Microsoft hobbles XP mini-notes with 1GB RAM limit

[Cyrus_the_virus]

Redmond’s new XP mini-note licence dictates a 1GB memory limit to protect the high-profit position of Vista-powered notebooks


Bill Gates famously said that “640KB ought to be enough for anybody”, but his company has now decided 1GB is enough for XP – that is, if you’re running it on a mini-note.

As the new wave of mini-notes powered by Intel’s Atom processor starts to take off, bringing low-cost mobile computing to the mainstream, APCmag.com has learned that Microsoft is dictating that vendors limit their mini-notes to 1GB of RAM if they want to install XP.

The artificial memory ceiling is a condition of the OEM licence for Microsoft’s bespoke ‘netbook’ build of XP Home, which includes SP3, a pre-loaded copy of the Microsoft Works suite and links to Windows Live online services.

A high-level spokesperson at a mini-note vendor, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told APCmag.com “This is a licensing restriction on netbooks. It’s not a hardware limitation. This is to deliberately separate XP netbooks from Vista notebooks.”

APCmag.com has since learned that Acer has downgraded the memory specification on the Windows XP edition of its forthcoming Aspire One mini-note. A spokesperson confirmed to APCmag.com that the initial 1.5GB of RAM promised in its press release and Web site would be pared back to 1GB “due to XP restrictions”.

However, the Linux-powered model will retain its 512MB of RAM and the ability to be upgraded by Acer or a tech-savvy user to 1.5GB by dropping a 1GB chip into the mini-note’s on-board memory slot.

Buyers of Acer’s XP mini-note would obviously be able to do likewise, but the process necessitates removing the entire chassis (which can carry the subsequent risk of voiding your warranty). Unlike conventional laptops, mini-notes are not designed with end-user upgrades in mind. There’s usually no door for accessing the memory slot, and in many cases RAM is mounted directly on-board to speed up the production process and reduce costs.

It’s true that XP runs fine with 1GB of RAM, and mini-notes aren’t faced with hardware-intensive tasks such as playing DVDs or editing video. However, there’s no argument that with memory so cheap and the notebook industry starting to toggle to DD3 as part of the new Centrino 2 platform, there’s plenty of benefit – from a vendor’s competitive standpoint, as well as giving the user some extra overhead – to loading 1.5GB on deck.

Microsoft’s decision is also ironic, given that it needlessly cruels one of the last remaining outlets for the seven year-old old OS in a market where Linux already has its foot in the door. And Windows remains the OS of choice for vendors who want to give their mini-notes maximum mainstream appeal. Windows bestows an instant familiarity, as well as the ability for customers to install almost any of their current Windows program and have plenty of avenues for support should things go askew.

In an interview earlier this month with APCmag.com, speaking on the ‘Linux v Windows’ mini-note issue, Acer senior product manager Henry Lee said “The bulk of the requests and requirements we see in the marketplace are for the model with Windows rather than Linux”.

Source

So much so for consumer choice

Pathetic!

Typical examples of vendor lock-in and no surprise to find Microsoft at the Vendor end!

[NucleusKore]

Originally Posted by Cyrus_the_virus

Redmond’s new XP mini-note licence dictates a 1GB memory limit to protect the high-profit position of Vista-powered notebooks


Bill Gates famously said that “640KB ought to be enough for anybody”, but his company has now decided 1GB is enough for XP – that is, if you’re running it on a mini-note.

.............................

The artificial memory ceiling is a condition of the OEM licence for Microsoft’s bespoke ‘netbook’ build of XP Home, which includes SP3, a pre-loaded copy of the Microsoft Works suite and links to Windows Live online services.

A high-level spokesperson at a mini-note vendor, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told APCmag.com “This is a licensing restriction on netbooks. It’s not a hardware limitation. This is to deliberately separate XP netbooks from Vista notebooks.”

However, the Linux-powered model will retain its 512MB of RAM and the ability to be upgraded by Acer or a tech-savvy user to 1.5GB by dropping a 1GB chip into the mini-note’s on-board memory slot.

Source

Tomorrow they will tell you what colour underwear to wear with your notebook. This is the problem with monopolies.

[amitava82]

WTF!

[gxsaurav]

What's the point of giving more RAM in netbook anyway? For the tasks a netbook is made, 1 GB RAM & XP r fine.

They should bring the Origami UI to there netbooks running XP. Infact they should make the OS again for these only, slimming the requirment

[Faun]

^^2GB is enough IMO

[amitava82]

Originally Posted by gx_saurav

What's the point of giving more RAM in netbook anyway? For the tasks a netbook is made, 1 GB RAM & XP r fine.

WTF? It's my laptop, It's my decision how much RAM I want. Cheap strategy to kill XP. Someone bring up the Hero Honda bike example please (the one you use for Mac OS)!

[ray|raven]

Originally Posted by gx_saurav

What's the point of giving more RAM in netbook anyway? For the tasks a netbook is made, 1 GB RAM & XP r fine.

Just shows that you guys will just go on blatantly defending whatever Microsoft does.

Werent you there in the iPhone thread arguing against Apple's decision to decide what apps the users get to use?

Apple was 'restrictive' then, but Microsoft isnt now? Sheesh.

[iMav]

It's a business decision. Get over it. Don't buy the netbook. The company making the netbook entered a deal with Microsoft, those were the terms, if they didn't want these restrictions then they could have said no to Microsoft's XP, like that another company had done, XOPC or something. But, it was the makers of netbook that decided to go ahead with it. It is their fault, NOT Microsoft' fault.

[lywyre]

Originally Posted by gx_saurav

What's the point of giving more RAM in netbook anyway? For the tasks a netbook is made, 1 GB RAM & XP r fine.

They should bring the Origami UI to there netbooks running XP. Infact they should make the OS again for these only, slimming the requirment

If you truly like windows, then you should not acknowledge this. It is the customer's choise how much RAM he wants to use. On the topic, though, this means that Microsoft acknowledges Vista is not good enough yet.

[iMav]

Originally Posted by lywyre

If you truly like windows, then you should not acknowledge this. It is the customer's choise how much RAM he wants to use. On the topic, though, this means that Microsoft acknowledges Vista is not good enough yet.

Microsoft got into the deal with the hardware makers, those were the terms. If they were not acceptable to the company that makes the laptops and will eventually sell it they could say NO. But, they didn't. IT IS THEIR FAULT! BLAME & BOYCOTT THE MAKERS OF THE LAPTOP NOT MICROSOFT!

[FilledVoid]

What's the point of giving more RAM in netbook anyway? For the tasks a netbook is made, 1 GB RAM & XP r fine.

They should bring the Origami UI to there netbooks running XP. Infact they should make the OS again for these only, slimming the requirment

Does McDonalds require you wear Polka dot trousers and yellow shirts while you stroll in their joint? Dude, whatever you are smoking please stop and then come back and post. You are such a hypocrite going apeshit over Apple posts but at the same time posting nothing that would distinguish your posts from garbage.

Microsoft got into the deal with the hardware makers, those were the terms. If they were not acceptable to the company that makes the laptops and will eventually sell it they could say NO. But, they didn't. IT IS THEIR FAULT! BLAME & BOYCOTT THE MAKERS OF THE LAPTOP NOT MICROSOFT!

In other words MS extorted it from them. Read the below again. If they wanted to use XP they need to follow the specifications. Not doing so would end up in either raising their products costs or having to move to another OS.

As the new wave of mini-notes powered by Intel’s Atom processor starts to take off, bringing low-cost mobile computing to the mainstream, APCmag.com has learned that Microsoft is dictating that vendors limit their mini-notes to 1GB of RAM if they want to install XP.

A high-level spokesperson at a mini-note vendor, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told APCmag.com “This is a licensing restriction on netbooks. It’s not a hardware limitation. This is to deliberately separate XP netbooks from Vista notebooks.”

I hope this Lame Marketing tactic blows up in their freaking faces and is classified as an EPIC FAIL.

It's a business decision. Get over it. Don't buy the netbook. The company making the netbook entered a deal with Microsoft, those were the terms, if they didn't want these restrictions then they could have said no to Microsoft's XP, like that another company had done, XOPC or something. But, it was the makers of netbook that decided to go ahead with it. It is their fault, NOT Microsoft' fault.

Yeah unfortunately with a majority of the market share that doesn't leave the companies with a hell alot of options now does it? In an extent I can now see why Prakash posts those links against MS.

[gxsaurav]

Restricting it in Windows XP Licensing agreement is wrong, but if we look at it over all it won't make any difference anyway. Get over it, stop cribbing

[FilledVoid]

Restricting it in Windows XP Licensing agreement is wrong, but if we look at it over all it won't make any difference anyway. Get over it, stop cribbing

We're not here trying to make a cure for cancer Einstein. We are posting our views. The one you posted earlier is flawed to the core. So go Cry me a river elsewhere.

[iMav]

Originally Posted by FilledVoid

In other words MS extorted it from them. Read the below again. If they wanted to use XP they need to follow the specifications. Not doing so would end up in either raising their products costs or having to move to another OS.

That's business 101. You want our product these are the terms. And as far as the links are concerned. Well ...

[FilledVoid]

That's business 101. You want our product these are the terms. And as far as the links are concerned. Well ...

Exactly what I'm trying to say. Its business nothing else than that. Could you not decipher that from the line which said.

I hope this Lame Marketing tactic blows up in their freaking faces and is classified as an EPIC FAIL.

I wouldn't disagree with this but what I would disagree with is lame statements like these.

What's the point of giving more RAM in netbook anyway? For the tasks a netbook is made, 1 GB RAM & XP r fine.

State the business motive instead of justifying with "Well 640 kb ought to be enough." catch lines. It didn't work then. It won't work now.

[chandru.in]

Originally Posted by iMav

Microsoft got into the deal with the hardware makers, those were the terms. If they were not acceptable to the company that makes the laptops and will eventually sell it they could say NO. But, they didn't. IT IS THEIR FAULT! BLAME & BOYCOTT THE MAKERS OF THE LAPTOP NOT MICROSOFT!

Ok. So according to MS lovers here, when Apple restricts apps on iPhone, Apple is to be blamed, not AT&T or Vodafone who distribute it. But Microsoft puts in stupid restrictions, suddenly Dell and other OEMs should be blamed and not Microsoft.

My Opinion: Both Apple and Microsoft create stupid restrictions to choke consumer choice. Nothing new here. If Microsoft does not pose such restrictions, XP will live for too long and destroy Microsoft's further lock-in plans with Vista.

[narangz]

Originally Posted by ray|raven

Just shows that you guys will just go on blatantly defending whatever Microsoft does.

Werent you there in the iPhone thread arguing against Apple's decision to decide what apps the users get to use?

Apple was 'restrictive' then, but Microsoft isnt now? Sheesh.

+1

Why oh why Ballmer is ruining this company

[iMav]

Originally Posted by chandru.in

Apple is to be blamed, not AT&T or Vodafone who distribute it. But Microsoft puts in stupid restrictions, suddenly Dell and other OEMs should be blamed and not Microsoft.

Dude! There is something called as rationality, look around you might find it under the table! Microsoft does not make the laptop they provide the software to make those otherwise pieces of junk to work. It is their product they have the right to negotiate possible options to improve their business and such moves are part of those, if Dell or HP or netbook do not like it, go use something else. Why blame Microsoft? And who would blame AT&T or Vodafone for App store terms Are you high or something?

[Faun]

lolz...we are not dumb and don't want to see a restricted world too.

Look how win live for PC went free ! Why ? Cuz the consumers vowed to make a remark over it.
Developers started shifting to steam. MS was in deep trouble then

Its the "we" that make a difference

[narangz]

Originally Posted by iMav

Microsoft does not make the laptop they provide the software to make those otherwise pieces of junk to work.

Why are they imposing such terms then? They aren't only providing software they are also trying to control the use of hardware in the device.

[chandru.in]

Originally Posted by iMav

Dude! There is something called as rationality, look around you might find it under the table! Microsoft does not make the laptop they provide the software to make those otherwise pieces of junk to work. It is their product they have the right to negotiate possible options to improve their business and such moves are part of those, if Dell or HP or netbook do not like it, go use something else. Why blame Microsoft? And who would blame AT&T or Vodafone for App store terms Are you high or something?

I never blamed AT&T. I just pointed out your double stand. Just as appstore is Apple's term, this RAM limit is Microsoft's term. Just as AT&T sells iPhone with AppStore, OEMs sell Windows XP with this restriction. If the OEM's warranty terms are restrictive, they are to be blamed. Why blame them for MS's terms? Anyway no point in trying to point out reality to a closed mind. So I'll stop with this.

[iMav]

Originally Posted by chandru.in

I just pointed out your double stand.

Please point to me any post, not only on this forum, anywhere on any forum, any blog where I have 'blamed' Vodafone or AT&T for any App store terms & conditions. Failure to do so, I want you to edit your post where you speak of my alleged double standards.

[chandru.in]

Originally Posted by iMav

Please point to me any post, not only on this forum, anywhere on any forum, any blog where I have 'blamed' Vodafone or AT&T for any App store terms & conditions. Failure to do so, I want you to edit your post where you speak of my alleged double standards.

OMG that's exactly what I said. You did not blame Vodafone & AT&T for Appstore but you are blaming OEMs for the new XP terms. Is that not what is called double stand?

As I said I'm not interested in arguing more. Just replied to defend myself from the blame leveled against me.

[iMav]

Again rationality dude. Vodafone & OEMs are abso-friggin-lutely 2 different things There is no comparison between the 2 what-so-ever. Vodafone took the contract to distribute the Apple iPhone, the terms and conditions of the contract say that they have no say in what Apple does when it comes to App store. But, here my dear friend the manufacturers of netbook agreed to the terms and conditions set by Mircosoft, it is their fault for agreeing.

Apple makes iPhone & owns the app store, therefore they will be blamed. Netbook manufacturers make the notebooks therefore they will be blamed. Manufacturers is the keyword.

[adithyagenius]

You guys are not getting what MS is doing here. They have phased out Windows XP to standardize Vista. There are certain PCs like netbooks that do not meet the requirements for vista. Only for such PCs, MS is licensing XP. To prevent exploitation of this licensing, MS has capped the specs of these UMPCs. If they exceed these specs they will have to install vista. I have a system with 2 GB RAM and XP SP3. My RAM usage never exceeds 800MB unless I am running virtual machines or high end games. Noone will do that on netbooks, so that should not be a problem. If you want to do high RAM requiring work on netbook, get a vista netbook.
stop fighting...
peace!

[iMav]

Originally Posted by adithyagenius

They have phased out Windows XP to standardize Vista. There are certain PCs like netbooks that do not meet the requirements for vista. Only for such PCs, MS is licensing XP. To prevent exploitation of this licensing, MS has capped the specs of these UMPCs.

Bang on target! Finally. I hope the people who are comparing Vodafone & AT&T and OEMS and what not be in peace.

[infra_red_dude]

Bottom line is, MS is doing everything it can under the sun to save/promote/force Vista.. be it in the form of DirectX, Xbox Live, Mini-notes or whatever.

Vista was a failure (I'm sure there would be very very few who'd NOT agree to this), Windows 7 isn't ready... With Vista around, they can't extend XP's life which would acknowledge Vista's shortcomings. MS is in a fix...

No point arguing about all this

[Faun]

Originally Posted by adithyagenius

You guys are not getting what MS is doing here. They have phased out Windows XP to standardize Vista. There are certain PCs like netbooks that do not meet the requirements for vista. Only for such PCs, MS is licensing XP. To prevent exploitation of this licensing, MS has capped the specs of these UMPCs. If they exceed these specs they will have to install vista. I have a system with 2 GB RAM and XP SP3. My RAM usage never exceeds 800MB unless I am running virtual machines or high end games. Noone will do that on netbooks, so that should not be a problem. If you want to do high RAM requiring work on netbook, get a vista netbook.
stop fighting...
peace!

wth ! My bro works on Eclipse and that too three instances running at one time. Takes more than 1GB
Oracle database so alag.

And it all works on XP, why should he buy VISTA for that

[iMav]

Don't buy the netbook. As simple as that!

[infra_red_dude]

Originally Posted by adithyagenius

You guys are not getting what MS is doing here. They have phased out Windows XP to standardize Vista. There are certain PCs like netbooks that do not meet the requirements for vista. Only for such PCs, MS is licensing XP. To prevent exploitation of this licensing, MS has capped the specs of these UMPCs. If they exceed these specs they will have to install vista. I have a system with 2 GB RAM and XP SP3. My RAM usage never exceeds 800MB unless I am running virtual machines or high end games. Noone will do that on netbooks, so that should not be a problem. If you want to do high RAM requiring work on netbook, get a vista netbook.
stop fighting...
peace!

Acer Mini-Note XP specs:

• 8.9-inch 1024 x 600 LED-backlit display
• 1.6GHz Atom N270
• 512MB DDR2 SDRAM (expandable)
• 1.3 megapixel camera, SDHC and multi-format media readers
• 802.11b/g, Ethernet, three USB 2.0, VGA, and 3.5mm audio out
• One free mini PCI slot for WWAN
• 80GB hard drive (with XP) or 8GB solid state (with Linux)
• 2.5 or 5 hours on 3 or 6-cell batteries in XP model, 3 or 7 hours on Linux
• 1kg (2.2 pounds)

Specs for HP Mini-Note

• 1.19 kg
• 8.9 inch wide XGA display 1280×768
• Close to full size keyboard
• 3D DriveGuard with accelerometer for parking the hard drive when the computer falls
• Webcam
• Two battery solutions: 3 cell for ultralightweight config // 6 cell for extended battery life
• 802.11g WLAN
• Bluetooth
• Option for Windows Vista Basic, Windows Vista Business or Linux Preinstalled
• Scratch resistant screen
• Hp DuraKeys
• Via 1.0GHz Processor
• 1GB RAM
• 120GB Hard Drive

Need I say anything? So before posting anything, try to gather some facts.

XP uses about 900MB of RAM, Linux uses 700MB of RAM, Mac OS X 10.5 about 750MB (all upper end figures) unless something very very heavy work is going on.