Even though Windows 7 looks like it will be the Microsoft OS that will finally take over the PC world (again), it appears as though the road hasn’t run out yet for Windows XP.
For one year after the general availability of Windows 7 final, OEMs will still be able to pack Windows XP in with netbooks.
"OEMs that are using Windows XP on netbooks will have the ability to install Windows XP for one year — 12 months — after Windows 7 general availability," Mike Nash, corporate vice president of Microsoft's Windows product management group, said during a conference call with reporters, quoted by ComputerWorld.
Microsoft has been developing Windows 7 with netbooks in mind, even creating a version called Starter Edition which carries with it a license cost that’s supposed to keep prices low.
According to Microsoft, 96 percent of new netbooks sold bundle Windows XP. The company’s choice to keep XP going might be a hedged bet in case Windows 7 doesn’t take off on netbooks.
If it’s performance that netbook buyers are worried about, however, Nash said that Windows 7 should perform well enough on the Atom-powered machines.
"It's been a long time since we've had a version of Windows that will actually run better [than the previous version] on the hardware that most customers have," Nash said.
Does this mean 7 will run better or worse? Microsoft should have learned they can't force hardware upgrades to the masses by writing shitty software. With trends actually going backwards (Atom processors being slower and less capable than most PCs even 5 years ago), I think Microsoft is really feeling the heat.
I think it's still up in the air if 7 will accomplish what Microsoft hopes it will, and extending XP doesn't sound very confident on their part.
It also has a lot faster RAM speeds than former pc's. (400/533Mhz DDR2 vs 200Mhz P4 1,4Ghz).
I'm actually running also a trimmed down version of XP, even with a celeron 900Mhz cpu, and get equal results of the older P4 1,2Ghz thanks to the bump in memory speed. So the EeePc actually outperforms any older P4 pc; and the atom outperforms older P4's 1,6Ghz mainly thanks to it's HT capability.
You could almost see the Atom as 2x800Mhz processors, each loading files pretty slow by themselves, but together (with multi threading) they load applications faster than my 1,4Ghz singlecore Athlon processor.
I have no complains about the atom,but it's crappy Intel video chip.
Nvidia's ion platform is the solution (paired with a Geforce 9400) to make many people change their mind about this chip!
I only wished we could buy them somewhere.
Really? I get
So depending on what the Celeron core was, the Atom is not much faster than a Pentium 4 from 2006.
Other than that, only one word in reply to the topic: "Still?"
On a side note:
Atom needs a x64 version dual core with virtualization so we can run W7U XPM.