Slashdot Mirror
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."
This is where ASUS can come in a kickass, but bundling all the Windows versions of popular open source apps, like OpenOffice.org, GIMP, Inkscape, Audacity, MPlayer, etc.
Add in a little splash screen blurb that all of this stuff ALSO comes on the Linux EEE, which runs faster, more reliably, etc.
C'mon ASUS, whatdya say?
My blog
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?
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
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.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
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?
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)
liqbase
Am I just being cynical in thinking that Asus are only offering XP because Microsoft are threatening them in some way? Why on earth would they take a heavily customised thing like the Eee and then replace a key component, the OS, with something that is so clearly inadequate for the purpose and then market it on an equal footing? Why cannot they just turn round to Microsoft and tell them that putting XP on it is pointless?
Almost anything by Microsoft is lightweight. ;)
And, with XP being taken out back and shot in favor of the new baby, why didn't they try to come up with a scaled-down version of Vista that would run on the hardware? Surely they'd want to disprove the claims that Vista was a hardware pig any chance they got.
And then, with Windows 7 theoretically coming soon, they, theoretically, could use this hardware as a testbed for showing off just how *amazing* the performance of 7 is compared to everything else.
Regarding CE: Microsoft seems positively schizophrenic when it comes to positioning CE in any market...it's theoretically their "embedded OS" but out SAN uses "XP Embedded" as its controlling software, and apparently CE is relegated to basic phone use, down from the PDAs and smaller pseudo-PCs of the late 90s, early '00s (much like the Eee machine, come to think of it...)
...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.
Bearded Dragon
...a Vista Lite is out of the question then?
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.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
XP has the whole backward-compatibility thing going which is both their big strength and the albatross around their neck. In particular, I expect the big draw is running your standard non-hobbled version of MS Office so you can read the files sent to you by other people running it that nothing else can read. And unlike Linux, CE has no mechanism for even trying to run standard Windows apps under emulation.
Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
"Lightweight XP" - Hell, that's what I've been using across my rigs for years, thank God for nLite. XP has grown to be a pretty stable OS by now, and if you get rid of all the crap Microsoft stuffed into the system it's actually lightweight enough to be run on low-spec hardware just fine.
Rudolf Hess edited Mein Kampf. He was the very first grammar nazi.
Isn't that what Windows CE is suppose to be for?
So we complain when MS bundles in a bunch of apps that it's monopolistic.
Bundling apps does not make you a monopoly. Bundling an app to hurt a competitor & expand into their space when you're already a monopoly is anti-competitive.
Now are we going to complain that it sucks when they don't?
Yup, if they hadn't been such a bunch of predatory assholes, they'd be able to bundle apps & they wouldn't produce such a shit operating environment
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.
-- LP-Research
Just install Windows 2000 on it. I love the Easy button.
Enlightenment is the elimination of that which is unnecessary.
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.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
What's running on the XBox?
Is OP being facetious or an idiot?
Life would be easier if I had the source code.
Whilst using the Win2000 theme does save space, it looks dog ugly. However there are loads of theme hacks for XP, so there must be a clean, neat one that minimises used space, maybe using a vertically smaller font in addition to compacting UI elements by removing the odd pixel of padding and margin?
Also, the same goes for GTK for the Linux variants on the Eee.
Also a full screen editor, like WriteRoom for the Mac, would be a neat application on the Eee. Is there something like that available (yeah, I guess I could maximise a terminal window).
Also all applications should have a borderless full-screen mode, otherwise the title bar is using valuable vertical screen estate.
Instead of having to deal with microsoft's inability to make a decent working system on your platform, why not go back to working on your custom linux installation that makes full use of the hardware? Maybe, just maybe that would make things easier, and leave the XP install to the user!
I have this feeling that Microsoft may sound the death knell for the eeepc in the near future while other UMPC's blow it out of the water. Probably intentional too. I wouldnt be shocked if they stall the release of the release of the next versions of the eeepc (desktop and the 9" laptop) because they take forever to build a custom XP install.
On the other hand, Asus, may unintentionally make Microsoft look really bad when linux has no problem running on their system, complete and all, already a mainstream product and microsoft cant even supply an OS that can run on it properly, lacking all the cool features and apps that the linux install has.
One more note, Microsoft isnt monopolistic if they include apps, as long as they arent their own applications, or are supplied by the OEM. What got them in trouble was bundling their own web browser in an attempt to control web standards and curb an emerging market in their favor.
CE sucks on what is for it 'larger screens'
ce on VGA is poor...
CE on larger than VGA resolutions is very painful
lots of apps & displays & views don't work right.
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Microsoft doesn't have to work that hard! There are plenty of stripped-down versions of WindowsXP available through "The Pirate Bay" today. I'm sure quite a few versions there will be more than acceptable on the EeePC.
But, if they don't use what's there, what they make will end up there... so either way...
XP can be slimmed down to run very well on the Eee...I dual boot XP and Xubuntu on mine. XP can run my work software and hibernate. Xubuntu is what I use for fun.
Microsoft already has a stripped down version of XP shipping to corporate customers.
They'll change the login screens, and BOOM! Its XPeee. (or eeeXP, whatever)
Are you kidding?
I own a Windows CE handheld (HTC Wizard http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_Wizard) full of hardware capabilities and the pre-installed Windows Mobile 5 renders it almost unusable.
Luckily I could join a development team that were porting Linux to it.
Genesis 1:32 And God typed
what I want to know is... how does this effect the price?
I mean presumably there is a windows cost added on, and with Linux/Win being sold side by side this might finally get the consumers to see something that only us geeks have been that knowledgeable about: ie, the windows tax.
I've had mine since they came out, and I will not be dirtying it with windows...
I wiped the linux install and installed XP the day I got mine per the instructions you can find on the web. Did the install from a USB flash drive. Worked great and the system runs just fine with XP Pro. Not sure why they want a special build of XP...
Nice. That's a real kick in the nuts for Microsoft and all the Microsoft fanboys. "I like your os and all, but can you make it run as well as Linux?".
Good luck with that. Just the virus protection requirement alone will blow this one apart.
It's already been done. look it up. I've actually found it runs even better than ubuntu on certain rigs. I've been playing with a few different linux distros to learn what all the fuss is about, and what I've come up with is that if a machine has integrated video, ubuntu runs like a dog, whereas Windows Fundamentals will glide rather effortlessly. It's XP SP2 built up from the kernel specifically for old hardware, unlike the 'lite' versions you'll find all over that were fullblown, then stripped out. It'll run happily on a pentium 133. Was designed as a stepping stone for small businesses that wanted to move to XP from, say, 98 but couldn't afford to upgrade hardware as well. Granted, there are some utilities it does not include, but generally if it runs under XP, it'll run in Fundamentals (hardware reqirements aside). I have an old IBM laptop (p3-450) that I'm turning into a wifi digital pictureframe. Everything integrated, of course. I tried Ubuntu and Kubuntu, both ran like crap, and of course, couldn't enable any advanced graphic options, whereas a similarly specced desktop with an old geforce2 MX I have here just FLIES with all the options turned on. I like XP as far as windows OSs go.. I'm comfortable with it, and will be dissapointed when it's finally replaced by Vista, but I've now recycled a few old systems with Fundamentals, and from what I've seen of it, it's very well done.
what a concept!
... but it helps; doesn't it M$?
Once more proving that you don't have to be big to be slow
Comment removed based on user account deletion
okay... and they'll add in a few other optional functions. My EEE works better with FLP than it does with XP, and since I don't have a blackberry, I wouldn't know about tethering (or care).
The Eee PC is a mild success for an extremely nich product; as a runaway success? Not even close...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Windows 2000 was overshadowed by XP too early in its lifetime. It will run on almost any hardware and it's fast. I put it on a tiny Toshiba Libretto back in the day when XP literally choked on it and I also put it on an 800 MHz Fujitsu Lifebook when XP ran like a dog.
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.
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.
I understand that Windows Server 2008 (based on alot of SIMILAR technology to Vista) is able to be pared down to just a Command Line.
Why can't they do that do Vista?.
This is the part I don't get about the Vista being so bloated. Everytime I have gone back to fix my own code, I have made it faster, smaller and better.
Why does the MS software seem to be going in the other diretion?
Sorry 3 minute boot times - unacceptable. My 486/100 could boot Windows 3.11 in 30 seconds. that was 94' I have never encountered a faster MS computer system (If you see what I mean).
Move along... there is no sig here.
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.
Seven Days with Ubuntu Unity
But, Microsoft can't ignore the prospect of small, cheap, low-end laptops becoming widespread which are being shipped with Linux by default.
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.
For decades we've been subject to the hardware/software upgrade circle jerk. When Vista hit the market millions of PC users, particularly in the enterprise, thought their hardware was still serviceable and Vista didn't represent any compelling value. Couple a grown up Linux, that's functional and modular, with low cost hardware and all of a sudden the cost of Vista became a very big issue. And the cost of the hardware to carry that bloatware created a reverse circle jerk vortex in the minds of many technology consumers.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
If it was purely because the users would like it, why did they steal doubledrive?
....". 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.
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,
OMG... the new and different "lightweight" super-special version of XP they are going to "make" Microsoft create for them... has already been around for years. It's called "XP Embedded".
Looks like someone is going to have to work a bit harder on the next MS-hate story.
Personally, the EEE is looking less and less like a good deal. The screen is crap, it can't even run Windows, and as it turns out, it's not really "low cost". Instead of a $500 laptop with a tiny screen, I can go get a full-featured Dell for the same amount of money (or even less, if its on sale).
And yet win apps running in Linux under Wine "cope" with these system limitations just fine.
Wasn't there already an official lightweight version of Windows XP Professional called Windows Fundamentals for Legacy PCs ? If this "new version" can be even more lightweight, I won't say no for it.
It's called NLite... I've used it to strip down XP for use on a bunch of P3 450s for a small cluster project in the lab where I spend more time than I should. We were able to strip it down so we could start a .NET based solution to do some combustion research. It actually ran decently fine on anything above 256 MB of ram. While I waited for him to finish up his code, I had them running Grid.org on it to compare it to a C2D Overclocked to 3.2 Ghz with 2 GB ram (this was basically 3 weeks after it first came out), and it only took something like 5 computers to match the throughput that machine. And most of the boxes in the cluster were literal junk from other labs. Before everyone starts flaming me about 'well why didn't you use linux?' - we had a site license and didn't have to pay, he was comfortable with C# and .NET, mono wasn't as mature as it is right now, and yes, the next version of the cluster will probably be linux based.
I don't know how much you can strip out of something and still make it desirable for an end user though. Most of the gain that we had was simply turning off all the pretty crap and cutting out all the multimedia stuff. When you actually used one as a terminal, it wasn't that bad - it was just kinda ugly.
Most of the other end users that I talk to (read family that relies on me being the resident geek) would rather have a pretty and slow machine than an ugly fast one. YMMV
I have been developing hardware and software for about 30 years and there is something happening in computers that is "important."
For what I can see, the nature of hardware has reached a plateau. RAM speed, hard disk speed, and CPU speed have all reached a practical top-end in their current form. Yea, sooner or later a breakthrough will happen, but we are not there yet.
So we are left with the only option, making bigger disks, more RAM, and more CPUs, but they are not "faster."
So, unless and until a breakthrough happens, systems like Vista can't push hardware anymore because it isn't faster and more CPU's won't help a single thread process a key stroke or mouse action.
For the time being, bloat can't be cured with a new computer, so people aren't buying them. Low end computers like the EeePC are almost as fast as your desktop. Microsoft's bloat to sell boxes (with Windows, of course) is starting to backfire.
People HATE big computers, they want something just big enough to do what they want. Now that speed is "static" and small is big enough for most, Microsoft has got to slim down Windows.
It will be interesting to watch this play out.
MS had a vista product aimed at this market segment: origami, however vista is too large for this ultra cheap pc. they also have windows mobile. But every one know windows mobile has very little to do with windows, and fails to run everyday windows applications.
Vista origami can run nicely on the already existing (900$ ) Umpc, but the ultra cheap eee pc was an unexpected success.
And MS already has a modularized version of XP ready, XP embedded. It is a small step to offer that to Asus with special licensing/branding condition (=cheap)
Ive been using the 4gb asus eeepc 701 since it came out
I bought an 120gb external usb drive and have been running xp off of it with no more or less pains than a normal xp pc
yes the screen size is a pain with some apps that dont size down very well, such as nero
I switch to a virtual mode for those case and get on with it
i dont really mind the small screen size, it makes me focus on work and less on gaming... although quake3 does run very well.thasnkyouverymuch
back in the day we didnt have no old school
I've got an odd hunch the HP Omnibook 300 had a custom Windows build:
http://www.hpmuseum.net/display_item.php?hw=123
Microsoft already has the perfect product. Windows NT4 is proven technology, runs on minimal hardware, has a small footprint, and only needs a few tweaks (USB, firewire, wifi support). Integrate the latest security updates into a new build and ship it. All they need to do is blow some dust off the old girl and clean her up a bit. She'll still dance.
Actually, I own a copy of Windows XP Lite; it's called Windows 2000, and it does everything I'd want to do with a EEE, and then some, and does it reasonably quickly. I run Windows 2000 on my Pentium 200 laptop, and find it quite salubrious; if I bought a EEE today, it's likely what I'd [try to] install.
Back around 1990 Apple was struggling internally whether to "bifurcate" the MacOS into a "low end" OS version suited for entry level and educational platforms and a "high end" version for power users and business. Apple eventually decided to keep their "one size fits all" approach, largely for fear of pissing off developers who might be forced to develop 2 versions of everything. I think Microsoft has now found themselves in pretty much this same position. Vista is bloatware that runs like a truck, even on expensive hardware, when compared to XP, and especially when compared to Linux. Does Vista make sense for entry level and educational platforms? I don't believe so.
So here comes a new class of highly popular computers, ultra mobiles like the ASUS eee (I love mine!), and at least part of Microsoft is trying to respond and not lose the market segment. Does this raise the question whether people will accept a "one size fits all" OS model? I think it does and it has. YMMV.
Not sure why they need to create a cut down version of XP. It runs just fine on mine with hardly any tweaks. The real issue is the 4GB SSD but this is also an issue for the default Xandros distro it comes with.
I have XP Pro SP2 with all updates, WMP10, Winamp, MPC, ffdshow, Notepad++, UltraEdit, Office 2003 (Word and Excel only), mIRC, Windows Live Messenger, Total Commander, Firefox and a few other little single exe apps like PuTTY and still have 1.5GB of SSD left. It runs perfect. Boots quickly and is just as responsive as a "normal" laptop. I originally put Windows Fundamentals for Legacy PCs on my Eee as I have it from my Software Assurance contract with Microsoft however the lack of NULL driver gave me issues with Cygwin so I decided to just stick full XP on it and have not looked back. I can't see I have noticed any difference between full XP and WinFLP.
The dialog size issue pops up every now and then but it is very rare once the system is up and running. The only screen I found was an issue is the 'System Properties' screen (WinKey+Break or System in the Control Panel). However as all these screens default to the OK button you can just hit enter to confirm or Esc to cancel. Pretty simple.
It also seems a little too late for Microsoft to do this. I mean by the time they get around to releasing it the 4GB SSD issue will be history as 8+ GB SSD will be the norm (the Eee 900 has 12 and 20GB models from what I have read and are due out very soon).
The only tweak I have done is move %TEMP% to an SDHC card however it made no difference to the performance (at least that I can tell) and was done just to save the SSD from being used as scratch space. I also stuck the Mozilla temp files on the SDHC too. However everything else (pagefile included as sticking it on the SDHC slowed the machine down) is on the SSD.
It would make more sense to me if Microsoft took Vista and stripped bits out of that. There are a lot of people who have done this and are very happy with Vista on their Eee. Ben Armstrong (Virtual PC PM) has done just this, have a read at http://blogs.msdn.com/virtual_pc_guy/archive/2008/03/05/using-virtual-pc-to-evaluate-eee-pc.aspx
Goodness knows why, as that would have been a reasonable spec machine back in 2001, when XP came out! XP != Vista, it seems the guy took a while to realise that.
For what it's worth an old P3 machine I built 9 years ago is still going strong. It runs XP Pro on 320MB RAM (and a 450MHz Katmai P3), with Office 2007 and Firefox. And because I don't have any junk running on there, it idles at just under 100MB at the desktop and you really have to go some (ie load games) to make it use any more than 256MB or so of its RAM. Embarrasingly, it boots into Windows faster than this Core2 Duo machine running Vista (pared back as best as I was able)....
I'd expect XP to pretty much fly on the Eee PC, it's just the small screen size that'll be a ptoblem (as XP was the first Windows OS to assume you're using 800x600 or higher right from the off).
Microsoft has offered a product called Windows XP Embedded for a long time. It lets hardware vendors basically roll their own version of XP to suit the requirements of their device. They can take out this or that, assume a smaller screen resolution, or what-have-you. A tool that ships with the product cooks up an install image to their specifications, et voila!
I don't see anything particularly revolutionary about Microsoft helping Asus out with a customized version of Windows for the Eee PC when they routinely do the same for ATM manufacturers, for example.
Breakfast served all day!
Has anybody gotten eeeXUbuntu (supposed to be optimised for the eee) to work? I always get a "Error 15" message when I try to boot from the internal drive.
First off, Microsoft will not allow ASUS to put open source applications on Windows preloads. Secondly, ASUS isn't dumb enough to put disparaging comments on the screen of a device which is already in the hands of the customer and tells them they should have bought the other model.
As far as how I see Microsoft moving on this goes, I see a new OS from them called Microsoft Windows CE-Vista for Eee PC or UMP Edition. I doubt they can get XP down to the size which can compete with Linux so putting a new face on a Windows CE variant and calling it XP or something like that to make people think it's something of value. In other words, they'll spend millions on marketing and throw garbage out as the product. But this time, it'll fail because they can't rely on quad core CPUs to hid their technical failures. IMO.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
But bearing in mind that these days my computing time is split 80%/20% in favour of Linux over XP, my real problem with XP is the registry.
If I'm going to buy a EEEPC then I will do so because of it's portability for where I can't easily use my desktop PC or a laptop. Therefore a EEEPC won't be my main computing platform but a means to carry about some of the applications that I regularly use, whether or not I buy the Linux or XP based EEEPC.
And here is where Linux has a distinct advantage over XP. Whilst no-one is denying that many users find configuring Linux a daunting task that often involves manually editing text configuration files for applications, the fact is that once they are written, it's very easy to copy the configuration files over to another PC to have those applications work in precisely the same way on that other PC. A case in point is the Vim editor where I've spent a long time over the years creating and changing a configuration file that does all manner of wonderful things with shortcuts and macros. And because Vim's configuration files are held in my home Linux directory (along with the configuration files of just about every other application that I've customised), then it's dead easy to manually copy them to a new machine, or get a shell script with a little rsync knowledge to update config files across machines pretty much automatically.
Unfortunately, in the case of Windows, most commercial applications obfuscate their configurations deliberately inside the registry and it's pretty much impossible to find and export those parts of the registry so that, when one of those applications gets used on another machine, it's difficult to bring its configuration across with it.
This is why, with XP, I am doing my utmost to wean myself off of any commercial Windows applications - simply because many of the free and Open Source ones already come in "portable" versions that can be stuck on a USB memory stick, for example, so that all configuration files are held locally to the application. Additionally, a lot of the applications are moving to XML-based configuration files which, again, can just be copied across between machines.
This is where Microsoft's "me, myself and I" mentality is really beginning to cause it some problems - the fact is that people are now own more than one computing device and don't want to have to fully install and configure every application (or the desktop environment even) on each new device. With Linux, just copy your home directory over and you can be pretty sure the configuration file you need has gone with it.
And if someone can explain to me the logic behind the "Documents and Settings" folder in Windows, I'd be grateful. Why-oh-why are there protected and inaccessible files (when Windows is running) in there such that you can't just copy the whole thing off to another machine when you need to?
If someone can explain the logic behind the registry I'd be grateful - again, I've used Windows since Windows For Workgroups and (with the exception of ME and maybe Vista) it's got better with each new iteration - but the registry must be the most ***STUPID*** design decision within Windows.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
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:
Cheers,
I would be satisfied if the apps on the Linux version "just worked"...
They clearly have not been set up in advance for the size screen the eeepc uses - I know because of the many times my girlfriend has come over and said "why doesn't this work?" to me and I find that the window hasn't sized properly so a portion is cut off.
Last night it was the organizer... she couldn't send a page to the printer. Why? Well the print dialog had an option for configuring the printer but no "print" button so she just kept closing the dialog using the decoration. This is perfectly predictable for a normal person. She had in fact done what I'd shown her before and grabbed the window and moved it up so that the top moved off screen and the bottom became visible - something I guarantee most new users will not know how to do. But the button was still not visible - nothing looked especially wrong so she used the decoration to close. She was amazingly frustrated when she watched me grab the bottom of the window and resize it until the "print" button became visible.
There are lots of issues like this ... the other one last night was that the default layout of the monthly view of the organizer prints outside the margins of letter size paper so even when she did get it to print some of the page was missing.... there are two icons on the network page to make a wireless connection and no explanation on when and why she would want to use one rather than the other ... if somebody doesn't get their s*#t together and this continues to be what new users experience then they will run to the XP version.
The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny - Aesop
ASUS will shortly be releasing the ASUS eee PC 900 with an 8.9" screen capable of 1024x600. That should be a lot more usable.
http://eeepc.asus.com/global/news03042008.htm
Now if only they could add a nipple mouse.
Truth is that for what I want to use it for (web, maybe some music, listen to podcasts), the Linux version should be fine (in fact probably superior XP because of security and performance).
However I will insist that I can run Starcraft on it (sorry - but I love that old game) so I will be stuck with XP still.
Move along... there is no sig here.
What about Windows Fundamentals for Legacy PCs? http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/sa/benefits/fundamentals.mspx http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Fundamentals_for_Legacy_PCs
That's odd, I didn't think my old computer was an Eee pc. Wait... that means... oh.
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 $100 machine that does as much or more, guess which one they will pick.
Another problem for Microsoft is that people want their computers to be useful. Windows by itself is rather worthless, unless all you want to do is play Solitaire. People who have Windows will need to spend extra for applications, and that will easily double or triple the cost of their tiny laptops.
In contrast, Linux comes with a full suite of very functional and powerful applications -- and all of it is free.
Of course, Microsoft could upgrade Works to match the functionality -- and price -- of Linux's applications. But if Works became that powerful, who would buy Office? Nobody. MS is in a bind, they know it.
Conclusion: Linux will always have a giant price advantage over Windows.
I do not have expierce with it, nor googled it, but my impression that windows mobile and CE are basically the same thing.
With Eee PC etc being so popular, they don't feel so in control any more. MS are fighting a defensive action.
One thing Eee PC has done is exploded the myth that Linux is unusable by the non-geek and MS need to counteract that.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
This would be a great platform for Windows FLP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_FLP/ to spread it's wings. Sadly, it was never released to retail.
Maybe the slimmer XP would be a good PC classic gaming platform OS since Vista just SUCKS at that.
I always liked using 98Lite on my gaming PC; after dumping the unneeded MS-crap, the OS was actually responsive and rarely BSOD'd.
"Click and drool"? "M$"? What?
MS has already done a boatload of work in this area. The news should be that Asus is finally aware of it.
Linux not catching on is the reason that there is so much momentum to put Windows on this neat little device. People aren't thrilled with Linux and sales of the EeePC would improve when Windows is made to run better on it. I have one of ASUS's wireless router/NAS/Print server with a version of Linux on it and it's a terrible OS, all kinds of quirky problems as well as a poor add-on to my Windows network. Print server on it has problems dealing with the sleep mode of my printer. Network shares disappear until I ping the device acouple of times. I really wish it had a compact version of Windows running on it.
MS Internet Explorer came pre-installed on a couple of OS9 and OSX machines I've had.
I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
I installed that, and I'm using it, but it's a little too lite for my tastes. I am keeping it on there though, mostly because it's such a pain to reinstall to the SDHC card.
I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
try wm6, it is much better. wm5 is utter crap.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
it don't break?