News Digital Media, ...
Microsoft is hell-bent on killing the Netbook
Microsoft seems to be planning a murder. Its victim? Any kind of innovation in the Netbook market.
Take a look at the netbooks on sale right now. Virtually all have Windows XP, 1GB of RAM and a 160GB hard drive. The key factor in building a netbook is price, so you’re not going to expect a powerful machine for your money.
Of course, manufacturers are trying to sqeeze that little bit of extra power into their new models. The problem is that Microsoft is hell-bent on stopping them.
Let’s investigate:
The Evidence:
- MSI has been forced to remove the hybrid storage in its new Wind U115 netbook thanks to a new decree from Microsoft that anyone wanting to install Windows XP on their machine can’t use storage that combines the speed of flash memory with the greater size of a hard disk. This follows an earlier rule that netbooks with XP can’t have more than 1GB of RAM.
- Microsoft hates the name ‘Netbook’. They’d prefer we all use the term “Low cost small notebook PC“. Yes, that’s just as catchy and marketable isn’t it? It’s almost as if they want them to sound less desirable.
- Until there was a public outcry, Microsoft wanted to limit the netbook-friendly version of its upcoming Windows 7 OS to run no more than three applications at once. They eventually grudgingly relented and allowed unlimited apps.
The Motive:
Vista sales are flagging and Windows 7 is still at least four months away from release. Demand for XP is higher than Microsoft would like.
The fact is, people don’t care that the computer they’re buying is cheap and running an old OS; it does what they need it to. That must hurt Microsoft. Killing netbooks by strangling them with licensing restrictions and poor marketing is their desperate attempt to keep Vista sales afloat.
The Verdict:
Customers won’t be fooled. They’ve heard Vista is a poor choice and they’ll continue buying netbooks with XP as they’re cheap and ’good enough’. Microsoft’s actions, especially the licensing restrictions that hold manufacturers back from innovating, are at best morally questionable and at worst crying out for an anti-competition case against them.
For now let’s sentence Microsoft to a stern slap on the wrist and a demand that they realise that, as usual, the customer is right.
[Image: Drustar]
Discussion - 11 Comments/Pingbacks RSS feed for comments on this post
-
Links: 2009-06-09 - Credit Writedowns
[...] Microsoft is hell-bent on killing the Netbook – The Next Web [...]
-
Microsoft Can Go Right To Hell - cbpye.net
[...] – Not too long after I posted this, I noticed NetbookClub posting a link (via twitter) to The Next Web’s “Microsoft is Hell-Bent on Killing the Netbook.” Check it out for another insightful take on Microsoft’s anti-competitive shenanigans. Share [...]
Don’t worry, if things stagnate then someone else will come along and turn the market upside down like the Eee did, and for the same reason: market hegemony meant that the technology was available for what people wanted, but it wasn’t being made. Asus made it and (accidentally) disrupted the scene. Maybe an Android-based system next time?
I blame the media and the bloggers in general. Vista was made out to be a monster, when in fact it is a OS far superior to XP. I’ve been using it for over 2 years now and the 64bit version is a dream compared to XP. It was given a bad rep by people who don’t really know IT and by people who in general just hate MS and will talk crap about them any chance they get. This is obvious by the statement in the article “They’ve heard Vista is a poor choice…”
Secondly, it is obvious that the author is biased, and makes the statement “are at best morally questionable and at worst crying out for an anti-competition case against them”. I laugh every time I read statements such as this. They are generally made by Apple fanbois who fail to see the irony in their own statements.
Apple lets you run the Windows OS on their machines, but fail to allow their Intel-based OS to be installed on non-Apple machines. I would certainly say that is anti-competitive behavior, especially since they advertise this as a selling point on their machines. Argue all you want about the reasons behind this, the Apple OS is running on thousands of non-Apple machines out there, and running stable. It’s something Apple can allow but does not. It is anti-competitive behavior at its finest, and hypocrisy at its best.
Thanks for the comment TJ. The point I’m making is that Microsoft seems to be changing the goalposts repeatedly. Microsoft and Apple have the right to do what they want in terms of licensing but to impose new rules simply to cripple a section of the market seems wrong. As for your point about Vista, I’ve seriously never met someone who said they prefer it to XP. Vista may be technically superior but most users prefer XP in my experience.
I prefer it to XP in almost every way. It crashes a lot, and I curse Vista’s name on a daily basis, but then I cursed XP on a daily basis too.
First off, if this is what Microsoft truly plans to do, then they are out of their mind. Why change the name from netbook to something that’s not even marketable? Secondly, creating the netbooks was a creative idea. I bought one and many others like them too. XP is a good operating system and Vista is terrible, so why wouldn’t people use XP. We have some time for the official release of Windows 7 and because Microsoft feels like doing their own thing, they are willing to end the existence of a popular product. Did Microsoft ever take the time to realize why Apple has been so successful? They listen to their customers! I think they better start doing this before they make customers angry!
It won’t be long until all Netbooks are running special distros of Linux such as Moblin or Android if Microsoft keep playing silly games like this, they’ll end up losing all market share in the category. You can’t kill the Netbook, companies can’t choose what people call stuff, its something that just happens, its a meme. I too think this should be addressed in an anti-competition case, it’s ridiculous.
I just posted a very similar story not 20 minutes ago, then noticed NetbookClub twittering this very story.
Something about great minds thinking alike. :P
MS is in dire need of a hardcore new antitrust lawsuit. Maybe that’ll get’em back in line.
This article is highly illogical. Why would Microsoft want to “kill” a product that only increases their sales and market share in a down economy?
“The fact is, people don’t care that the computer they’re buying is cheap and running an old OS; it does what they need it to. That must hurt Microsoft.”
Wrong. If Microsoft does one thing well, it’s win market share and make money. Any product that gets more users on Windows and off of Linux / Apple would never be actively fought by Redmond. Microsoft still makes money for every netbook sold with XP. And furthermore, if netbooks didn’t sell with Windows, they’d sell with Linux. If more people get comfy with Linux, that IS a competitive threat. So Microsoft’s best play is to sell the hell out of XP licenses.
Your comment that Win7 Starter is netbook friendly is also odd. An OS with a window limit is unfriendly to everyone. Just a bad decision made by some marketing moron at MS, and it got the treatment it deserved. You say in your last sentence that Microsoft needs to realize the customer is right. You’re contradicting your own point – didn’t the repeal of the application cap do exactly that? Microsoft took the feedback and changed the product before it even hit the market.
Looking at Win7, I think the entire OS was engineered to perform as fast and with as low system requirements as XP. Read between the lines here – Microsoft clearly built Win7 to run on netbooks in any SKU, not just starter. However, if you think about the value of additional features and the price you need to pay, most customers would never upgrade from starter at all. The 3-app cap sounds like a dirty trick to annoy users into paying more for the higher end SKU’s, making Microsoft more $$ than Starter would. That has nothing to do with killing the netbook, or netbooks at all. It’s just Microsoft will have a hard time justifying a $500 SKU when snow leopard sells for $30.
And your second point is completely off base. Intel has a trademark on the term “netbook”. They threatened to sue all of their partners if they continued to use the term. Thus the ridiculous “low cost…” terminology. No one is going to call it anything but a netbook in real life, but Microsoft can’t officially say netbook in an ad, speech, or presentation without a lawsuit.
You’re right in that Mr. or Mrs. Average doesn’t actively chose an operating system. The truth is that XP offers more than sufficient usability for anyone who just wants to surf the net and write and few letters. Therefore it’s not really an issue of XP vs. Vista, it’s more about Windows vs. the competition.
As things stand, there is no competition. Apple doesn’t compete on price, and the return rates for Linux distributions are too high. But collide007 raises an interesting possibility in that something like Moblin or Android may present Microsoft with a very real problem.
Anti-competitive behaviours seem to be ingrained into the culture of Microsoft. Rather than focussing on producing a simple, lightweight OS of their own, they’re concentrating on attacking the competition and offering netbook users their desktop OS with a few features removed.