Slashdot Mirror


Windows 7 Sets Direction of Low-Power CPU Market

Vigile writes "News is circulating about Microsoft setting hardware limits for the Windows 7 Starter Edition rather than sticking to a 3-application limit. With just a few simple specifications, Microsoft has set the tech world spinning — not only is Microsoft deciding that a netbook is now defined as having a 10.2-in. or smaller screen, but by setting a 15-watt limit to CPU thermal dissipation they may have inadvertently set the direction of CPU technology for years to come. If Microsoft sticks to that licensing spec, then AMD, Intel, VIA, and maybe even NVIDIA (who might be building an x86 CPU) will no doubt put a new focus on power efficiency in order to cash in on the lucrative netbook market."

19 of 369 comments (clear)

  1. bar set pretty high by Locutus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't quite get the big deal here since they are just setting the bar as high as needed to make sure Windows kinda runs on the hardware. Microsoft must be the one to set the bar because if it was anyone else, that bar would probably be too low to have any fun or use running Windows.

    15 watts for the CPU is huge compared to what some of the ARM chips are doing while also doing HD video.

    If anything, these specs for Windows netbooks is just another way to segment the winbook market to make sure a much higher price can be obtained for notebooks. After all, Microsoft can not have the netbook market grow up and start eating into its profits and people getting the idea that the OS is way too much of the cost of the device.

    So, it's really all about marketing and little else. yawn.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    1. Re:bar set pretty high by SoTerrified · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't quite get the big deal here

      Because MS will set the specs. Since some customers will only buy Windows, all the hardware manufacturers will build within those specs. And those specs will be with us for the duration of Windows 7.

      Why is it a big deal?

      When we see a Space Shuttle sitting on the launch pad, there are two big booster rockets attached to the sides of the main fuel tank. These are the solid rocket boosters, or SRBs. The SRBs are made by Thiokol at a factory in Utah. The engineers who designed the SRBs might have preferred to make them a bit fatter, but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch site so they must be US Standard railroad gauge (distance between the rails) or 4 feet, 8 1/2 inches.

      Why was that gauge used?

      Because that's the way they built them in England, and the US railroads were built by English expatriates.

      I see, but why did the English build them like that?

      Because the first railway lines were built by the same people who built the pre-railroad tramways, and that's the gauge they used.

      Well, why did they use that gauge in England?

      Because the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools that they used for building wagons, which used that wheel spacing.

      Okay! Why did their wagons use that odd wheel spacing?

      Because, if they tried to use any other spacing the wagon wheels would break on some of the old, long distance roads. Because that's the spacing of the old wheel ruts.

      So who built these old rutted roads?

      The first long distance roads in Europe were built by Imperial Rome for the benefit of their legions. The Roman roads have been used ever since.

      And the ruts?

      The original ruts, which everyone else had to match for fear of destroying their wagons, were first made by the wheels of Roman war chariots. Since the chariots were made for or by Imperial Rome they were all alike in the matter of wheel spacing.

      Thus, we have the answer to the original question. The United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8 1/2 inches derives from the original specification for an Imperial Roman army war chariot.

      So even though we could've designed a better Space Shuttle, because of the limitation of Roman war chariots, the boosters are not optimal. Win 7 vs. netbooks might not be so extreme, but it's still a force that's going to insure the hardware isn't designed the best it could be... It'll be designed towards the Win 7 specs. (With thanks to http://www.astrodigital.org/space/stshorse.html)

    2. Re:bar set pretty high by ignavus · · Score: 4, Funny

      So even though we could've designed a better Space Shuttle, because of the limitation of Roman war chariots, the boosters are not optimal.

      Damn those Romans and their lack of foresight!

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
  2. Re:lacking info by LaskoVortex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the article didn't explain how they were going to improve the BSOD

    That's not all they wouldn't explain:

    Would Microsoft charge PC makers less per copy for Home Premium than it charges to run the exact same Home Premium SKU on a full-fledged notebook or desktop system? Would Microsoft attempt to establish itself as the judge of what is a "netbook"? Microsoft officials had nothing more to say about my questions.

    The problem has become that there is simply nothing left to improve in a typical OS for the vast majority of users. If you have a browser, an spreadsheet, and a wordprocessor, you cover 95% of your users' needs. So what can you do for sales? This seems to be the plan: (1) Increase general shininess and bling. (2) Reduce essential functionality relative to earlier distributions. (3) Price the OS on tiers based on restoring the essential functionality. You are seeing the self destruction of an antiquated business model, namely that OS sales should be profitable.

    Here is a hint to all of the companies in the OS market: give your best distribution awayand use it as a client for services that google can't profitably provide for free.

    That's the future.

    --
    Just callin' it like I see it.
  3. Re:Might wait to see if this turns out to be true by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Not to mention if you RTFA(I know, but i got bored) it says on top of this BS that Win7 Start will STILL have the 3 app limit. To me that is gonna be the deal breaker. The only worry here is that they are going to offer Win7 Starter for sooo cheap that we will end up with pretty much every PC, be it Netbook or low cost desktop, that would have come with XP Home or Vista Home Basic end up with Win7 Starter.

    If that happens and they don't make it VERY clear before purchase, with a sticker on the machine or some other obvious and hard to miss label then i can see this ending up a good case for a class action lawsuit. And by what metrics do MSFT decide what constitutes a "program"? Will IE not count but FF or Opera will? What about WMP Vs Media Monkey or iTunes? Windows Firewall VS Comodo or Zonealarm? Sounds to me if like in TFA they stick with the 3 app limit they are just begging for a whole mess of lawsuits. Because unless they make everything built into Windows like IE and WMP and Windows Firewall count against the limit they are gonna get nailed in court. Real Shame, as Win7 looked like it might actually be a decent OS. Trust Ballmer and his marketing dollars to totally bone a winner with marketing BS.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  4. Re:lacking info by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Interesting

    > Here is a hint to all of the companies in the OS market: give your best distribution
    > away and use it as a client for services that google can't profitably provide for free.

    And use it to lock the customers in.

    > That's the future.

    Grim, isn't it?

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  5. That's bass ackwards by xs650 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It would be a better world if the CPU manufacturers required Microsoft to meet certain standards.

  6. Re:bar set pretty high - BS by scheme · · Score: 4, Informative

    When we see a Space Shuttle sitting on the launch pad, there are two big booster rockets attached to the sides of the main fuel tank. These are the solid rocket boosters, or SRBs. The SRBs are made by Thiokol at a factory in Utah. The engineers who designed the SRBs might have preferred to make them a bit fatter, but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch site so they must be US Standard railroad gauge (distance between the rails) or 4 feet, 8 1/2 inches.

    That's utter bs. If you bother to check wikipedia, you'll find out that diameter of the boosters are 12.17 ft. That's not us standard gauge by any means. Plus, if you think about it, NASA doesn't have any issues shipping the main fuel tank assembly to florida.

    --
    "When you sit with a nice girl for two hours, it seems like two minutes. When you sit on a hot stove for two minutes, it
  7. Re:Might wait to see if this turns out to be true by Daltorak · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ed Bott did a bunch of research on what the Windows 7 three application limit really means:

    http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=844

    In short, he says that:
    - Windows Explorer, Command Prompt, Task Manager, Control Panel applets, other Windows system tools don't count
    - Many applications that run as system services and present themselves through the notification area (aka system tray) don't count (anti-virus, firewall, little utilities, etc) ...
    - The version he tested doesn't exempt installers, but Microsoft said that they should be
    - Internet Explorer is NOT exempt, but there is no limit on the number of tabs you can open
    - If you don't like the three-app limit, there is a built-in way in Windows to upgrade to a higher edition that doesn't have the limitation. You don't have to reinstall Windows or lose your data or anything; it's just an online purchase and a change of product key, and the upgraded features are unlocked with a reboot

    So it's not like you're screwed if your computer came with Starter and you need more. But if you don't need more, hey, you just saved some money....

  8. Re:lacking info by rzekson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actually, there's plenty to improve in a typical OS: making the OS more componentized, programmable, adding new layers of APIs for different functional domains, and otherwise supporting the developers that write code for that OS, so that they can be more productive and write more functional code in a fraction of time. For example, things like COM, WMI, DirectX, .NET, or the new WDF toolkit for driver development in Windows Vista. I don't see how you can separate any of this from the rest of the OS. The job of the OS is to bridge the gap between the developer and the hardware, and this is all part of it. And all these things have continued to evolve and will probably keep evolving for a very, very long time.

  9. Re:Starter Edition is for 3rd World Countries by earlymon · · Score: 4, Informative

    Seriously /., you can't even buy starter edition in the US or most technologically-capable countries. It's for underdeveloped countries. It's been this way for years now, it was like this for Vista also.

    And, from TFA:

    Windows 7 Starter Edition, unlike XP Starter Edition, will be for sale to users in both developing and developed nations.

    That's why /. is called News for Nerds, Stuff that matters. When something that was one way is now another, many people call that news.

    In the time you've taken to call /. dumb, you could have RTFA and learned also:

    Specifically, according to TechARP's information, Microsoft's maximum specs for machines it will consider to be netbooks/"small notebooks" will change in the following ways:

    Screen size: With XP and Vista, maximum allowable screen size was 12.1 inches; with Windows 7, it will be 10.2 inches

    Storage: Maximum limits for XP and Vista: 160 GB HDD or 32 GB SDD; with Windows 7, it will be 250 GB HDD or 64 GB SDD

    Graphics: With XP and Vista, netbooks/small notebooks was "less than or equal to DX9; with Windows 7, there will be no limitation

    CPUs: With XP and Vista, netbooks/small notebooks had to have "single core processors that do not exceed 1 GHz frequency, or Intel Atom (N270, N280, 230, Z500, Z510, Z515, Z520, Z530, Z540, Z550); Intel Celeron 220; AMD (MV-40, 1050P, TF-20, Geode LX, Athlon 2650e, Sempron 210U); VIA (C7-M ULV, Nano U1700, U2250, U2300, U2400 or U2500). With Windows 7, the maximum will be "single core processors that do not exceed 2 GHz frequency, and have a CPU thermal design power that is less than or equal to 15 W, not including the graphics and chipset."

    --
    Pathological kinda promises Path + Logical - but instead, you get stuck with pathetic.
  10. Hence, Microsoft hired Marc Tremblay. by reporter · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Back in April, according to a report by "The Register", Marc Tremblay began work at Microsoft. Tremblay was the lead architect of several processors at Sun Microsystems.

    At Microsoft, Tremblay joined the Strategic Software/Silicon Architectures team, nicknamed "SiArch".

    Today's news that Microsoft will set a wattage limit on netbooks running the starter edition of Windows 7 clearly shows why Microsoft has an SiArch team and why Microsoft hires "processor" guys and gals. Only a team packed with "processor" experts can do the kinds of studies that are needed to determine what is a reasonable wattage to impose on netbooks.

    Why must Microsoft spend several million dollars on a SiArch team to pick a simple wattage? Microsoft is facing severe competition from Linux at the low end.

    If Microsoft picked a wattage that is too low, then the netbook manufacturers could not build such a system and would rebel -- right back into the arms of Linux. Microsoft absolutely needed to pick a realistic number.

    Until April of 2008, Linux owned the majority of the netbook market. Then, Microsoft submitted its Windows XP to that market and quickly seized 90% of it. Microsoft wants to keep that market share. So, if Microsoft wants to impose hardware restrictions on netbooks, Microsoft will ensure that those hardware restrictions are reasonable.

  11. Lucrative Netbook Market? by dangitman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... a new focus on power efficiency in order to cash in on the lucrative netbook market.

    I don't think that word means what the writer thinks it means. In what way is the netbook a "lucrative market"? The profit margins must be almost non-existent. It's a race to the bottom, and I think many companies will regret chasing this market.

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
  12. Re:Might wait to see if this turns out to be true by mckinleyn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since Microsoft has imposed an artificial limitation that was not previously present, which will undoubtedly inconvenience a number of users, it is hardly a stretch to define the limitation as "crippling". It is, however, a stretch to claim that such a limitation is not a limitation if previously disclosed. I know all analogies are flawed, but let me try one: You buy a car that will not drive faster than 35 MPH (or KPH, depending on where you live. I digress.), and the dealer offers you the "opportunity" to "upgrade" your vehicle to the "better" model, which has no such governor. Are you upgrading? Or uncrippling?

  13. The lowering of the bar by QuietLagoon · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Microsoft has always endeavored to lower the bar of innovation. Why should Windows 7 be any different? It is expensive to innovate. It is less expensive to use a monopoly to stifle innovation

    .
    If Microsoft is successful (through marketing "incentives") in strong-arming hardware OEMs to lower the hardware capabilities of future netbooks, that is nothing less than an enormous win for Microsoft.

    I am nothing but amazed that the hardware OEMs do nothing but roll over and say to Microsoft, "please, Sir, may I have another."

    1. Re:The lowering of the bar by AHuxley · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Exactly. MS can dictate the hardware product line : Do as we say or you will not get a MS sticker. You will be in the bargain bin with the junk from Taiwan, Korea (South owned, made in the north ;) ) and a brand from China looking to emerge.
      Or you can help MS trash Linux with low hardware numbers and get a sticker. Another plus is real shelf space too.
      MS can fool most people with its OS, its just for netbooks, dont expect so much. Most will just be happy for the low price.
      The real win for MS is Linux is crippled too. Every OS likes more RAM, a faster cpu and a plug in power setting.
      The low end was breaking out, Linux was winning.
      After this, its just a toy market, with MS on top.
      MS cannot make a good OS, so they kill the hardware base for the rest. The MS can say its the hardware, all OS are lame on it :)

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  14. Re:Lucrative Netbook Market? by Erikderzweite · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, it's software. Even if you get $0,01 per copy you're still better off than if you wouldn't be in this market at all. Remember, an additional copy still comes to no additional cost.
    Perhaps though it is lucrative as in "lose this market to Linux and it will be the beginning of the end". So even paying OEM's to install Windows could be profitable because such move secures desktop OS monopoly further.

  15. Re:lacking info by Anpheus · · Score: 4, Informative

    Please god, stop the madness. Starter edition is an edition that they plan to sell for next to nothing to developing (read: third world) nations in order to provide the same kernel and ability as the rest of the business world (ideally to increase their participation in the market and get them out of the "developing nation" category by fostering growth of the IT sector and all the dependencies it places upon an economy.)

    Starter Edition is not Netbook Edition. There is no Netbook Edition. I repeat: There Is No Netbook Edition of 7.

    Here are the editions of Windows 7, from least capability to highest, and each successive entry is a superset of the previous one's capabilities:

    Windows 7 Starter: OEM distribution to "developing markets" only. We're talking third world here. China? No. India? No. A lot of African nations apply. Sold for dirt cheap.
    Windows 7 Home Basic: Retail distribution to "emerging markets." Like China, India, Taiwan to a lesser extent, basically not fully developed nations that are economically growing.
    Windows 7 Home Premium: This is what your netbook will have if you buy it yourself.
    Windows 7 Business: This is what your netbook will have if you bought it from the "Small Business" section of the online retailer.
    Windows 7 Ultimate: This is medium sized businesses and developers will likely use. Basically a one-off type license of the following edition.
    Windows 7 Enterprise: This is for volume license agreements only, and is identical to Ultimate.

    If you're reading Slashdot, chances are, you won't be able to buy Starter edition anywhere. In fact, I'd like to see you get a price on it. From anyone.

  16. Re:lacking info by nschubach · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually, there's plenty to improve in a typical OS: making the OS more componentized, programmable, adding new layers of APIs for different functional domains, and otherwise supporting the developers that write code for that OS, so that they can be more productive and write more functional code in a fraction of time. For example, things like COM, WMI, DirectX, .NET, or the new WDF toolkit for driver development in Windows Vista. I don't see how you can separate any of this from the rest of the OS.

    You don't see how it can be separate? Like GTK, OpenGL... shall I go on? I hope you mean that you CAN see how it could be separated, but Microsoft WON'T separate it. They make too much money when people can't take the DirectX modules from Windows and hack them into OSX/Linux. Technically, or legally.

    --
    Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.