Windows 7 Starter Won't Open Any Doors for Android or Linux

by Lance Ulanoff

Buzz up!on Yahoo!

Tell me if you've heard this before: Microsoft's decision to limit Windows 7 Starter to running three concurrent programs at a time opens up a huge opportunity for Android. It's the premise of a wrong-headed column by Seth H. Weintraub on Computerworld. It sounds reasonable, but for me there was an eerie echo. I seem to recall that Microsoft Vista travails would also open up an opportunity for Linux.

Let's get real, folks. There is no opportunity for Linux or Android, for that matter, on the desktop. This is not case of my dislike of either platform, mind you. In order to understand what upstart platforms can and can't do against the world's most-widely-used OS, we need only look at history (even recent history will do).

First, though, let's return to the Computerworld article. In it, Weintraub points to a now oft-cited The Wall Street Journal report about how Microsoft is making just $15 per license on netbooks running Windows XP. That's not much, and Weintraub states that Microsoft is doing this to "stave off broad adoption of Linux." Ha!

Let's look at what really happened when a good portion of early netbooks shipped with Linux: They were returned! Consumers did so because netbooks targeted the least tech-savvy, most cost-conscious rung of the market. Not exactly a good fit for Linux, which, while a great OS, can get a bit confusing at times (i.e. adding apps, updating drivers, finding things in the varied distro interfaces, etc). Microsoft was pushed into offering Windows XP on netbooks because manufacturers were desperate. If they didn't replace Linux, the market would have suffered an untimely death. Against its own best interest, Microsoft has allowed netbooks to extend the life of Windows XP.

Now let's look at Linux offspring Android's opportunity to take it to Microsoft and Windows.

As you know, I've been running Windows 7 Ultimate for months. It's a good OS and could make people forget about Microsoft's Vista blunders. Windows 7 Starter is the low-end edition in the Windows 7 line. Interestingly, under Vista, "Starter" was only available in third-world countries and the abysmal "Basic" was the low-end, entry-level OS in the Vista line.

Windows 7 Starter doesn't sound much better than Basic. Running just three apps at once could be a buzz kill for almost any user. (What happens when Internet Explorer or FireFox opens multiple tabs? They're seen as separate processes in Windows. Does this mean Starter will see those tabs as separate apps? I hope not.)

Weintraub and others insist that this latest Microsoft blunder opens the door wide for Google Android. I know that Android-based computers could show up in market before the end of this year. As a result, I've been walking around with a T-Mobile G1 for the last few weeks, trying to assess its desktop chops. So far I'm not convinced. It's nice looking and relatively fast (though the phone takes a solid minute plus to launch the OS). Still, the OS feels a bit lightweight to power a PC. Acer admitted to having an Android desktop prototype, but the company isn't jumping to roll it out into its retail channel.

Even if Android is desktop ready right now, I still don't think it can win or even grab measurable PC market share, and the reasons are very simple. Microsoft released Windows Vista in late 2006, and it was a disaster from the get-go. Don't get me wrong. The operating system, especially SP2, is decent, solid, and usable. It's also an excellent case study for what can happen when you over-promise and under-deliver.

Continue reading from the source....