Slashdot Mirror
Windows 7 Starter Edition — 3 Apps Only
CrustyFace writes "Cybernit reports that the Starter Edition version of Windows 7 will only allow the user to run 3 applications at once. Targeted at notebooks, this doesn't seem like such a bad limitation, however it is a bold move from Microsoft, and it will be interesting to see how the operating system sells."
I'm guessing that a new 3rd party shell will be released within a month of Windows 7 that defeats this. Anyone want to take a wager on when or how this will be cracked?
moox. for a new generation.
They also had a "single window" mode in the OS X public beta way back when. It was quickly removed after user comments.
Except when you know how to handle your background apps properly, which is why I bought a Windows Mobile phone instead of an iPhone. I have my SSH session open, Opera, mail, all open at the same time, with plenty of memory to handle it. Easy to switch between tasks and I don't have to reconnect every time I want to switch. I have an iPod Touch, and I know from experience it wouldn't quite work for me as a phone.
You know what the best part about this is? I DON'T CARE ONE BIT.
When I first read the title my instinct was to get angry. Then suddenly I felt a wave of calm come over me as I realized that I haven't relied on windows for 5 years now.
I simply just don't care any more.
Faith is a willingness to accept something w/o complete proof and to act on it. Reason allows you to correct that faith.
That is esentially the administrator password recovery tool.
Use "at" to schedule explorer to run. Kill explorer, wait 1 minute and yippy, you have explorer with system credentials(higher than admin).
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
Perhaps more importantly to most users:
Let's say you have 2 viruses and 1 piece of spyware running on your computer, does it prevent you from launching the applications you actually want to use... Like the malware removal tool?
Fanatically anti-fanatical
I agree wholeheartedly. I've switched to linux a million times now and I keep falling back to the ever stable, ever reliable windows xp. I never dreamed that I would make this statement 10 years ago, but I have had about 0 problems with XP. Ever since service pack 2, XP has been rock solid. Its been a long, long time since I've seen a blue screen. I can't even remember. Maybe over a year ago. I was all excited about Ubuntu 9.04, so I downloaded the release candidate and tried a wubi install inside my windows partition. Usually this option works great, but not this time. It seems my generic Athlon 64 motherboard won't boot 9.04. Amazing. (It seems USB related) I finally dicked around and got it to boot (exit busy box after everything times out) and now it doesn't see my virtual partition on the windows drive. Lovely. It wants to install to the first primary partition on the first drive in the chain by default. If I didn't know what I was doing I could have easily installed over my windows partition (or attempted to at least). I'll take it as a sign. No Photoshop CS3? No lightroom? No reason or live? I can run mozilla and the gimp in windows too. In fact, there is better quality free software on windows than linux and a great deal more of it too. I don't want to turn this into a troll (I know I'm on the edge here), but when my ATI card can't even get accelerated 3d at a basic level its kind of hard to see the appeal. (was looking foward to the new drivers too) A lot of this crap would have been perfectly acceptable in 1994, but its going on 2010 and when I plug something in, I really expect it to work without pissing around with it for 3 days and finding the magic keywords on google that will hunt down that one post on that one obscure bulletin board that will magically fix my problem. Sorry. To get back ontopic....
Its amazing that M$ would even consider selling such a neutered OS still. Look at what the OEMs are paying for a license (they won't tell you, people would be outraged) and look at what you pay when you walk into Best Buy and pick up a copy of ultimate. What the hell ever happened to the simple Home/Corporate ideology of XP? Like for instance vista ultimate is $319 versus Home premium at $239 with surprisingly Vista Business being the cheapest out of the 3 at $200. The cheapest dell right now is like $350 with vista home premium. So what is dell paying for the OEM license? $50? $70? I don't see how it could be more than $70. Why the hell do you have to pay $170 more at retail???? Talk about gouging. The best part of the OEM license is that it is totally not transferable. Want to install Vista on another machine, you need buy another license. This crap has to end. Consumers should at least have transferable rights to software.
zosxavius photography