Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Did the Netbook Improve Windows 7's Performance?

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the probably-yes-about-a-hypothetical dept.

Windows 440

Arnie87 writes "One Microsoft Way has an interesting article suggesting that the reason Microsoft is focusing so much on speed with Windows 7 is the whopping sales of netbooks. The article concludes by saying: 'If you plan on adopting Windows 7, you have the netbook to be thankful for, because Vista's successor would be a very different beast if Microsoft had less motivation to pursue performance.'"

cancel ×

440 comments

Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (4, Insightful)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 5 years ago | (#27284977)

Face it, the real reason that Windows 7 is leaner than Vista is that Vista was a market flop because it tried to do all sorts of things that Windows users were simply not ready for.

There is nothing seriously wrong with Vista, and Windows 7 is mostly an optimized version 2 of Vista. So it's no surprise that with the codebase stabilized in Vista SP1 that Windows 7 will be able to build successfully upon that.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285019)

Face it, the real reason that Windows 7 is leaner than Vista is that Vista was a market flop because it tried to do all sorts of things that Windows users were simply not ready for.

Such as force users to give up applications that ran perfectly fine under previous versions of Windows.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (5, Insightful)

koro666 (947362) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285361)

Such as force users to give up applications that ran perfectly fine under previous versions of Windows.

They ran perfectly fine because Windows let them get away with whatever dirty tricks they were doing — which wasn't the case with Vista anymore.

Give me an application that is coded correctly and that does not try to be "more clever" than the operating system by using undocumented structures, functions, registry keys or whatever else, and I'll show you an application that runs fine on Vista.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (5, Informative)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285535)

There are lot of problems with portable applications which try to write into the directory where .exe file is installed.

Vista 'helpfully' virtualizes file access and this breaks a lot of such apps.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285655)

There are lot of problems with portable applications which try to write into the directory where .exe file is installed.

Do portable progs on your fav linux distro do the same? That is, they write their configuration files to /bin or /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin or whatever.

What happens when an app with no root priviledge tries to write its configuration files in /bin? It fails spectacularly of course.

I don't like vista but isn't this double standard?

 

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (5, Insightful)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285689)

I fully agree.

For years we (the FOSS community) have been bemoaning Windows' poor, totally broken security model. Now, when MS attempts to fix that and inevitably breaks applications that rely on the previous totally broken security model, we want to whine and moan about backwards compatibility?

Are we going to whine the same way if IE8 standardizes but breaks web pages that rely on IE7/IE6?

Seriously, there are some among us that simply will not be satisfied, and they are making the whole FOSS community look like a bunch of children.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (1)

Jurily (900488) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285825)

Do portable progs on your fav linux distro do the same? That is, they write their configuration files to /bin or /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin or whatever.

Apples and oranges. The last ten years of Fav Linux Distro didn't let that either, so it's not surprising. XP, on the other hand...

Also, Linux is nowhere near standardized with directories:

jurily@jurily ~ $ echo $PATH /usr/kde/3.5/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin:/opt/bin:/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-bin/4.3.3:/opt/blackdown-jdk-1.4.2.03/bin:/opt/blackdown-jdk-1.4.2.03/jre/bin:/usr/qt/3/bin:/usr/games/bin:/opt/vmware/player/bin

Just randomly, can you guess where, say, alsamixer is?

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (-1, Troll)

Anthony_Cargile (1336739) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285947)

Just randomly, can you guess where, say, alsamixer is?

This is why the `which` command is so useful, especially if in backticks like that so you can do stuff like kill -9 `pidof firefox.exe` or sudo cp `which vi` /tftpboot. This is the reason I usually put helpful code snippets in backticks, since you don't have to tell users to omit the quotes since they are optional either way, but I was just pointing out how I've always gotten around the non-standard directories in *nix - not meaning to turn this thread into ask Slashdot.

Oh, and speaking of non-standard directories, 90% of the stuff most Unixes and Linux distributions cram into /usr/bin should go in /usr/local/bin, but everyone's been doing it wrong for so long that we're all just used to it the other way around. This whole thread's topic is like if a new Ubuntu version started putting everything in /usr/local/bin for once, and programs started failing because they are used to /usr/bin and /etc - that's what Vista pretty did much to apps in the way of non-standard/undocumented API features and registry key abuse over the years.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (5, Insightful)

Minupla (62455) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285661)

Speaking as an IT manager, I'll be dancing in the street the day that the last app stops this.

If I had a penny for every time a user lost data because some app decided to be clever in the manner mentioned above and not save it in the users profile directory...

Truly, if you were writing a linux app would you expect this to work? It's the same thing. Your app needs to expect that it can write to the user's home directory and temp locations. Fini. Done. Need to write somewhere else, make sure you set up the proper permissions during install time, when you'll be running with privs to access those directories.

Then I know where the user's data will be and can plan backups accordingly, without playing scavenger hunt with however many hundreds of apps my users are using.

Min

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (0, Troll)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285713)

Portable apps _designed_ to behave this way. That's not a bug.

They can be copied on (and started from) a USB stick.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (4, Informative)

Anpheus (908711) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285821)

And that'll work fine in Vista, because that's not Program Files. Like in Linux, there are a few privileged, protected folders, and pretty much everything else, including mountable r/w media like flash drives, is essentially an extension of one's home directory. (Unless you do something fancy with the permissions, of course.)

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (1)

t0y (700664) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285683)

For a good reason, right?
Why the hell would you put a "portable" application inside c:\windows or c:\program files ?

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (2, Insightful)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285849)

The nature of software and progress.

Both Linux and OSX are far worse than Windows on backwards compatibility.

Adobe's creative suite still doesn't run properly on OSX (weird print driver conflict with HP Design jet, effects InDesign is a known problem, Apple admits it, but yet 10.5, and still running it in Rosetta to print).

I recently just gave up trying to get Majesty to run on mycomputer (after downloading a new installer, and updater), and from what I read, it would be easier to get the Windows version running (assuming the Linux one would run at all).

OS 10.4 had it's own issues with compatibility too.

When Windows 95 came out, and it didn't let application trounce all over memory (as much anyway), a lot of apps stopped working. This was a good thing. For an example of a great system that still let the apps spew all over the place see Amiga OS (old school ones), apps brought it down constantly.

I am willing to bet that many of the sloppy apps that don't work in Vista, would also fail in a proper XP set-up (un/low privileged user), now that Vista forces a decent user setup, and Windows 7 appears to be better optimised, my life at work will be better.

At home I will continue to use Linux, and keep an eye out for the Windows versions of games I purchased Linux versions of, trying to support a Linux shop (oops).

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (3, Insightful)

rtb61 (674572) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285095)

My guess is this will be more of 'ready for Vista' underpowered desktop, now just in windows 'craps' (what version is it anyhow, up near 13 by now) for netbooks. Sure it will run windows, just barely, but run any applications on top and you'll get to re-experience that whole vista feeling all over again.

Personally I want my netbook to come basically complete with all the applications I will ever need at a very 'competitive' price, so when I drop it, drown it or some one pilfers it, I can just buy another one restore the data, not have to futz around with re-installing software or paying for B$ software licences bound to dead or missing hardware.

Netbooks are going to suffer a pretty hard life and the last thing you want to get caught up in, is buying the same software over and over again and you certainly don't want to end up paying three times the price in software versus what you are spending on hardware.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285211)

Also the reason that netbooks run XP rather than Vista is because Microsoft was trying to segment the market. XP has a netbook discount program, and Vista does not.

This is entirely aside of the issue of Vista's market acceptance.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (3, Funny)

Gerzel (240421) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285229)

Vista uswers were simply not ready for...

Darned users! Why can't they get off their rears and make themselves ready for MS's products?

Should MS have to do all the work of marketing, programming, and figuring out what these "users" want?

Users should what what MS provides when MS wants to provide it!

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (1)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285385)

If I had a cigar, I'd give it to you.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (1)

Schemat1c (464768) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285485)

If I had a cigar, I'd give it to you.

Is that a Bill Clinton quote?

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (1)

dov_0 (1438253) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285667)

If I had a cigar, I'd give it to you.

Is that a Bill Clinton quote?

According to the court case, he'd offer his "cigar" to just about anyone...

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (1)

pdabbadabba (720526) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285707)

I doubt it. If there's one thing I know about Bill Clinton it's that he always has a cigar to give.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285539)

I see that a Microsoft Fanboi has mod powers - if I still had mod points, I'd have given you a +1 insightful. It's a terrible shame that /. doesn't have more variation in moderation. It's even a worse shame that some people abuse their powers.... ;)

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285233)

There is nothing seriously wrong with Vista

Bwaaaaaa hahahahaha

I use it every day. It takes 15 minutes from boot to usable desktop. This is on NO slouch of a computer.

It is a pig with the disk. It is a pig with the memory. I have no problem with it using these things. But it does it in such a bad way it is amazingly bad. Close an application that was using a good chuck of memory and watch it chug on the disk filing that memory with stuff 'that might be used'. I have sat there and watched it fill the memory with mp3s that I haven't listened to in a couple of years. It uses 800 meg of memory just to start up to a desktop. What the hell... An OS with NO apps running uses 800meg? Im sorry that is just stupid.

When you have to disable all the new features to make it usable that says alot. When you have to disable the sysindexer, readyboost, superfetch, and windows defender to make it usable. I say all the crap they added in is just that crap.

My hopes for 7 are fairly low. It is getting good press as it is better than Vista. But not by much. XP is still beating it in many tasks. That is sad. Vista should be smoking it and so should 7. Instead we only get 'sorta better than vista'.

The one thing that made it better was the release of sysindexer 4.0. It was AMAZING bad at thrashing the disk, cpu, and memory. Now it is just tolerable.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (3, Informative)

Mad Leper (670146) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285387)

Takes 15 minutes you say ? You must either be doing something extremely wrong or have mistaken your computer for some other device, perhaps a toaster.

Honestly, the minute you see an anti-Vista rant that brings up the old canard about "uses too much memory", you know the poster is just recycling FUD.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (2, Informative)

i.of.the.storm (907783) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285525)

Seriously, I don't know how that got modded insightful. My Vista machine boots to the desktop and is usable in under a minute. 15 minutes is complete bullshit unless he's trying to run it on a 486 or something.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (2, Insightful)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285591)

Recycling FUD. Maybe. Then again, maybe you are another MS Fanboi? I test drove Vista. Performance sucked. Maybe it didn't take 15 minutes to boot, but it certainly took three times as long as XP - no bullshit, no exxageration. In the time it took Vista to boot, I could have booted Ubuntu, started a virtual machine, and booted WinXP. Or, started Ubuntu, and booted Win7 inside the same VM. 15 minutes? I don't know for certain, but it seems the guy was exagerating, slightly.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (1)

perryizgr8 (1370173) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285963)

mod parent up. it is a really big misconception out there that using more memory means slow. guess what morons, superfetch allows you to load firefox instantly on clicking the orange icon. in xp and ubuntu, it takes 10 seconds.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (1)

kimvette (919543) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285547)

Sorry, but I just don't see it. 15 minutes? Either you have Symantec's security suite and only 256MB of RAM AND have the eye candy turned on AND a ton of OEM software running at startup AND 5400RPM or 4500RPM drives, AND it's heavily fragmented or it's just a really old computer. Or, it's really loaded up with spyware or has otherwise been rooted.

I've usually seen Vista boot more quickly than XP. Once at the desktop it is more sluggish than XP, that is true, but not by orders of magnitude.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (2, Insightful)

master811 (874700) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285557)

RAM is there to be used, that's the whole point of it. Vista has considerably better memory management than XP ever had so the fact its using 800MB is a non-issue.

Vista pre-caches often used apps, which makes it sooo much better than XP (just cos it uses more RAM doesn't make it worse). It's using that RAM because it is there, not because it needs to, there's a difference.

The fact it takes 15 mins to boot means there is something very wrong with your PC and it certainly isn't Vista (dodgy driver/startup prog) perhaps?

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285569)

Actually - I've test driven Win7. It really is a pretty good OS. It takes the better features of Vista, and adds them to XP, IMHO. (Yes, Vista actually had a couple decent improvements, hidden among the bogus marketing bullshit) I can't really imagine that Win7 is going to run real great on a netbook (I don't have one to test with) but on a desktop with more than a gig of memory, it is a pretty solid system. Some tweaking may be necessary to suit the individual's needs, but I was a serious XP tweaker years ago!

You might want to check your own ass... (1)

Quantos (1327889) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285621)

I run Windoze Vista, and I'm not at all dissatisfied. Yes, it does somethings in ways that I'm still adjusting to, some of the buttons aren't in the exact same spot they were in before - but I'll adjust.
However it doesn't take anywhere 15 minutes to load.
I'm running a Toshiba laptop, and Vista loads in under 2 minutes - that's from cold boot to me being on the internet. That includes the sidebar starting up, that funky eye candy thing called Aero, my AV software, and Ad-Aware.
No, Vista is not perfect, but I haven't had to reboot my laptop since I got it three weeks ago.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (1, Insightful)

hemp (36945) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285509)

By optimized you mean they have DRM turned off. Expect DRM to be in place for the final release candidate.

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (1)

Tawnos (1030370) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285883)

Insightful? Really? It's an easy test - try running DRM protected content on a non DRM protected source and see if it works in Win7 (beta). What? It does. So you're the one spreading FUD this time? Shocking!

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (1)

Tawnos (1030370) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285889)

er doesn't... (to nonprotected source)... no more alcohol tonight...

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285631)

Will windows 7 actually run acceptably on a netbook?

I downloaded that public beta of mojave but never bothered trying it. Anyone here have Windows 7 on a netbook like a Dell Mini 9?

Islam - because the Enlightenment was overrated. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285701)

And because beating your arranged wife into submission is fun!

Re:Or maybe you're pulling that from your ass (1)

xs650 (741277) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285935)

"Vista was a market flop because it tried to do all sorts of things that Windows users were simply not ready for."

Oh, bullshit. It was a flop because users have seen it for the POS that it is.

Microsoft performance and security ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27284985)

More performance is always a good thing, but since this is Microsoft it probably just means they will figure out how to suck up the extra performance with DRM....

Re:Microsoft performance and security ! (1)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285079)

Well, maybe, but along those lines it could be something similar, such as the mass amounts of poorly coded applications on Windows (or anywhere really, but more apparent on Windows), so with that in mind they make the OS itself take less resources, to allow for the resources used by the crappy applications.

Neither is a good reason for improving performance, but I think in the long run I'd prefer it was for DRM rather than poor coding practices, DRM can be subverted, and generally quite easily, improving application performance and coding practices is much harder, even if it's open source you still have to spend the time yourself, or wait for someone else to fix it.

Re:Microsoft performance and security ! (1)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285341)

ell, maybe, but along those lines it could be something similar, such as the mass amounts of poorly coded applications on Windows...so with that in mind they make the OS itself take less resources, to allow for the resources used by the crappy applications.

Wait, are you seriously suggesting that when everything else remains the same (hardware, software) except the OS, and performance of apps that used to work fine takes a sudden nosedive, it's somehow the application developers' faults and not the OS's? Even though the OS is the only thing that changed?

Re:Microsoft performance and security ! (2, Interesting)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285501)

Quick Answer: "No"

I simply meant since XP was released, or more specifically, since the internet became really popular, and .Net was released, there are now hordes of craptastic applications out there.

Vista is pretty much irrelevant, although with Vista, they introduced (to the average windows user) things like Widgets, so now people are a little more familiar with running stupid little shit all the time, so maybe Microsoft realized that when people run all their craptastic software, they blame the OS, rather than the software, so they are trying to minimize that blame by partially taking responsibility for various peoples poorly coded software, and allowing for even more of it to run, or for the "normal" amount now, to run better.

And I'm not necessarily even saying that's what I think, I was only adding another possibility to the GP's comment, although that I'm sure that it does play a part, however major or minor it may be, in addition to just the general desire for a slimmer/faster/smoother OS.

End justifies the means (2, Interesting)

Chairboy (88841) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285003)

It doesn't matter if I have a netbook or not, if this is true, then everyone benefits. Even the guy with a multimedia powerhouse machine will see an improvement if performance is the bottom line.

Microsoft's fascination with taking advantage of new hardware and technologies has led to a consistent decrease in performance over the years, with Vista perhaps being the most obvious and poorly received example. The tide seems to be turning, though. Symantec pulled all the stops on making the newest releases dramatically lower in memory & faster, everyone's re-writing pages so they scale properly for mobile devices, now Microsoft is paying attention too?

This is a good trend. I hope it continues.

Re:End justifies the means (4, Interesting)

CAIMLAS (41445) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285453)

Microsoft's fascination with taking advantage of new hardware and technologies has led to a consistent decrease in performance over the years, with Vista perhaps being the most obvious and poorly received example.

Oh, please. A "fascination with taking advantage of new hardware and technologies" is not why Windows has sucked on an an epic level. Windows has always been an "also ran" when it comes to adapting "new hardware and technologies". Always.

Hardware support? Even the abysmal Mac OS 9 had more leading-edge hardware support than W9x and W2K on their respective releases. Windows XP and 2k3 can, and have been, a huge pain to install if you've got SATA and/or necessary USB devices on the system. Sure, decent support is available after you're installed - but that's not due to Microsoft.

Emerging technologies? Can you name one software/OS/desktop feature which MS was first-to-market on for Windows? I seem to remember something called Cairo that was making news back in the mid-90s, which had a feature list similar to what we now know as Time Machine - on OS X. MS still hasn't come up with such a functionality. Hell, they don't even have simple search indexing working well in Vista, yet.

No, MS has been behind the curve with implementation - and well ahead of it with outright lies and broken promises ("Vista Ready", anyone?)

Historically, these are the things a new version of Windows has been certain to bring to the table:
* Slower performance
* Bigger memory footprint with little related advantage (see "slower performance").
* The first release/pre-SP will be buggy, unstable, and nearly unusable.
* A lot of stuff that's supposed to work, won't. This includes applications which are supposedly designed for said OS.
* If it's a complete lemon, they'll silently drop actual support and focus their efforts on their next release (See: ME -> 2k, Vista -> W7).

Yes, there are various other improvements to new Windows releases. But, consider: Windows still can not approximately estimate the time it will take to copy a file from one local directory to another. That's hardly a focus on new technologies.

Though, I absolutely agree with you on the whole low-end focus in the IT industry being a good deal for everyone. Now, if only we could get away from the "the browser is the OS" idea, as we're running into all sorts of the same bloat and instability we got with OSes, as browser developers re-implement containers and other OS-level features at a highly abstracted level.

Re:End justifies the means (1)

i.of.the.storm (907783) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285541)

Hell, they don't even have simple search indexing working well in Vista, yet.

I'm curious, what do you mean by that? It seems to be working fine for me, despite what you say.

I agree on the browser thing though; it's like the thin client all over again, but using 10x more resources than an equivalent desktop programs.

Re:End justifies the means (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285799)

Vista's search seems to be a hell of a lot faster than ubuntu's. I'm a linux advocate and I still think the search is shitty for most distros' standard file manager.

Re:End justifies the means (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285955)

Can you name one software/OS/desktop feature which MS was first-to-market on for Windows?

Pen and touch support. Windows Tablet PC Edition, Vista, and 7 have excellent tablet support. Linux is far, far behind in this area and I don't know about Macs.

When Windows detects a tablet PC, a well designed on-screen keyboard is presented at the login prompt. I still haven't figured out how to get Ubuntu to correctly do that...

The little tablet input app Windows uses is far better than anything I've seen on Linux. Linux did get CellWriter about year ago, but it has to be trained and it still isn't as good.

If I'm wrong, please let me know.

Win7 development started just after Vista shipped (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285021)

Yeah, because 3 years ago when Microsoft started the work that went into Windows 7 (remember MinWin?) they were smart enough to anticipate netbooks and so they did the performance work up front that would be necessary to make netbooks work well.

Or maybe, just maybe, they realized that Vista's performance sucked rocks and they decided to fix it and Netbooks were a happy beneficiary.

Re:Win7 development started just after Vista shipp (5, Insightful)

haruchai (17472) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285065)

I give credit to the OLPC and the push it gave to the computing world to come up with something lightweight but functional. And that was long before Vista shipped. The Netbooks were a result of the global awareness the OLPC gave to a need for cheap, portable, functional computing.

I would have said the eeepc (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285329)

I never saw an OLPC here in Australia or anywhere else in my travels (including 2 trips to the US last year and 3 months in Europe).

I /did/ see a lot of eeePCs. Not all of them running Linux, but the day my parents came home with their shiny new eeePC running Linux, I thought to myself "Microsoft must be SHITTING BRICKS".

Re:I would have said the eeepc (2, Insightful)

theillien (984847) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285613)

Agreed. OLPC wasn't meant to be a market-changing piece of hardware. It was designed to provide inexpensive options to countries with limited resources so that students could get a relatively modern education. Initially, that it ran Linux is why it was able to be made so small. They were able to keep it small when XP was introduced on it by using a scaled down version. The eeePC is what became the market changer because it was more consumer focused.

Re:Win7 development started just after Vista shipp (1)

Mad Leper (670146) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285411)

Now THAT is a mighty thin thread to attach to any sort of sucess for the OLPC project.

But I guess the poor OLPC folk can dream....

Re:Win7 development started just after Vista shipp (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285477)

It's not as thin as it seems. Intel and Microsoft worked hard against the OLPC with much success. Do some Google searches to find out more.

Re:Win7 development started just after Vista shipp (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285625)

Honestly, if Microsoft came up with a Windows OS that was compatible with all the drivers written for XP and/or 2000 I'd be perfectly happy to buy it. If Windows 7 works well I'd be more than willing to pay the money IF everything works. I don't want to buy a new motherboard because it doesn't have Vista/Win 7 drivers... I don't want the hassle. Give me a OS that just WORKS with the hardware I buy.

Bloat (4, Insightful)

Ritz_Just_Ritz (883997) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285053)

I dunno...Microsoft isn't the only faction that's suffered from some serious code bloat. Computers have gotten so much faster at such a rapid pace. Linux + Gnome and OSX have gotten rather porky as well....

I'd be happy to forego all the eye candy if it would speed up the work that I actually care about.

Best,

Re:Bloat (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285215)

Linux + Gnome and OSX have gotten rather porky as well....

Funny you should mention that... OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard) is, in part, a return to a smaller, faster OS. So even Apple feels the heat of Core Duos and such. And there are a number of Linux distros that are pretty slim.

It is certainly a welcome trend that you don't need next years supercomputer to run a damn OS...

Re:Bloat (3, Interesting)

prockcore (543967) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285391)

The thing about Linux is that nearly every netbook maker is developing a custom Linux distro that removes the cruft and makes it run faster.

Re:Bloat (1)

electrosoccertux (874415) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285777)

Gnome will always be slow...

Re:Bloat (1)

Cathbard (954906) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285403)

Well that is one of the beauties of GNU/linux, if gnome and kde are too bloated for you it's a simple matter to install any number of lightweight window managers and/or desktop environments. There's fluxbox, openbox, lxde, icewm, crystal fvmw and xfce just to name a few.

Re:Bloat (1)

theillien (984847) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285669)

I don't know if it is is necessarily adding all the features that has caused the bloat. Although, you are probably right that it is the horsepower that modern systems bring to the table that is the root of the problem. With each iteration of Moore's Law developers (née, business managers) are less concerned about clean, efficient code. After all, they don't have only having 64k to work within anymore. A single program can be larger and less elegant and have less impact on system performance than in days gone by. However, multiply that by all the apps running on your system and it quickly gets out of hand.

Re:Bloat (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285729)

Windowmaker works great. FVWM is pretty good too. Lightweight and happy. Check it out.

white people... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285059)

...are always stereotyping.

There is some bad news too (2, Informative)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285069)

Sadly, I have some bad news for Linux lovers (myself included) when it comes to the netbook. The fact is that hopes for Linux on the netbook is all but dead now that Windows owns more than 90% [computerworld.com] of this market.

I still have some hope though. KDE 4.2.1 is convincing many folks in my small world. If KDE programmers do what they have to do in terms of multimedia and the browser (read KHTML/WebKit), there is a future.

Why is this bad news? (4, Funny)

FranTaylor (164577) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285143)

Nothing is going to get me to stop using Linux, and if all of this competition means that Windows is getting better, well bully. I seriously would not mind if everyone stopped asking me to fix their computer for them.

Re:Why is this bad news? (4, Funny)

Celc (1471887) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285283)

The others asking you for help problem lies with people not getting better.

... that and you obviously aren't unplesant enough for them to be scared of asking you, work on that it helps.

Re:Why is this bad news? (3, Funny)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285445)

They really need to get cracking with Moore's law for people. My boss has been stuck at 4.77Mhz for at least twenty years now.

Re:Why is this bad news? (2, Funny)

dangitman (862676) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285563)

They really need to get cracking with Moore's law for people. My boss has been stuck at 4.77Mhz for at least twenty years now.

Whoa. That's seriously fast for a boss. Did you overclock him or something?

Re:Why is this bad news? (2, Interesting)

CAIMLAS (41445) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285469)

Well, it's bad news for a reason he didn't quite mention. The bad news is that it's likely, in part, due to how pokey Linux has gotten on the desktop in the last 5 years.

We need a serious initiative within open source to push for a feature-lock for a year or two (or even 6 months), and focus on improving the ability of OSS to run within small constraints. Granted, a lot of this is happening currently (see: Firefox), but I think a more concerted effort needs to be taken.

What are you talking about? (1)

FranTaylor (164577) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285781)

I have a pretty standard Linux desktop, and just about everything happens instantaneously. It takes a second or two to start up Firefox, but everything else is just blinding quick. Really nothing to complain about.

Re:There is some bad news too (1)

Onaga (1369777) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285185)

And microsoft used to own 95% of the browser market share. Things change.

Re:There is some bad news too (3, Insightful)

wisty (1335733) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285199)

Even so, 10% is pretty damn good. Ask BMW, or Steve Jobs.

I'll agree - KDE is doing a lot of attractive stuff, with it's whole interoperability of user data focus. And the default theme looks better than Leopard.

Re:There is some bad news too (2, Insightful)

IntlHarvester (11985) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285249)

Even so, 10% is pretty damn good. Ask BMW, or Steve Jobs.

Instead ask Yugo, because Linux netbooks tend to be the elcheapo models.

What's happening is that Windows users have found higher-end netbooks to be workable laptop replacements and not just internet appliances.

Re:There is some bad news too (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285335)

Of course they are. Not having windows or office shaves a few hundred off the price.

Re:There is some bad news too (2, Insightful)

IntlHarvester (11985) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285921)

The comparison was with BMW, not the loss-leader they throw out there at $299 to bait you into buying the more profitable windows models.

Re:There is some bad news too (1)

prockcore (543967) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285635)

Linux netbooks tend to be identical to the windows models except that they have an 8GB SSD instead of a 120GB HD.

Re:There is some bad news too (1)

PhrostyMcByte (589271) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285241)

Recent games don't run on netbooks. Old Windows-only games run fine in Wine. So I've got no issue running Linux on my Eee PC. The only thing I'd like to see, is apps have better support for the small screen. I'm sure Windows has much of the same problems -- whoever gets there first might find it easier to sell.

Re:There is some bad news too (4, Interesting)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285395)

10% of 14 million is still a sizable market share. There are countries all over the world that are smaller than that number that speak their own unique language. The netbook might not be most people's primary machine, but 1.4 million people who are now OK with using linux that would have blindly bought a windows PC before is a giant leap in terms of consumer penetration. 10% penetration is a number Apple's been clawing after for years .

Re:There is some bad news too (1)

qazwart (261667) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285589)

Actually, Linux might be the real winner in the end. The current Microsoft OEM price for Windows Vista Home Basic is between $50 to $100. Windows Vista Home Premium is between $125 to $200. I have no idea what Microsoft plans to do for Windows 7 pricing.

Here's Microsoft's problem. As computers become cheaper, the cost of the Windows OS becomes a higher percentage of the price of a computer. When computers were just below the $2000 mark, the cost of Windows was negligible. When you're talking about a $200 netbook, adding an extra $100 for a very basic operating system is a lot of money.

Even worse for Microsoft is that the OS is not quite as important as it once was. In the good ol' days, everybody needed Microsoft Office. Now, people want a browser, so they can read their mail, twitter, or play games on Facebook.

And, Linux is now consumer ready. I've installed it on quite a few people's computers because of problems they were having with malware, or because their computers were running slow. They love Linux. Well, they don't actually love Linux, they love the fact that their computers are faster and they don't have to worry about malware. They really don't care about the OS itself.

The only problem with Linux is that it doesn't work with iPods. Sort of ironic: Apple is one of the reasons why some people can't abandon Windows.

Re:There is some bad news too (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285665)

Just curious to know what your take is on the latest KDE. Do you see anything positive in it to help out the Linux cause in your opinion?

Re:There is some bad news too (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285687)

The OEM price for netbooks is more like $20.

Re:There is some bad news too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285651)

That's not really bad news.
As long as people use open formats, I don't care if they use Windows or Mac OS. It doesn't really affect me. Running GNU/Linux is a personal thing.

Market forces (1, Troll)

daemonenwind (178848) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285073)

Up to this point, people just wanted something flashy that justified expensive, penis-length-contest-winning hardware. And so Microsoft gave people a more and more integrated experience.

As the public finally realized that they mostly just wanted glorified net appliances, demands changed. Microsoft, being relatively nimble as gigantic international companies go, is shipping what people are demanding.

Whether people would have realized this without alternative OSs pulling them along is debatable, of course. But Microsoft is simply tailoring their product to demand.

Um, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285085)

Duh?

Maybe, Maybe not. (4, Insightful)

Reed Solomon (897367) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285151)

While they claim (and reports indicate) Windows 7 will be faster than Vista, I wouldn't put it past Microsoft to shoot themselves in the foot as soon as it's released.

And I don't think its the success of Netbooks that is making Microsoft focus on speed on netbooks. It's the fear of Linux/Android taking over where Windows Vista cannot work that is making them focus on speed for Windows 7. Amusingly enough, if Arm based netbooks take off, Not only is Microsoft screwed, but intel too.

Then again, Via Nano based netbooks are also starting to be rolled out, and they are comparable to the atom chipset. We'll see.

Nobody has made a netbook where when the lid is closed you have an e-ink screen for dual use as an ebook reader. This is totally pissing me off. I'm not the only person in the world who wants this or has thought of this.

Re:Maybe, Maybe not. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285297)

You want to put a $300 eink screen on a $250 netbook?

THe market for this is pretty slim I think. The Kindle keeps most of book worms happy, and the netbooks are good for us net users. Sure, there is overlap, but how many people want a netbook and an ebook reader and have $600 burning a hole in their pocket?

The OLPC seems to kinda sorta do what you want though. It isn't eink, but it is readable in sunlight and is supposed to be very crisp in bw.

i finally get it! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285169)

slashdot's windows logo, they are all broken!

ha.

fi8sT (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285259)

Re:fi8sT (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285327)

rivalry, 4nd we'll

Ignoring the fact that it's a goatse link; this seems to be a snippet from a larger text.
Do I even want to know which one?

Color Me Stupid (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285305)

I ran Vista for a few hours before hitting fdisk, and didn't dig, but Windows 7 has ten million services I'm unfamiliar with, and everything I've read about 7's performance on a netbook has to do with the disabling tons of services for the netbook verison.

I'm pretty familiar with what all the XP services are, and which I don't need, but what NEW can I disable in 7? What is MS disabling in the netbook version?

Other than Samba sharing, I don't expect I need much more than the netbook version would offer on my desktop.

Short answer - no (5, Interesting)

Daltorak (122403) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285397)

Short answer -- No.

First of all, the obvious: Microsoft started working on Windows 7 late in 2006, even before Vista was released. Netbooks became popular in 2008. 2007 worldwide sales of Netbook-type machines were less than half a million.

Any self-respecting computer programmer knows what's really going on. When you spend months or years working on a major new release, you're often struggling to get the new stuff working at all. Your managers are pushing you to get the thing out the door; deadlines are looming; adding more people to the team would probably be counterproductive since they'd only slow down the people who need to be 100% focused on finishing things up.

Once you get that x.0 release out the door, you take a vacation, reintroduce yourself to your wife and kids, putter around at work for a while, and then dive back in and make your code faster, cleaner, more reliable, more useful. The x.1 release that follows ends up being the one everyone likes; people say "It's what x.0 should have been!" ... Right? That's what happens!

And that's exactly what's happening with Windows 7. This isn't a major "reinvent the wheel" release... it's all about optimization, performance, better user interfaces, and tacking on some new things that have become popular since Vista was released, like proper support for SSD drives, multi-touch, multi-core GPUs, and so on...

Re:Short answer - no (3, Insightful)

D Ninja (825055) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285601)

adding more people to the team will always be counterproductive since they'd only slow down the people who need to be 100% focused on finishing things up

Fixed that for you.

If there are any manager types reading this - THIS IS TRUE. More people does not make a project quicker to market. In fact, it has the reverse effect for a variety of reasons. A great book about this is The Mythical Man Month by Frederick P. Brooks. Please. Read. Do it for all of us techs-types who already know this.

Re:Short answer - no (1)

iScharfschtze (1506249) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285633)

Well im sorry but id huvta say "wrong answer bud". Do you honestly belive that M$ plays with dice when it comes to market oportunities? They are a couple of hundreds steps away from what the real market timing is. A notebook may huv been a hit in 08, n in 07 had a lame start but M$ knew bout em since 04 when the netbook "proyects" started. I thought this was common knowledge, but lemme explain it to you real fast, in order to get this netbooks on the market theres an entire infrastructure (or backend if u like) behind the machine blueprints, n im talkin bout market estimates, market studies, new technologies, well... pretty much all sorta stuff we, on this side of the market, dont get to see unless u work for one of those computer manufacturers corporations or companies. That being said, M$ has some pretty badass legal contracts with most of these manufacturers, n which ever manufacturer gets the latest version of win offered on their product, and workin, ll give em such a humongous amount of profit there is just not enough room on slashdot's host to type that number in. A couple of years ago, when IBM started their unique "Linux" campaign, everyone was just goin mental about puttin money on it (manufacturers that is), such as dell, lenovo (which isnt IBM, just bought a product line, know how, n a whole bunch of corporate stuff), HP, etc etc. But, it failed, they thought it d somehow end with M$'s tyrany in short terms, but it didnt, normal users (unsuspecting public if you want) dont like linux, they are still afraid their computer might eat them if they hit the ScrLk button or sth, so they rely on Windows to satisfy this. Try to open ure mind a bit, corp world is too huge to sum it up in a couple of lines, but trust me on this one, ive seen it happen.

Who says it performs better anyway? (2, Interesting)

edxwelch (600979) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285401)

Who says it performs better anyway? Arstechnica gives no information on what tests they ran. Windows 7 is really just Vista SP3, so I'm a bit sketical.

makes sense (2, Funny)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285407)

Microsoft will *always* improve their products. As the very last resort.

Psion (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285441)

Thanks, Psion. [slashdot.org]

Blah fucking netbook blah (0, Troll)

dangitman (862676) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285523)

The "netbook" is simply the tech media's latest obsession. Name anything, and the netbook is touted as the reason behind it. Cure to polio? Netbook. Waning Windows adoption? Netbook.

Name any problem, and the netbook is the answer to it. Financial crisis? Netbook. Inexplicable popularity of reality TV? Netbook. Global warming? Netbook.

Get the fuck off my lawn, assholes. Netbook.

Re:Blah fucking netbook blah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27285611)

Get the fuck off my lawn, assholes

There is this netbook I know of which can help you with that...

Re:Blah fucking netbook blah (1)

rob1980 (941751) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285771)

Second shooter on the grassy knoll? Netbook.

ok (1)

Venim (846130) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285603)

cant say i really care. im going to dual boot xp and some distro or freebsd instead.

thank the netbook? (3, Insightful)

Ralph Spoilsport (673134) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285873)

Yeah - godferbid they just make a quick efficient OS because it's a good idea...

Pretty Convincing (2, Insightful)

LuYu (519260) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285899)

This whole thing seems to support earlier rumours that MS was deliberately bloating Windows code in order to make people keep buying new computers. Now that the market has spoken, all of that bloat can be easily removed. Everything in Windows seems to be necessary until MS is forced to remove it.

Duh (2, Interesting)

symbolset (646467) | more than 5 years ago | (#27285915)

Intel giveth, Microsoft taketh away.

The thing that breaks this paradigm is an Intel platform that moves backwards in net performance. When the goal shifts from ever increasing net performance to performance per power it's only expected that Microsoft should miss the turn.

The question is, how did they miss being informed that the turn was coming? Did they get told and disbelieve, or were they just not told? I believe the former, not the latter.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...