Microsoft Puts Limits on Windows 7 Netbook Specs

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
That's absolutely retarded. They are so full of their own ad campaign they are making it a reality at the expense of their consumers. What if the user wants the powerful netbook? (bit of an oxymoron there)
 
That must be the maximum specs for Windows 7 Starter Edition.

As I could not see Windows 7 Ultimate checking the specs then the manufacturers website and saying sorry the manufacturer calls this a Netbook but it is too powerful Windows 7 is now being disabled.
 
I don't care for netbooks as they are now. I like the price point and the size, but at Best buy they netbooks seem to bog down in youtube. I know that bestbuy puts a bunch of bloatware, especially on the display models, but that was just sad.

If a netbook was just a bit more powerful I would be happy to get it, even if it was in the 300+ range. I have a desktop for gaming and stuff like that, but laptops need to be quick for me to be useful. I can't wait for em to r load java and flash and quick time. Just cause I'm not gaming don't mean they don't have to run multi-media stuff quickly.

I wondering are these max specs for Windows 7 starter?
 
This is like saying that condom manufacturers will be limiting the size of penises that use their condoms can fit so they can ensure the cost of goods sold stays low.
 
retarded indeed. they are kind of shooting themselves in the foot with this...

i personally would stay away from that version of windows an run a windows XP or something on my 2Gb of ram netbook.

Again, at the risk of tom's hardware moderator erasing my post, Microsoft can go **** themselves.
 
Then you buy the ultimate/home premium type edition... this will be for the starter/entry level of Windows 7.... designed for starter/entry level computers. Although it sucks, it makes sense.

I don't really care either way, i have an Microsoft MVP in the family, so a I get anything Microsoft makes for free =P

[citation][nom]doomtomb[/nom]That's absolutely retarded. They are so full of their own ad campaign they are making it a reality at the expense of their consumers. What if the user wants the powerful netbook? (bit of an oxymoron there)[/citation]
 
P.S. I don't pirate microsoft's OSs, (well, maby win98 on my dosbos). I own 2 Windows Vista 64 licences, 1 windows XP, and i am currently testing a legitimate copy of Windows 7 RC, and providing feedback.

 
I bet this is the limitation on the OEM version of netbook windows 7 only. It is absolute rediculous for other version to have the same limitation.
That being said, if you're willing to pay for the os, you should still be able to use it on whatever hardware hardware.
 
Why buy a netbook? So you can type your book while you are traveling?
To use the internet but NOT youtube? (maybe ion can fix this?)

Damn, hell no.. I won't go down from 13" displays. 13 is already too small. My notebook is a DV5 (15,4"), Turion X2, Radeon 3200.. Just cuz netbooks are lighter than notebooks that doesn't mean we should accept worst specs than what we are used to.

I love a bit of gaming and I can run TF2/HL2/Burnout Paradise and other games on my notebook. God forbid I miss that action.. 😛

I do see that older ppl that are not used to computers using it because it's portable (way more than a notebook), have a long lasting battery (but at the expense of the specs), and can be used anywhere as long as you are using 3G networks or on a WiFi zone.

Personally? I really don't have good arguments if I have to explain to someone why buy a netbook.
 
No sir, I don't like it. Particularly with the maximum allowed RAM. RAM is one of the most commonly upgraded parts/specs on mobile computers. I understand why MS is doing this, but IMO they are being a bit heavy handed with it. They are scared of selling too many Starter Editions for beefed up 'netbooks' in an area they want to sell Premium editions for 'ultraportable notebooks'. It's just corporate greed, which should not come as a shock to anyone here.
 
Well if that forces a netbook with those specs to be say $300 I am all for it. Netbooks are creeping into the $500 range and that is just wrong. There are some cases where for an extra $25 you can grab an actual laptop. I am thinking this is an attempt to draw a clear line between Netbooks and Laptops, and as time goes on Microsoft can easily creep the specs up.
 
[citation][nom]jabliese[/nom]And MS shoots itself in the foot yet again.[/citation]

I guess it doesn't hurts them that bad, they can afford it.
I wonder how many netbook models are beyond those specs anyway... and how many will be, by the time win7 is released

It would have been nice if the author of this article would have mentioned the win7 versions these limits apply to...
 
Those kinds of limitations will only force people away and developers aside. M$ charges an arm and a leg as it is for their OS, now they want to tell me what I can use it on? Next years Medfield platform promises high-end performance in the netbook space, yet I'm limited to only 1GB ram and 250GB hard disk? No way! Last years 2133 from HP already broke those barriers.
 
I don't have a problem with limits like this. If you want a more powerful laptop then get a real laptop not a netbook. If you want to save money by buying the el cheapo version of the OS then you buy the low priced hardware. If you want faster hardware then get the more expensive version of the OS to go along with it.

My wife wanted a small computer but we decided a 12" screen would be better so we bought a real laptop for her.
 
Quit saying netbooks are low end laptops. Netbooks are netbooks.

Netbooks are the $100 evolution of the laptop for kids. Thats right they figured out a way to not sell you a laptop for $100, instead charging you just short of a real laptop and making a killing off of you.

If you need a LAPTOP BUY A LAPTOP.
 
These requirements are already in place for current Netbooks running Windows XP.

I'm hoping these are just the specs M$ for netbook mfgs and not that the OS is actually crippled to not run faster than 2Ghz or recognize >1GB memory. Now if they go to the trouble to actually limit the OS, now THAT would be stupid.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom