Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Microsoft Doubtful of Win XP's Netbook Future

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 48 comments

It seems the OS from two-generations ago is on its way out.

Windows 7 is here and it's pretty good. If you're a road warrior armed with a netbook, however, it seems that Windows XP is still the choice for those who demand the longest battery life. But Microsoft doesn't foresee that Windows XP will be living much longer on those tiny little laptops.

With Windows 7 being the main product now that Microsoft, it sees little reason to market and push Windows XP as the operating system of choice for netbooks. In fact, instead of pushing the low-cost Windows 7 Starter for netbooks, Microsoft is giving it the full treatment with Home Premium.

The director of netbook PCs in Microsoft's Windows client group, Don Paterson, told The Register in an interview, "We will continue to make Windows XP available for those devices [netbooks], but it doesn't make sense to put marketing effort behind those devices. As much as we make Windows XP available for a year, we won't see it last in the market that long. We will get through the holidays. My gut [feeling] is we will walk away from the holidays and see that it's not worth keeping it in market."

Paterson added that those who "do their homework and understand the value proposition [of Windows 7 Home Premium] will migrate," while those who choose Windows XP are just looking for "absolutely the lowest cost device" or are just resistant to change.

From here on out, it seems that Windows 7 Home Premium is that main choice for nearly all consumer PCs.

Display 48 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 18 Hide
    apache_lives , November 12, 2009 10:28 PM
    Pffffff sif use xp when you can use windows 3.11 - wwwwaaaaaaayyyyyyyy faster and ligher on the resources
  • 18 Hide
    deadlockedworld , November 12, 2009 10:30 PM
    yea lets re-release DOS!! very easy on comp resources
  • 16 Hide
    apache_lives , November 12, 2009 10:36 PM
    deadlockedworldyea lets re-release DOS!! very easy on comp resources


    its too heavy on resources - the bios is much lighter
Other Comments
  • 6 Hide
    krazyderek , November 12, 2009 9:42 PM
    read: stop buying our old refined product we don't make as much money off of and buy the new version that has worse battery life and many many service packs to come.
  • 5 Hide
    ssalim , November 12, 2009 9:49 PM
    Resistance to change? Are they forcing us (winXP) to upgrade? Why should I? I would if it's free. I don't need Win7.
  • 4 Hide
    BrentonMcGhee , November 12, 2009 9:52 PM
    krazyderekread: stop buying our old refined product we don't make as much money off of and buy the new version that has worse battery life and many many service packs to come.


    read: I will and will always be an XP user completely ignoring all of the benefits that 7 has to offer.
  • 14 Hide
    Niva , November 12, 2009 10:17 PM
    ^^ You can't update beyond direct x 9c on windows xp as far as I'm aware.
  • 9 Hide
    apache_lives , November 12, 2009 10:27 PM
    __-_-_-__I still use xp x64. stable and compatible as hell. even got directx11 on it."benefits that 7 has to offer" woot? lol!


    You give 64 bit windows xp 2gb of ram and its ok, you give it 8gb and... its still the same as if you had 2gb - on the other hand if you feed vista or 7 the 8gb it owns, the more you give it, the quicker it gets.

    How about trying it one day? you will never go back.
  • 18 Hide
    apache_lives , November 12, 2009 10:28 PM
    Pffffff sif use xp when you can use windows 3.11 - wwwwaaaaaaayyyyyyyy faster and ligher on the resources
  • 18 Hide
    deadlockedworld , November 12, 2009 10:30 PM
    yea lets re-release DOS!! very easy on comp resources
  • -8 Hide
    deadlockedworld , November 12, 2009 10:31 PM
    why cant MS make a light version of windows? Apple runs a modified OS X on iphones... so it only seems natural that microsoft could make a netbook capable windows..
  • 16 Hide
    apache_lives , November 12, 2009 10:36 PM
    deadlockedworldyea lets re-release DOS!! very easy on comp resources


    its too heavy on resources - the bios is much lighter
  • 0 Hide
    maigo , November 12, 2009 10:37 PM
    XP is less UI bloat. I hate UI bloat.
  • 2 Hide
    cscott_it , November 12, 2009 10:46 PM
    __-_-_-__I still use xp x64. stable and compatible as hell. even got directx11 on it."benefits that 7 has to offer" woot? lol!


    x64 XP was crap. I should know, I had a cherry system and suffered with a bug ridden poorly designed OS. XP was fine, but XP 64 gave me quite a few problems.

    I mean, X1900XT in crossfire, FX-55 (then later a FX-60 last tribute of 939), 4GB of ram. I much prefered my system on Vista x64.
  • 5 Hide
    doc70 , November 12, 2009 10:47 PM
    deadlockedworldwhy cant MS make a light version of windows? Apple runs a modified OS X on iphones... so it only seems natural that microsoft could make a netbook capable windows..


    There is a Windows for phones, it's called Windows Mobile, and it does multitasking among other things, unlike the iDon't.
    If you are implying that the iPhone is a netbook... well, just look at the specs and capabilities of the OS and draw your own conclusion.

    I have XP, Vista and Win7 on my PCs and I have to admit that Win7 is excellent so far. When I use it I don't miss XP a bit.
  • 3 Hide
    thedipper , November 12, 2009 10:56 PM
    Wait, XP's UI being bloat free? Memory wise, sure, but that UI is horribly inefficient in terms of actual use.

    To the guy claiming to have DX11 on XP, it's not possible to have over DX9 on XP. Yes, I've read up on the little hacking scheme, no they did not successfully do anything other than enabling winXP to run DX10+ on XP - which can still run in DX9.
  • 5 Hide
    matt87_50 , November 12, 2009 11:08 PM
    deadlockedworldwhy cant MS make a light version of windows? Apple runs a modified OS X on iphones... so it only seems natural that microsoft could make a netbook capable windows..


    god, Apple won't even make a netbook.

    again, how were these battery tests when they turned the 3d desktop off???

    either way, I think you'll find XP is more of a resource hog than 95.

    its not microsoft's fault that laptop manufactures decided to make antiquated laptops and then sell them as current gen.
  • 1 Hide
    aspireonelover , November 12, 2009 11:49 PM
    Microsoft is doubtful about windows xp.... We're doubtful that microsoft's even making the right decision of putting windows 7 home premium on netbooks :p  (just my thought)
  • 1 Hide
    Yoder54 , November 12, 2009 11:50 PM
    __-_-_-__I still use xp x64. stable and compatible as hell. even got directx11 on it."benefits that 7 has to offer" woot? lol!


    Well, I did an upgrade to Win7 to get the 64-bit version and have benefited a lot from it! I like what I see so far, and enjoy the shit out of the 64-bit architecture.

    For those still running 32-bit Windows, then 64-bit Windows 7 is a MUST GET upgrade (assuming all is well with the hardware.) In fact, you would be a fool not to.
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , November 12, 2009 11:57 PM
    Windows 7 is alright, although TBH, it doesn't exactly blow me away... Atleast UAC isn't nearly as bad as it was in Vista...
  • 1 Hide
    maigo , November 13, 2009 12:03 AM
    thedipperWait, XP's UI being bloat free? Memory wise, sure, but that UI is horribly inefficient in terms of actual use.

    Not free UI bloat, no, only but half as much as Vista/7
  • -3 Hide
    liquidsnake718 , November 13, 2009 12:45 AM
    Wow resist change... those are words are straight out of Terminator. Haha I wouldnt be surprised if Microsoft did forced us users into an OS that gives them all of our info and internet habits, which im sure is pretty common in Windows 7.
  • 4 Hide
    intesx , November 13, 2009 12:57 AM
    maigoXP is less UI bloat. I hate UI bloat.


    8 years ago people like you were saying that about 2000 and XP. They converted eventually and they're the same ones today that are struggling to hold on to XP.

    There is nothing bloated about Aero these days... even throw away computers can run Aero without breaking a sweat.
Display more comments