# Microsoft hobbles XP mini-notes with 1GB RAM limit



## Cyrus_the_virus (Jul 23, 2008)

* 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

Cyrus_the_virus said:


> * 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.
> ...



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


----------



## amitava82 (Jul 23, 2008)

WTF!


----------



## gxsaurav (Jul 23, 2008)

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 (Jul 23, 2008)

^^2GB is enough IMO


----------



## amitava82 (Jul 23, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

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 (Jul 23, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

lywyre said:


> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

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 (Jul 23, 2008)

> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

FilledVoid said:


> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

iMav said:


> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

ray|raven said:


> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

chandru.in said:


> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

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 (Jul 23, 2008)

iMav said:


> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

iMav said:


> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

chandru.in said:


> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

iMav said:


> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

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 (Jul 23, 2008)

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 (Jul 23, 2008)

adithyagenius said:


> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

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 (Jul 23, 2008)

adithyagenius said:


> 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 (Jul 23, 2008)

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


----------



## infra_red_dude (Jul 23, 2008)

adithyagenius said:


> 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
> ...


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
> ...



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.


----------



## adithyagenius (Jul 23, 2008)

^
oh yeah i forgot to mention. I disable most of the startup services and use very light antivirus. That should remove that 100 mb from 900 mb. I am a gamer. So I make those tweaks and I automatically make those tweaks with any machine.
900 MB is less than 1GB. Whats you point anyways?



T159 said:


> 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



Dude I agree with you. I desperately tried to get a XP between Jun 24th and June 30th but I failed as Dell had stopped selling OEM licenses. Vista is being forced on us. Your post has nothing to do with my post. I am talking about the 1gb limit on xp netbooks.


----------



## infra_red_dude (Jul 23, 2008)

adithyagenius said:


> ^
> oh yeah i forgot to mention. I disable most of the startup services and use very light antivirus. That should remove that 100 mb from 900 mb. I am a gamer. So I make those tweaks and I automatically make those tweaks with any machine.
> 900 MB is less than 1GB. Whats you point anyways?


My point is that Vista notebook is NO powerful than the XP one.


----------



## casanova (Jul 23, 2008)

Bad on both.

Manufacturer's forcing Microsoft to ship Win XP
Microsoft forcing manufacturers to limit the amount of RAM.


----------



## Faun (Jul 23, 2008)

^^and no one is listening to what customers want 

you forgot that !


----------



## adithyagenius (Jul 23, 2008)

infra_red_dude said:


> My point is that Vista notebook is NO powerful than the XP one.



1gb is transition point. At some point the specs need to meet. You can't have no OS for a certain config. I would buy a CTO with vista instead of a normal netbook. Waiting for HP Pavilion tx2500z to arrive in India.


----------



## infra_red_dude (Jul 23, 2008)

adithyagenius said:


> There are certain PCs like netbooks that do not meet the requirements for vista. Only for such PCs, MS is licensing XP.


My post was in reply to this post of yours.



adithyagenius said:


> 1gb is transition point.


And your point is? 1GB+ can run Vista comfortably? I do not understand.


----------



## adithyagenius (Jul 23, 2008)

I dont know if 1gb can run vista comfortably or not because it depends on usage. All I know is that vista takes around 550mb with no applications open. Even If I open opera with 6 tabs and wmp11 simultaneously it will not exceed 1gb. I also have noticed that vista is slow even if there is free RAM. I think RAM is not the only issue for vista. Dont expect 3GB RAM to make Vista run smooth. Vista was sluggish on my desktop with 600gt and 2gb ram even after defragmenting and tweaking. But, then on my laptop vista was running very smooth on 1GB. Vista is very unpredictable and should avoided if no reviews exist for such configs.


----------



## threeonethree (Jul 23, 2008)

To hell with Micro$oft. i hope this "business" decision backfires big time and other better operating systems succeed in this market. But knowing how ignorant the masses are, microsoft is surely going to win even if they limit the RAM to 512 MB.

yesterday i saw a child labour in my college and somebodys quote came to my mind. "Its a microsoft world" ...

Be free.


----------



## lywyre (Jul 23, 2008)

Q: Whats the need to enforce the limit ?

A: ?????


----------



## chandru.in (Jul 23, 2008)

iMav said:


> Apple makes iPhone & owns the app store, therefore they will be blamed.


Microsoft makes Windows XP and owns the new licensing terms, isn't it?  Blaming OEMs for netbook's terms and quality is fine.  But why blame them for the terms of an operating system made by someone else?


----------



## iMav (Jul 23, 2008)

chandru.in said:


> Microsoft makes Windows XP and owns the new licensing terms, isn't it?  Blaming OEMs for netbook's terms and quality is fine.  But why blame them for the terms of an operating system made by someone else?


OMG dude! Rationality! Did you check under the table?

If the hardware manufacturers don't want the limit, DON'T GIVE OEMs BUNDLED WITH XP! The hardware manufacturers agreed to the OEM terms, why? It is their lack of business management skills to agree to the terms, NOT MICROSOFT! Microsoft saw an oppurtutnity and made a clause, those guys agreed to it. IT IS THEIR STUPIDITY!


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jul 23, 2008)

Here is my 8 annas:

*As long as they provide a cheap and powerful linux version along with XP version that too one which is around Rs. 2000 - 3000 cheaper for the same configuration as XP, I have absolutely NO issues.*

Or, they should provide linux versions with same price as XP version but something extra, like 4GB extra flash memory.

If they do something like above, I don't care what they do with that dead OS.
*
Edit: they really DO have an Rs. 4000 off on buying linux and ditching an extra 512mb ram. Not bad. I am impressed 

Another Edit: they are giving 80GB HDD with XP note.*
how is this useful at 600$ when for lesser price, I can get a 2GHz celeron notebook in India with same HDD, DVD Writer, etc ?


----------



## Cyrus_the_virus (Jul 23, 2008)

Wow, I didn't expect so much response, as for those fools who keeps arguing that 1GB is enough simply have peanut sized brains and don't get the point that it's not about what you think is right or wrong, preventing a consumer from doing what he could do otherwise with anything else is a sign of a pathetic force feeding ideology by a company and it's not just MS, any company who does this is in the same category.

As for the MS fanboys here, I think we all now realize what kind of double standard talk they have.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jul 23, 2008)

Cyrus_the_virus said:


> Wow, I didn't expect so much response, as for those fools who keeps arguing that 1GB is enough simply have peanut sized brains and don't get the point that it's not about what you think is right or wrong, preventing a consumer from doing what he could do otherwise with anything else is a sign of a pathetic force feeding ideology by a company and it's not just MS, any company who does this is in the same category.
> 
> As for the MS fanboys here, I think we all now realize what kind of double standard talk they have.


*I* don't use Windows. *You* don't use Windows.
*Then why the HELL should we care ?*
Let windows users suffer at the hands of MS, but its not going to hurt us one bit.


----------



## Cyrus_the_virus (Jul 23, 2008)

MetalheadGautham said:


> *I* don't use Windows. *You* don't use Windows.
> *Then why the HELL should we care ?*
> Let windows users suffer at the hands of MS, but its not going to hurt us one bit.



I'm not talking from a linux standpoint of view or anything yaar.

I'm talking in the view of general consumer rights. Like Rahul Gandhi said, I'm not talking as a congressmen but as a youth of this nation. Although it's not going to affect us(congress party), it's still in the interest of our nation(technology world).

If such things continue, then it's going to affect us the same way windows live crap for games is affecting us today.

Hence, I'm saying this in the general consumer interest and not in favour of open source.


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Jul 23, 2008)

Yea.consumers are the one who are getting hit,both hardware manufacturers and M$ is still making truckloads of $$$.

and the morons who says 'don't buy if you don't like' please tell me whats the alternative left?

Monopolist market requires the company to have high transparency and high moral standards which M$ obviously lacks and M$ fanboys won't ever understand.


whats next in line?Hell Price the bloody XP 3x more than Vista and see who still buys it(I know what M$ fanbois will say 'Its M$'s bloody OS,they can price it whatever they damn well please'.Losers.


----------



## infra_red_dude (Jul 23, 2008)

iMav said:


> OMG dude! Rationality! Did you check under the table?
> 
> If the hardware manufacturers don't want the limit, DON'T GIVE OEMs BUNDLED WITH XP! The hardware manufacturers agreed to the OEM terms, why? It is their lack of business management skills to agree to the terms, NOT MICROSOFT! Microsoft saw an oppurtutnity and made a clause, those guys agreed to it. IT IS THEIR STUPIDITY!


I've been following yours and chandru.in's posts and its clearly you who needs to lift the table and find something! Even a first time reader will understand what he's trying to say!

I'm neither taking his side nor yours, just suggesting you to read the posts again.

The greatest impact will be on a market like India, where we consumers haf little choice in portables.


----------



## iMav (Jul 23, 2008)

And your point is ...


----------



## infra_red_dude (Jul 23, 2008)

My point is: Thats double standards! Thats all


----------



## iMav (Jul 23, 2008)

Can you explain how?


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jul 23, 2008)

Cyrus_the_virus said:


> I'm not talking from a linux standpoint of view or anything yaar.
> 
> I'm talking in the view of general consumer rights. Like Rahul Gandhi said, I'm not talking as a congressmen but as a youth of this nation. Although it's not going to affect us(congress party), it's still in the interest of our nation(technology world).
> 
> ...


Consumer Rights ? You talk about rights when the very time you buy some product with such a license you end up giving up all your rights.

Till now, MS has been pursuing practices which abuse their monopoly. *But do you honestly think that this can continue for a long time to come ?* Look at the way US can no longer assume its living in its own uni-polar world. Similarly, MS can't hold monopoly for a long time. The world is changing. For the good. Apple is getting looked into more and more by corporates, while Linux is getting looked into by personal/power users. Companies like ATI, AMD, nVidia, etc which were formerly exclusively MS oriented are shifting their focus to other platforms so that they can gain trust of overall market.

*Take a better look at the mini-note market today*. Unlike the Xbox live, which affected several gamers, the mini-note case is a bit different.

*The original idea was to push in 200$ subnotebooks for the masses*, which later went up to 400$ and now we are staring at 600$ subnotebooks, which definitely don't make sense for these money concious people when there already exist 500$ full blown notebooks. In the current avatar, these 600$ "netbooks" powered by the so-called "low cost" Atom processor are becomming nothing more than lifestyle gadgets just like the already existing tablet PCs, PDAs, etc. I seriously doubt this would impact the original market the products were intended for. And once you get to this range, full blown notebooks at the same cost suddenly become vista capable. Hence XP makes no sense at all.

*Finally, what I am trying to say is this:* MS has being doing lots of evil. But neither is their evil expected to continue for a long time nor will this particular event affect as many people as expected by many here. This particular action of MS can be seen as a last ditch attempt to avoid pirated windows xp copies continuing to exist in the future, cut the market share of linux and at the same time, ensure that vista still sells. This showcases the pathetic dying monopoly MS is in the process of becomming.

I too am not pro OSS here, I am just talking realistic.

*This action should be condemned and boycotted, but at the same time, breathe easier than usual since this time MS didn't hurt us that badly.*


The_Devil_Himself said:


> Yea.consumers are the one who are getting hit,both hardware manufacturers and M$ is still making truckloads of $$$.


Thats true, but its still the duty of every customer to ensure that such practices are not allowed to continue. For this, boycotting is the only solution. 


> and the morons who says 'don't buy if you don't like' please tell me whats the alternative left?


Er... Linux ? Isn't Acer also producing a 100$ cheaper and SSD enabled linux version ? 
And you can also buy full blown notebooks at the same price.


> Monopolist market requires the company to have high transparency and high moral standards which M$ obviously lacks and M$ fanboys won't ever understand.


+1. No arguement there.


> whats next in line?Hell Price the bloody XP 3x more than Vista and see who still buys it(I know what M$ fanbois will say 'Its M$'s bloody OS,they can price it whatever they damn well please'.Losers.


+1 again


infra_red_dude said:


> I've been following yours and chandru.in's posts and its clearly you who needs to lift the table and find something! Even a first time reader will understand what he's trying to say!
> 
> I'm neither taking his side nor yours, just suggesting you to read the posts again.


Exactly. I think iMav is being slightly hypocritic here. First, he and GX bashed apple for doing a similar thing with iPhone store. Now, when MS does the same, they say "it doesn't matter" ?


			
				infra_red_dude said:
			
		

> The greatest impact will be on a market like India, where we consumers haf little choice in portables.


Still, that doesn't stop us from looking ahead for a better future, hopefully without such egoistic monopolistic companies.


----------



## gxsaurav (Jul 23, 2008)

My god, I did not know my reply will hurt Cyrus, gautam & devil so much that they r bashing MS like Balmar took away thr GF.

Right now in Metro so either U guys stop arguing & wasting time or wait for my reply tomorrow.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jul 23, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> My god, I did not know my reply will hurt Cyrus, gautam & devil so much that they r bashing MS like Balmar took away thr GF.
> 
> Right now in Metro so either U guys stop arguing & wasting time or wait for my reply tomorrow.


I never even saw your reply 

And I am hardly bashing MS this time. All I am doing is pointing out bare facts about how people can be affected by monopoly and how people can avoid it.


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Jul 23, 2008)

^^OMG,do you really think I read your posts? thats a mega *LOL*.And Ballmer is the second most lucky SOB this world ever saw,first being Bush jr.

OMG,I just thought up a perfect analogy to this situation,too bad Its 18+,else would have shared.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jul 23, 2008)

The_Devil_Himself said:


> ^^OMG,do you really think I read your posts? thats a mega *LOL*.And Ballmer is the second most lucky SOB this world ever saw,first being Bush jr.
> 
> OMG,I just thought up a perfect analogy to this situation,too bad Its 18+,else would have shared.


post in small font white colour with a warning please


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Jul 23, 2008)

^^look who is talking,a preteen himself!


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jul 23, 2008)

The_Devil_Himself said:


> ^^look who is talking,a preteen himself!


Just a few months away from 18


----------



## infra_red_dude (Jul 23, 2008)

gx_saurav said:


> Right now in Metro so either U guys stop arguing & wasting time or wait for my reply tomorrow.


ROTFL...  why do you always think that you are the *MOST* important person in this forum?!?!  lolz...


----------



## Faun (Jul 23, 2008)

^^delusion of grandeur...lulz


----------



## amritpal2489 (Jul 23, 2008)

What is Microsoft upto?????


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jul 24, 2008)

@GX: Still in metro ?


----------



## infra_red_dude (Jul 24, 2008)

[No Offense]

^^^ Yeah.. Life in a Metro  

[/No Offense]


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Jul 24, 2008)

oh yea,metro is pretty awesome to get off.


----------



## adithyagenius (Jul 25, 2008)

4GB is enough for everything except crysis.
For crysis 8 GB is enough.
64bit needs to become the standard.


----------



## MetalheadGautham (Jul 25, 2008)

adithyagenius said:


> 4GB is enough for everything except crysis.
> For crysis 8 GB is enough.
> 64bit needs to become the standard.


You definitely need over 4GB if you are intent on virtualisation, hyper multitasking and maya/photpshop.


----------



## adithyagenius (Jul 25, 2008)

3GB enough for running a single virtual computer with vista x64. I am not into virtualisation. I just use it for testing purposes. I use MS Virtual PC. I generally do 1 thing at a time with batch processes running in the background. The number of my batch processes is limited by number of hard disks  and processing power and not by RAM.


----------



## iMav (Jul 25, 2008)

MetalheadGautham said:


> You definitely need over 4GB if you are intent on virtualisation, hyper multitasking and maya/photpshop.


And you intend to do that on these cheap ultra-useless (read: portable) laptops?


----------



## The_Devil_Himself (Jul 25, 2008)

adithyagenius said:


> 3GB enough for running a single virtual computer with vista x64. *I* am not into virtualisation. *I* just use it for testing purposes. *I* use MS Virtual PC. *I* generally do 1 thing at a time with batch processes running in the background. The number of *my* batch processes is limited by number of hard disks  and processing power and not by RAM.



*I,me,and myself*


----------

