year's wages for it, it's difficult for us"

    MS - "Ahh we understand completely, have this knobbled version for only HALF a year's wages, no piracy excuses now"

    Users-"Hmmm, I think I saw a full copy for $5 down the street somewhere..."

  19. Starter Edition is NOT a cheap version of Windows by CGameProgrammer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I feel it's necessary to clarify this. Starter Edition is not a cheap alternative to XP Home; it's supposed to be for people who have never used a computer before. Ever. In fact, look here -- it's maximum resolution is 800x600 (that's XP Home/Pro's minimum supported resolution!) and it only allows three programs to run at once. But it has other features geared to people who are basically afraid of computers.

    Of course, people who can't even use XP Home or OSX are probably not eager to use computers at all, so the market for this is understandably minimal.

    --
    ~CGameProgrammer( );
  20. Just what MS Wants... by DavidD_CA · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If your RTFA, it implies that the Starter edition is not taking off because the vendors are still loading the XP Home version instead.

    So, it's not saying that sales are declining, they're just opting for the more expensive product. They're not getting the cheap one.

    --
    -David
  21. Re:who would buy...? by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 3, Insightful
    OMG, right and wrong, yes people, you must give all your money to giant monopolising corporations cos its the 'right' thing to do, don't worry that they are assraping you for every last penny and the product is over priced, cos pirating it is so wrong, you are evil and deserve to go to hell for being a satanic baby killing warez monkey.

    the law does not have a monopoly on right and wrong, there are thousands of things wrong with it.