4 ms·
MSFT certainly didn't help. For example, a lot of netbooks were packaged with Windows 7 Starter, a seriously limited version of Windows. I'm skeptical that the
by jljljl 13y ago
MSFT certainly didn't help. For example, a lot of netbooks were packaged with Windows 7 Starter, a seriously limited version of Windows.
I'm skeptical that the hardware couldn't handle full Windows (because Starter also provided an Anytime Upgrade option), so it seems likely this was an intentional decision to reduce the features of netbooks at the software level, in order to avoid cannibalizing larger PC's and laptops.
EDIT: link to feature limitations for W7 Starter: http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_7-windows_install/windows-7-starter-what-are-the-limitations/422801d5-89de-494d-8cc1-6f4fc21c2ac0 http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_7-w...
- scholia 13y agoThe netbook manufacturers were free to install a full copy of Windows 7 or Ubuntu or anything else they wanted (except Mac OS X, obviously). They didn't want to install a full copy of Windows 7 because they would have had to pay the full price for it (after the usual discounts etc). After much argument, they came up with a compromise that had acceptable functionality (to Microsoft) at an acceptable price (to the OEMs). So Microsoft was helping, rather than "not helping". But you're right: the aim was to sell netbooks without having too big an impact on more profitable sales of laptops.