Veghte is acutely aware that Microsoft faces a substantial challenge in persuading its vast XP installed base to upgrade. The move to Windows 7 from Vista will be seamless, he says, but that vast pool of users still on XP is faced with a complete re-installation. The appetite for such a labour-intensive task is likely to be negligible. Most migrations from XP to Windows 7 will result from the "purchase of a new machine", admits Veghte.
Vista-capable PCs "will be perfectly capable of running Windows 7," he says. He also said "Windows 7 will run beautifully on netbooks," most of which are, of course, Vista incacpable
There will apparently be two versions of Windows 7 that can run on netbooks – one a pared-down, entry-level system, the other the fully-featured premium edition. In this price-sensitive market, customers may baulk at paying for the latter.
Industry estimates suggest Microsoft only makes half as much from the sales of netbooks running basic versions of its XP system as it does from sales of fully featured laptops – although Veghte refuses to be drawn on the accuracy of those estimates.
The difference in price between a netbook running the basic edition and one with the premium version is "the price of a tank of petrol", he says.
But he didn't say if that was the current price for filling up a Smartcar, or last summer's price for filling up a Range Rover. µ
Share
Just a quick question for anybody: Why won't you be able to upgrade from XP to Windows 7 directly without requiring a complete reinstall. If you could upgrade to Vista why not from XP to 7?
Why would I ruin my Ubuntu trying Windows? It sure writes over all other partitions during installation, won't it? Or is there a Windows Live that runs from a DVD, so I can try it?
Next few years Microsoft will release new OS that require 100GB HD space and 8GB RAM, and people would keep bitching about how cheap 5TB SSD drives and 32GB RAM kit, the logic that we have more power so it’s okay to add more crapware is completely stupid. Where is the optimization? Do we really need 1000 lines of code for start button? Why the hell Vista64 is taking 22GB from my HDD? I couldn’t be happier with WinXP as my main OS even I got i7 platform with 6GB DDR3, everything is working as I want, and running games in DX9 instead of DX10 is a plus with better FPS and smoother motion. You gotta ask yourself why some developers still release new games with DX9 *only* API while DX10 has been around from 2006.
At least my E1000H...
And a damn site better than XP does as well.
Oh well never let the facts get in the way of a good MS bashing session ;)
'Most migrations from XP to Windows 7 will result from the "purchase of a new machine', sound like a Vista.
So, unless you give me a free copy, otherwise I wouldn't go and upgrade anything.
I have both Vista and Windows 7 beta installed on separate partitions on my laptop HD (Vostro 1400). So far, 7 seems to be running a lot smoother vs Vista, and the user experience is greatly enhanced IMO, especially but not limited to the taskbar. I do have to add that I don't have as many programs installed on 7, so it's not an apples/ apples comparison, but for those of you who think that 7 = Vista, you obviously have not used 7.
Vista is shockingly bad and damn slow. After using PCs for over 12 years with one form of Windows installed on it or another, Ubuntu is better, looks better, and runs faster.
Windows Vista is the worst OS i have ever seen.
"most of which are, of course, Vista incacpable"
What is Vista incacpable?
Aspire one + Linux4One = happy chappie.
even the wife prefers it to xp on the acer.
And shes only recently worked out how to use cd ripping software,after having a computer for 6 years i might add.
I also have an acer aspire one. I tryed the windows 7 beta on it and it ran hella slow. Switched back to good old xp pro.
Viggen - couldn't agree more. I sell 2 GB of RAM for $40 Canadian, and that's after prices went up recently. The only people who can't afford to run Vista are people on old SDRAM boxes, and really, if you're that far behind the times, you really shouldn't bitch. Growth happens people, deal with it.
Every time something is put on the Inq about Vista/Windows 7 all I see is people discussing how Linux is the only way to go, and nobody should or will ever use Microsoft again, and the whole company is going to tank and all sorts of crap.
For those of you who hate MS, stop using it. If you choose to use it, or have to use it because it's what 90+ percent of the population uses, then shut up about it.
People always say on this site that if you don't loudly despise Microsoft, you're a slave to corporate America, and you drink the Kool Aid etc.. No, there are just those of us who know MS is nowhere near perfect, but they are better than the alternatives.
I don't own a Mac because I think it's stupid that if I want a faster processor, or a motherboard with modern features, I have to buy a new screen. I also don't like wasting my money on overpriced products just because they are deemed "pretty" by the masses. And I just hate using OSX. I sell Apple, but I cannot stand using their OS, and yes, it does crash. And at one point, 3 of my 5 demo Macs all had dead logic boards, so this myth of Apple quality is a big lie.
And then there's Linux. We hear it every week from idiots like Egan Orion that Linux is poised to strike. Yes, it jumped 1/2 of 1% in market share last year, despite the massive number of netbooks out there. Wow. I'm impressed. Linux is not a viable option for the average idiot who finds XP too confusing to use compared to their beloved Windows 98, or people who can't navigate around in Vista because it's so different from XP. Throwing people like that into a Linux environment is a bad idea. I don't think most people realise just how low the computer IQ of the common person is.
Stop the Vista bashing, you obviously know nothing about the OS. I've been loading Vista on Netbooks and UMPCs since it came out and have been very happy. 95% of the Vista complaints come from a lack of RAM, which is silly since RAM is dirt cheap. I also work on plenty of XP machines and I can assure you that XP suffers just as bad with low memory once you fire up enough apps. Then we move on to the fact that you can use vLite to make slimmed-down Vista installs. 700MB for a Vista install CD, 2GB installed, 256MB RAM footprint (but of course you have 2GB, right? because caching is good). So Vista is a fine OS, and Windows 7 is a nice refresh. But lets be clear, Vista is not as bad as people make it out to be, they are just too intellectually lazy to RTFM...
Here in Greece there have started to appear "naked" laptops/desktop PCs.
e-shop.gr,one of the major (r)e-tailers,recently started offering a choice of either an M$ loaded machine,a Linux loaded one,or even totally naked hardware for many of their models.
I'm not yet aware of any other retailer following suit but I really wonder how happy M$ has been about this move of theirs.
I'm running Windows 7 on my Acer Aspire One without any problems. It's running buttery-smooth on it with all the bells and whistles for a few weeks now. It feels just as fast as XP... Maybe it will get slow at some point, but hopefully not.
"The present Start Menu system is too time-consuming for business networks where operatives need to get to a program with a minimum of moves."
Only so their productivity can then be brought to a grinding halt by the "improvements" Microsoft have made to the Office UI... ribbon interface anyone? Still, now that MS have made it all but impossible to quickly knock up a bit of artwork within Word, it's giving me an excuse to brush up on my Inkscape skills.
This is a totally rubbish account from MS as soon as it hits laptops places in the Uk like PC Worst, Comet and Currys will sell laptops with it on and it'll be just as slow as VISTA.
Its the software that comes with it as someone mentioned the Anti Virus, Firewall those annoying free games that aint free just 60mins trials using space. The partitions on a single drive for recovery, system and free space when giving people the disc or manufactures giving a note tell them to create a back-up DVD instead would be better.
The free trials to MS Office 2007 when there's open office it's free it does what MS office would do at the fraction of resources. I've come across so many VISTA machines with all the above especially ACER laptops it's the cause of all the crap. Luckly the people I know understand how to format etc so I just tell them to keep back-ups to ext drives and go to XP Pro.
I have nothing against VISTA but Windows 7 will be like it on the pre-built side you can bet ya and most machine will come with crap graphics cards, A decent dual core CPU, 2GB DDR2 memory. But the motherboard will cripple the CPU and memory anyways as they never seem to be using the MAX FSB etc.
If Windows 7 does not allow a simple Classic tree-structured Start Menu it will not sell to business. The present Start Menu system is too time-consuming for business networks where operatives need to get to a program with a minimum of moves.
It will of course, as with Vista, be forced on the public who will have no alternative if they buy a new comuter. If computers were sold without an OS then one could choose a Linux system like Mandriva, PCLinux, Xandros, or Ubuntu. The Linux OSes run fast off older operating systems as well as netbooks.
The computing media (but not IT informatics specialists) slavishly worship at the Microsoft altar drinking the pap of Aero Shake and eating the manna of Fog Computing, and singing the hymns of Media Central! La la la, dear readers Microsoft now has more spots than Apple's Leopard.
I want a simple secure speedy system not an OS floundering in flummery.
Arrogant Microsoft is not listening; Hubris will be swiftly followed by Nemesis in the market-place.
Where I work, I have had a small demonstration of a terminal server running GNU/Linux with ancient PCs as thin clients. It sparkles in comparison to XP on old equipment. There is no way we can justify the cost of replacing working PCs of any age with new ones running Vista/7/whatever. Next week we will do a larger demonstration in a whole lab. Next year, almost all XP machines could be running GNU/Linux here.
Because we already have a working model of a terminal server, the entire cost of switching a 24-seat lab to GNU/Linux is about two hours of work instead of thousands of dollars for new PCs. Do the maths. We do not need that other OS any longer. We cannot afford it. It does not work on our equipment. It does not work for us. GNU/Linux is the way to go.
When we do replace our ancient machines, it will be with new thin clients which are around $50 to $100 per box now. Moore's Law is working for us.
Given Microsofts standard pricing structure and the currently planned 7 versions of windows 7 I would bet it's gonna be a lot closer to a Range Rover last summer then a smartcar anytime/anywhere.
In all honesty most of the problems that exist within Vista will continue with Windows 7 because they're using the same kernel. Granted it's a lot closer to the Vista server, ie Windows Server 2008, kernel then the standard one all the home users got bitched with but ya. That said there is also many things being removed which will probably make a lot of people unhappy, one such example being the classic start menu/taskbar. Another good example would be for businesses which used NTbackup or certain similar softwares to backup their stuff when using 2000 and XP because the Removable Storage Manager which was required to use those backups in Vista will not be in Windows 7.
Microsoft creates more e-waste from poorly designed software...Last thing I wanna do is to buy another PC just because of the OS again! I bought a PC with Vista.. buy was I fooled by this large corporate money making entity...
"Windows 7 will run beautifully on netbooks"
Sue him! netBook is a trademark.
Or does he mean Windows 7 will be so good that it'll run on a VGA device with 64MB RAM and a 190Mhz StrongArm?!
Wow.
They did some improvements like Aero optimization for weaker IGPs,
but they still far from what will run on netbook.
I use beta build as my main office station @work. It was nice for one week. then it became sluggish. More the you can imagine. (we use them for some validations). Other people experience same problems. I'm talking about Core 2 Duo machines with 2GB of RAM and discrete 8400GS VGA.
Just face it, there is almost nothing different in 7. Just side view of the same egg. (7 and Vista )
Lets hope he's not talking about filling up his Aston Martin in the UK.
Oh come on........of course it "might" run; now add the cost and CPU cycles of antivirus software, firewalls, the OS cost itself, the cost of extra application software that is essential in order for you to do any work at all (because unlike Linux, Win7 is a "bare system.....just the OS), and suddenly you have cost escalating enormously and the OS slowing down rather markedly.......This is a "no-brainer".. Win7 will be a disaster for netbooks; unless you ignore all the above and like a computer that works at the speed of a clamped snail.......Okay everybody, put on the Microsoft blinkers and flame me.