littleguru said:

Isn't Starter Edition only for emerging markets?

ManipUni said:

Windows 7 Starter Edition is the worst product ever made... 
I'd use Windows 95 before I used Starter Edition. The value add of Windows 7 is tiny anyway but when you contrast it against the value lost by the limitations imposed by these starter editions then you always wind up using something else. Linux, BSD, second hand Windows licence, pirated software, they all become better alternatives.

ManipUni said:

Windows 7 Starter Edition is the worst product ever made... 
I'd use Windows 95 before I used Starter Edition. The value add of Windows 7 is tiny anyway but when you contrast it against the value lost by the limitations imposed by these starter editions then you always wind up using something else. Linux, BSD, second hand Windows licence, pirated software, they all become better alternatives.

warren said:

ManipUni said:

*snip*

So says the guy who lives in a first-world country who uses computers as part of his way of life.

To even have a chance of understanding Starter Edition, you have to stop being so damned selfish and start thinking in terms of the poor farmers in northern Vietman who have every bit as much right to have their own computer and participate in the digital world as you or I do.  These aren't people who care about high resolutions, heavy multi-tasking, multiple CPU sockets or anything.  To most people who are in the target market for Starter Edition, the computers themselves would be far worse than what you'd be willing to use.  These are people who would be quite happy to have anything at all, but the cost of even Home Basic is too much.  We're talking multiple weeks of pay here.

Sorry but the point you're making holds absolutely no water at all. Microsoft is more of a hurdle for third world consumers than it is a help with or without Starter Edition. I named half a dozen alternatives that would be better suited for that scenario. Starter Edition with its frankly shocking three application limit is completely useless even for basic consumers.

Windows 95 licence (used) - $1-5
Windows 2000 licence (used) - $10-20
Windows XP licence (used) - $30-50
Linux - Free
BSD - Free
Windows 7 Crippled Edition - $20

I'd send third world countries Linux and Open Office on recycled hardware.

Turbodad said:

OK, 3 apps:

1) antivirus

2) firewall

3) web browser

Yeah, I guess that's useful.

Laura10 said:

Turbodad said:

*snip*

An anti-virus and a firewall won't be considered applications. The web-browser is though.

littleguru said:

Isn't Starter Edition only for emerging markets?

magicalclick said:

littleguru said:

*snip*

I don't think so. The version for emerging market (Starter) can run many applications which is equivilant to Vista's Basic. Regular retail versions of Win7 are basically Home Prenium and Pro, like XP. Other versions are lisencing. I remember from the site, all of the versions has estimated price comparible to Vista, except the version I am talking out.

I don't remember the name of it. It is Win7 Core or something. The one I am talking about only runs three applications, not Starter. There is no price on it. It is still cool for gaming machine since it is clean super lightweight, thus, run games faster.

warren said:

ManipUni said:

*snip*

So says the guy who lives in a first-world country who uses computers as part of his way of life.

To even have a chance of understanding Starter Edition, you have to stop being so damned selfish and start thinking in terms of the poor farmers in northern Vietman who have every bit as much right to have their own computer and participate in the digital world as you or I do.  These aren't people who care about high resolutions, heavy multi-tasking, multiple CPU sockets or anything.  To most people who are in the target market for Starter Edition, the computers themselves would be far worse than what you'd be willing to use.  These are people who would be quite happy to have anything at all, but the cost of even Home Basic is too much.  We're talking multiple weeks of pay here.

PaoloM said:

magicalclick said:

*snip*

There are no prices set. Whatever you can find around are just rumours.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7_editions

W3bbo said:

warren said:

*snip*

Please don't patronise people. To characterise the typical user of a Windows machine in SE Asia as a North Vietnamese farmer is awfully presumptive. In countries like NV the main users of computers are the emergent middle class to whome Starter Edition doesn't appeal at all. Society is very polarised. If there was computer ownership outside the middle classes it would likely be a communal thing, and even then they'd be smart enough to know not to purchase anything intentionally crippled or just shove a warezed copy of Windows on it (assuming something like Red Flag Linux didn't get there first)

AndyC said:

W3bbo said:

*snip*

Except that it has already proved popular, if it hadn't it wouldn't still be around. Microsoft don't make more SKUs for the fun of it you know. Just because you consider it "crippled" doesn't make that match the opinion in its target market.

 I'd suggest reading this, but I don't suppose it'll change your mind (not that it matters).

AndyC said:

W3bbo said:

*snip*

Except that it has already proved popular, if it hadn't it wouldn't still be around. Microsoft don't make more SKUs for the fun of it you know. Just because you consider it "crippled" doesn't make that match the opinion in its target market.

 I'd suggest reading this, but I don't suppose it'll change your mind (not that it matters).

W3bbo said:

AndyC said:

*snip*

Starter Edition can only be licensed by OEMs, not end users, so "popular" doesn't necessarily mean that people explicitly chose it over the alternatives.

AndyC said:

W3bbo said:

*snip*

OEMs don't sell products nobody will buy.

CannotResolveSymbol said:

AndyC said:

*snip*

But people will buy whatever's cheapest, without first reading about the limitations of whatever they're buying.

Then they'll sue Microsoft or the OEM because they expected to be able to run many applications at once and instead got a crippled OS that can only run three (or even none at all, considering the amount of crapware that Dell and friends put on PCs).

AndyC said:

CannotResolveSymbol said:

*snip*

And yet so far there has been any such legal action over Windows Starter Edition, so it can't be that big a deal, right?

I'm surprised people think it's that big a hinderance. I've seen plenty of people who use their computer one application at a time, closing each one before starting another (even to the extent of closing the "Google" "application" so they can open the "Hotmail" one). And these aren't stupid people or people who can't afford a better machine. They're just everyday folks (including a least one senior member of the British government) who really aren't very techno-literate and so tend to work in a somewhat limited fashion.

Sure, it'd kill my productivity as I can barely go a day without more windows and applications open that I care to count, but at the same time I know that I'm a long way from being a beginner user, which is where Starter Edition is targetting.