53 replies to this topic

[eVader]

You can put Ubuntu on a netbook even if it ships with XP however I have seen articles that hardware may require some tweaking vs. custom Linux image. What is your impressions of Ubuntu as a savvy techie but new to Linux?

Several tech sites have posted articles on how well Windows 7 works on various netbooks and so far claim it is the best Windows OS for the netbook.

[Dave Burrell]

You can put Ubuntu on a netbook even if it ships with XP however I have seen articles that hardware may require some tweaking vs. custom Linux image. What is your impressions of Ubuntu as a savvy techie but new to Linux?

Several tech sites have posted articles on how well Windows 7 works on various netbooks and so far claim it is the best Windows OS for the netbook.

I really really really like Ubuntu (and Fedora too) - fastest, most stable OS I've ever used and it really makes it hard going back to Windoze and Vista which run unbearably slow and have too much instability by comparison

I have no faith in Microshaft and don't believe version 7 will be any better then any of the prior versions of their buggy, bloated OS's (but that's just my opinion based on real world experience with the various operating systems)

[webuser]

Can Linux be installed on a netbook? That's a much better OS then waiting for Microshaft Windoze 7

You're right about the iphone not working with flash, that is a drag but I haven't used too many sites that are flash based so I've been able to surf pretty good using my iphone on many sites.
I read some news this morning about a new firmware code coming out that has a few lines of code in it for what is rumored to be for a new product release this summer, something beyond just additional memory - maybe this new version is the fix for the flash probs too.

You could install Linux or buy one with Linux already on it now, but that doesn't change the fact that the HARDWARE was intentionally limited in capability to appease Microsoft/Intel's wishes regarding what the maximum hardware specs XP can be factory loaded on is. If you install Linux, you do not get around the capability of the hardware the netbook has. The screen still will be no better than 1024X600 etc. even on a 10 inch or 12in netbook until after new post-Windows-7 netbooks are released.

Once Windows 7 comes out there will no longer be any reason to limit the hardware and screen resolution on future released models of netbooks. You will then have netbooks available with more RAM and higher resolution displays and that will make them much more desirable even if you load Linux on them at that time.

[bunny]

I dont think Windows 7 will arrive in netbook form in a reasonable enough time frame to affect a current buying decision. Probably not until next year sometime.

I like linux a lot and have worked with ubuntu quite a bit. Its fine for technical users with linux/unix experience. I found that there are still a lot of quirky driver issues and sometimes you have to figure a lot of stuff out on your own. Which might be tough if you're primarily a windows user.

For basic browsing/email/openoffice use, tough to beat considering the price.

Lots of internet support for it, but be prepared to be taunted by a series of 17 year olds who think you're an idiot because you didnt know intuitively that to fix your graphics display problem, that you'd just gedit some file and type in 45 lines of resolution options.

[webuser]

I dont think Windows 7 will arrive in netbook form in a reasonable enough time frame to affect a current buying decision. Probably not until next year sometime.

I like linux a lot and have worked with ubuntu quite a bit. Its fine for technical users with linux/unix experience. I found that there are still a lot of quirky driver issues and sometimes you have to figure a lot of stuff out on your own. Which might be tough if you're primarily a windows user.

For basic browsing/email/openoffice use, tough to beat considering the price.

Lots of internet support for it, but be prepared to be taunted by a series of 17 year olds who think you're an idiot because you didnt know intuitively that to fix your graphics display problem, that you'd just gedit some file and type in 45 lines of resolution options.

You can buy a netbook with Linux already loaded, all the drivers already installed and no need to tweak or change any settings if you are using it as just a web appliance.

[bunny]

You can buy a netbook with Linux already loaded, all the drivers already installed and no need to tweak or change any settings if you are using it as just a web appliance.

Agreed. I think what I was responding to was the suggestion that linux could be loaded on an XP based netbook to get the efficiency of linux, rather than wait for windows 7.

While there are many enthusiast groups that offer netbook specific loads that have all the necessary drivers, its not necessarily easy for someone with a low to medium tech skill set to implement it.

You could install Linux or buy one with Linux already on it now, but that doesn't change the fact that the HARDWARE was intentionally limited in capability to appease Microsoft/Intel's wishes regarding what the maximum hardware specs XP can be factory loaded on is. If you install Linux, you do not get around the capability of the hardware the netbook has. The screen still will be no better than 1024X600 etc. even on a 10 inch or 12in netbook until after new post-Windows-7 netbooks are released.

Neither microsoft nor intel has done ay "intentional" limiting in the netbooks that i'm aware of, and I'd probably be pretty well aware of it.

The GMA 950 graphics in most netbooks and the newer GN40 have the capability to drive much higher resolution panels and will drive an external screen to those resolutions. Nothing in the windows drivers limits the higher resolutions.

In fact, some netbooks (HP I think?) have higher resolution panels, several can have up to 4GB of ram, etc. The new Dell mini 12 goes to 1024x800. You really arent going to get much benefit by going too high on a 9 or 10" screen. The letters would be so small you wouldnt be able to read them,

I think microsoft wants to restrict XP usage in non netbook/non appliance applications, but you may still buy a copy of XP and install it on anything you want to.

So the people who have limited the capabilities are the notebook manufacturers who decided on a certain screen size and resolution, mostly to keep the size and cost down, and who put one or two memory slots in the box that are the ones driving any limitations. Maybe a few of them dont want a larger, lighter weight, big screen netbook that gets 12 hours of battery life and does most anything that their $800 laptop does?

[webuser]

Neither microsoft nor intel has done ay "intentional" limiting in the netbooks that i'm aware of, and I'd probably be pretty well aware of it.

Microsoft and Intel definitely do dictate and restrict what capability netbooks have for marketing reasons. Everything from processors to screen resolution to hard drive size to what is allowed to be factory preloaded with XP by the manufacturer.

http://www.digitimes...80903PD217.html

This is why specs on netbooks are so similar between all manufacturers and why you cannot get a higher resolution screen than 1024X600. 1280X800 would be quite useful on a 9-11" netbook and not cause a huge price increase.

http://www.fudzilla....c...0&Itemid=38

[bunny]

I hope this isnt going to flip into a peeing contest, but I used to work at Intel and have many, many friends that work in the microprocessor area. I used to head strategic marketing for microprocessors at the company, so I'm a little more credible than fudzilla and some guy at digitimes.

Intel does not and cannot put restrictions on netbook parameters, lest they find themselves in some sort of antitrust situation. What happened is that Intel created, with several of its partners, reference platforms for the Atom and supporting chips. Its really, really cheap to copy a reference platform, put your own spin and case on it, toss in a little extra h/w or s/w, and put it to market. Its quite expensive to go off on your own.

Most of the companies who have the financial wherewithal to build up their own netbook platforms have high margin, high end laptops and very little interest in building a large screen, high resolution laptop with a huge hard drive and an Atom in it to compete with that business.

Plus as I mentioned, in the 7-10" form factor, a 1280x800 screen would give you a ridiculously tiny fine character set. You can kick up the type size in windows, but that doesnt work with some applications. I cant even use an 8.9" netbook without a pair of binoculars at the current resolutions. I thought about getting one for my four year old, and after some consideration decided that anything smaller than a 10" screen wasnt going to cut it, and ended up getting him a 14".

Microsoft wanted to end XP's sales life since they have a follow on product. They dont want to keep selling XP ad nauseum, because that extends the time and volume of XP support they'll have to continue to do many, many years from now. They effectively EOL'd it about the time that netbooks came around. Vista on an Atom with 512KB of ram and a 4GB SSD wasnt going to happen. Since microsoft stood to lose considerable business at this low end by seeing the manufacturers install linux based alternatives, they agreed to allow XP to continue to be sold in configurations in which the configurations were too small for a basic Vista install.

Intel makes up reference platforms to help system builders more quickly design, has design and implementation specs that are useful, some guidelines that if you dont follow voids a warranty...but it cannot and does not specify how its products are used or implemented, or have any punitive methods of recourse if a vendor "doesnt do what they want".

Any netbook company could order a 1000 Atoms and their support chips, make a 17" laptop with 1080p capable resolution, buy a windows XP oem license on the open market, and make a laptop out of it. Nobody would stop them. What would stop them is the brazillion dollars it'd take to do the design, and the fact that their profit margins would stink.

The reason why 12" notebooks have taken so long to come out isnt due to the lack of 12" screens. Its due to the lack of PC makers interest in wiping out one of their most profitable product segments. If you've been buying computers for a while, you'll know that the ultraportable 12" notebook products frequently sold for 2-3x the cost of a 15" unit with the same specs.

So there are a lot of ways to look at this...the evil dual empires controlling what people can and cant do, against their will...or two companies trying to sell products into market segments, in conjunction with their partners, in a cost effective and profitable manner that the businesses can sustain.

[webuser]

I hope this isnt going to flip into a peeing contest, but I used to work at Intel and have many, many friends that work in the microprocessor area. I used to head strategic marketing for microprocessors at the company, so I'm a little more credible than fudzilla and some guy at digitimes.

I am not just getting this from "some guy's" personal blog or one or two websites. Those are not the the only websites with this information. A Google search on this topic brings up dozens of sites with similar info and I just chose the previous two links at random.

http://www.infoworld...tel-Atom_1.html
http://gadgets.boing...-ram-on-mi.html
http://arstechnica.c...or-netbooks.ars
http://apcmag.com/mi...b_ram_limit.htm
http://forums.msiwin...eased-t742.html
http://www.techspot....n-netbooks.html
http://www.crunchgea...een-resolution/

Regardless of what's happening regarding this at Intel, Microsoft's name comes up much more often and it only takes Microsoft to make this happen.
It turns out that Microsoft may not exactly "force" the manufacturers to build certain specs, but if they disobey, they do not get special discounts on Windows licensing and that makes it cost prohibitive not to comply.

[bunny]

Eh, Microsoft would end up in a lawsuit if they did anything of the kind.

I just wanted the average reader here to know that their largest local employer isnt trying to foist substandard products on people for their own benefit. Netbook makers are free to make any sort of product that they wish, and load whatever software on it that they want to. Microsoft may limit XP OEM licenses sold because they've EOL'd the product, but one can buy full or OEM licenses of the product on the open market.

I'm sure there are lots and lots of articles on the internet that are to the contrary. Everyone wants Intel and Microsoft to be the bad guys, and once one guy "reports" it, they all do.

Any of this sort of thing done in real life would cause antitrust and market manipulation charges to be brought to bear. Quite immediately.

About the only thing I can say that Intel may be doing thats sort of market manipulative is not releasing the dual core atom in a package that can be used in a small laptop. Its in a big package that really wouldnt fit, but makes for a nice low cost, high performance green desktop. I know they could have had a dual core atom package out suitable for smaller form factor laptops quite a while ago. I think they havent because it protects the margins of their more profitable products for a while longer, until those can extend a larger performance advantage.

I guess I'm okay with them bringing in some extra money, since it keeps a whole bunch of Folsom employees on the job, buying stuff, eating out in restaurants, and paying their mortgages.

Sometimes I sort of wish I was still there with them, slugging it out. No way I was going through another R&R session.

[webuser]

Eh, Microsoft would end up in a lawsuit if they did anything of the kind.

I just wanted the average reader here to know that their largest local employer isnt trying to foist substandard products on people for their own benefit. Netbook makers are free to make any sort of product that they wish, and load whatever software on it that they want to. Microsoft may limit XP OEM licenses sold because they've EOL'd the product, but one can buy full or OEM licenses of the product on the open market.

I'm sure there are lots and lots of articles on the internet that are to the contrary. Everyone wants Intel and Microsoft to be the bad guys, and once one guy "reports" it, they all do.

So, every one of the reports is false, none of those sites fact checks anything and it is a coincidence that all current XP netbooks from all manufactures have the same max specs and don't want to differentiate themselves by offering a model with even slightly better specs in RAM or disk space than competitors.
You seem really dismissive if this.

When I did the search I was also searching to see if there was any news sites that where saying this was a hoax or had contrary reports and I found nothing.
So, every one of the reports is false, none of those sites fact check anything. They all got this news from one random guys blog with an agenda to defame Microsoft and Intel.

It makes sense that Microsoft doesn't want OEMs putting XP on netbooks that could run Vista instead.
OEM vendors buying licenses in the open market is much more expensive than getting the preferred rates the OEMs can get directly from Microsoft if they follow their rules. On a cheap netbook where every dollar counts, they need to find every cost advantage they can get to be competitive.
It would also make sense that Intel would not want netbooks with low margin Atom processors to ever reach a point in specs where they have enough capability to be a real threat at cannibalizing sales of notebooks with higher margin chips.
It would not be a bad guy or mean. It would be to maximize profits and shareholder value.

When Windows 7 is out and XP is completely dead there will less reason for Microsoft to care if Asus or HP or MSI or Dell makes a netbook that could be optioned by the manufacturer with 3GBs of RAM and a 250GB hard drive and wants to sell it with Windows 7 preloaded on it.

However, the same type of thing about hardware limits could happen with Windows 7 "Starter" edition since that will be the new low margin OS and Microsoft would prefer higher margin Home Premium be sold.

http://news.cnet.com...0155943-56.html

In an interview this week, Senior Vice President Bill Veghte said that Microsoft will place restrictions on the kinds of processors and screen resolutions that will be supported by Windows 7 Starter, but declined to detail the limitations. Windows 7 Starter also won't support features like multitouch or Media Center.

There you have a quote from a named Microsoft VP about Windows 7 restrictions. The wording makes it sound as if it even goes a step further than XP OEM pricing discount restrictions and are going to code the software so it will not even install or will not be supported by Microsoft if the computer has a processor that is over the spec limits they specify.
So, now even less reason to doubt reports that the same thing is happening with XP right now.
I don't know what else to say or what other sites to point to since you don't want to believe it.

[webuser]

conspiracy theories versus insider Intel info hmmm

Maybe microsoft is trying to get revenge against apple since the zune failed to take market shares from iPod sales?

What conspiracy theory? Did you not read the last link I posted that has a direct quote from a Microsoft VP on netbook restrictions?


It can't be any more plain to see than that.

The majority of the issue about crippled specs in netbooks is about Microsoft, not Intel anyway. The manufacturers could build machines with higher specs, but would not be able to put XP on it because of rates or availability. Intel has no say in that.
XP is on the way out and was originally going to not be available now anyway, so Microsoft may feel they are doing the manufacturers a favor by "permitting" them to still buy it now under any circumstances.

If the netbook manufacturers decided to make an Atom netbook loaded with 2 gigs of RAM and a 200GB hard drive, they would have to only offer it with Linux to keep the price down because they would not be able to get XP at preferred rates if at all. Linux-only would not be a viable model in the market where most people want Windows.

[bunny]

I said right up front that Microsoft was willing to sell OEM copies of XP to run on netbooks incapable of running Vista with proficiency. But they dont want to keep selling XP on other machines and end up supporting a broad base of new XP clients that can run Vista.

Microsoft doesnt have to sell XP at all. I'm sure they arent being altruistic, they just dont want to lose sales to linux.

So microsoft isnt restricting netbook specifications. Any netbook maker can put vista or linux on the box and make it any way they want.

Riddle me this, Batman. Why dont the linux based netbooks have higher resolution screens?

Its also worth noting that the difference in price between the best discount and full price on a 1.6GHz Atom is about ten dollars.

So all the system builders in the world, in grave fear of their primary hardware and software providers...didnt put out a high resolution linux netbook over ten bucks?

The rest of the conspiracy theory is a couple of web bloggers with no viable sources speculating, and another 20 quoting them, and another 50 quoting them.

What you have here is an actual first person source letting you know that its not only incorrect, if it happened a thousand intel lawyers would have descended upon the people who created and published these "restrictions", diced them into small bits and eaten them.

Where I think the major source of the "Intel restrictions" seemed to come from were complaints by some system builders that the Atom's chipset and reference designs didnt have as many ports, FSB speeds or expansion capabilities to suit them. I've seen some actual quotes from actual system builders that they felt that Intel was artificially restricting Atoms capabilities by not making the supporting components more robust.

Probably so.

I think the bloggers then mistakenly latched that and the microsoft limits on where they'd be willing to sell XP as some sort of nefarious plot against their netbook buyers.

In any case, its not about that. Its simply that on a 7 or 9" screen, you cant read the text when the resolution is any finer than it is. And there IS a good difference in cost in larger, higher resolution screens.

Despite all the hoopla, you can now buy 10, 10.2, 10.4 and 12" notebooks with all sorts of higher resolutions. So apparently the Wintel embargo has subsided.

Some day when we're all in a sharing mood, I'll tell you guys about the stream of absolutely filthy language that came out of an Intel lawyer when she heard I'd put the word "wintel" on a powerpoint slide.

The only other thing I can offer is...