backtop

Print 57 comment(s) - last by TomZ.. on Dec 8 at 2:27 PM
Microsoft field testing XO notebooks running Windows XP

The One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) Foundation is making big news with sales for its XO laptops finally starting to add up.

The OLPC has had its share of issues with the XO notebook, most significantly when production costs drove the price of the XO from the original goal of $100 per unit to a cost of $188 per unit. DailyTech reported recently that a patent infringement suit had been filed in Nigeria against the OLPC foundation of technology used in the XO keyboard adding to OLPC frustrations.

After initial production delays were solved, orders for the XO notebooks are now coming in with the most recent XO order being 260,000 units from Peru. Today the Wall Street Journal reports that Microsoft is field testing XO notebooks running a stripped down version of Windows XP.

Microsoft tells the Wall Street Journal that one of the biggest challenges for running Windows XP on the XO is the small amount of solid-state memory that the systems have for data storage.

General Manager of Microsoft’s Unlimited Potential Group, James Utzschneider said, “We want Windows to run on the XO and we are investing significant energy and talent. Still, he said the Windows XO machine will have to pass muster before Microsoft supports it for volume use. "We really want to make sure we have a quality experience before we make commitment to governments."

According to Microsoft, the Windows running XO notebook will be tested in 2008 in the U.S., India, and possibly Romania. With favorable trials of the Windows equipped XO, the systems could be available as early as the second half of 2008 according to Utzschneider.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
By Flunk on 12/6/2007 3:57:10 PM , Rating: 4
Windows 3.1 Installs off of five 3 1/2" floppy disks. How is that bloated?


By therealnickdanger on 12/6/2007 4:15:45 PM , Rating: 5
Shhh... just go with it.

(D0wN w/m$!!!1)


By littlebitstrouds on 12/6/2007 4:52:49 PM , Rating: 2
That actually caught me off guard and I laughed a little to loud here at work.


By ChronoReverse on 12/6/2007 4:48:47 PM , Rating: 2
The full version of DOS 6.22 came on three floppy disks.


By fangwoo on 12/6/2007 7:00:29 PM , Rating: 2
windows can do a lot more than that...


By Jack Ripoff on 12/6/2007 10:06:54 PM , Rating: 1
Windows 95 can't.


By Samus on 12/7/2007 1:02:15 AM , Rating: 1
SuperDOS 7 fits in 10MB and is a multitasking, multithreaded, console environment with support for up to 64 processors, a native tape backup program, USB, SATA, IEEE1394 support, remote managability (TELNET) and of course full network support, even IPv6, NAS Router, web server, ftp server, file server, print server, user accounts, NSA 192-bit encryption, and addressable memory space up to 64GB.

10MB.


By TomZ on 12/7/2007 10:33:56 AM , Rating: 2
Does it have a GUI? Does it have a rich API - not just that, does it have multiple APIs, some modern and some legacy stretching back nearly 20 years? Does it have device drivers for hundreds of thousands of different types of devices? Does it support hundreds of thousands of different apps?

You're comparing a bike to a car, and complaining that the car costs too much since bikes cost much less. Makes no sense.


By mcnabney on 12/7/2007 6:07:45 PM , Rating: 2
Technically, Windows does not support hundreds of thousands of apps. You may or may not get them to run on it. But if it works it is due to the effort of the application developer and not anything that Microsoft has done.


By TomZ on 12/7/2007 8:49:51 PM , Rating: 2
While I agree that application developers shoulder a lot of the burden, Microsoft does a lot as well. Microsoft actually spends a lot of resources in application compatibility testing, especially when they release new operating system versions and new versions of their development tools.

This is because customers upgrading their operating systems have an expectation that their existing applications will still run after the upgrade. Of course application developers don't really have as much an opportunity to fix compatibility issues against future operating system releases. Microsoft doesn't resolve all compatibility issues, as you see now with Vista, but they do as much as they can.

For development tools, developers have a similar expectation that they can compile their existing applications against newer releases of the development tools with minimal or no changes, and have everything just work.


By SiliconAddict on 12/6/2007 5:37:55 PM , Rating: 2
Frame of reference dude. This was in 1994ish. 5 floppies was still a lot at the time.


By Vile2600 on 12/6/2007 4:25:07 PM , Rating: 2
Windows has been bloated since 3.1 or maybe earlier?
You sir are a complete newbie, or a typical MS hating troll.
Do some research and post some factual information if you want people to take you seriously.


By xphile on 12/6/2007 5:39:57 PM , Rating: 2
Windows 95 came on 13 DMF formatted floppy disks which even further makes your claim incorrect. That was hardly bloated - I remember EVEN THEN being quite amazed they'd achieved it.


By ranutso on 12/7/2007 5:25:09 PM , Rating: 1
Oh yes. MacOS Leopard DVD is almost 8 GB, and it is not bloated. =/

Come on...


By Zurtex on 12/6/2007 3:53:55 PM , Rating: 3
Trying to get XP running smoothly on XO should teach Microsoft some good lessons.

I really hope they continue with this to make Windows 7 good performance and good features, I certainly like what they are doing with minwin: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MinWin


By TomZ on 12/6/2007 4:39:30 PM , Rating: 2
The next version of Windows and MinWin are practically unrelated. Listen the Traut's presentation. It is complete nonsense to state or imply that Microsoft is somehow going down the path of providing a super stripped down OS.


By Zurtex on 12/6/2007 6:07:12 PM , Rating: 2
I know I know.

But it is a Windows 7 Kernal, which should give them good eperience on how to devloper a good modularised system. I'm not saying super stipped down, but some performance enchancements wouldn't be bad.


By SiliconAddict on 12/6/2007 6:04:19 PM , Rating: 4
"I'm a Vista x64 user and think Microsoft is the best software engineering company on the planet, but..."

I'm sorry but trolling aside that is an asinine claim. Their software is the most inelegant software in the industry only a slight step up from OSS. I've been doing IT since 97, and I can say this as someone who has had to support, deploy, and generally fix all the various problems that can be found when using MS wares that while they have come a LOOOONG way they still aren't there. Frankly until the registry dies in screaming twitching fit of beautiful death MS applications will continue to suck my right ass cheek harder then a black hole.
The registry is the single worst idea in the history of computer science as far as I'm concerned.

PS- Not overly impressed with Apple's wares either. Yes I'm an equal opportunity hater. But its generally a step above MS....just a step though. When Apple puts out a stable app after a few patches usually its good but for the love of god some of the initial offerings they have put out blow with the force of a cat 2.


By Sahrin on 12/6/2007 7:15:39 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah, I'm not seeing a lot of solutions in your post.

You bitch about the registry - but don't propose a solution; and don't recognize the benefits it provides, nor the vital function it serves. Is it a perfect solution? Not at all; but engineering (of all kinds) is about tradeoffs - "strength or speed" so to speak.

What I do see Microsoft doing is designing and maintaining the most sophisticated software infrastructure that has ever existed - and doing it quite well. Perfectly, no; but my point with respect to "Microsoft is the best software engineering company on the planet" was not made with respect to the products themselves, but rather MS's prowess at solving vast and seemingly intractable problems well. Not innovatively or creatively making the old problem simpler (OSS and Apple) - but solving the problem we have today (commoditized hardware and a disparate userbase that requires unification) in a competent manner.

A you yourself point out (by knocking the three predominant Client OS's - Linux, MacOS and Windows) there is no "perfect solution" - but by my estimation, Microsoft's efforts are by far the most impressive.


By retrospooty on 12/6/2007 7:24:06 PM , Rating: 2
"I've been doing IT since 97, and I can say this as someone who has had to support, deploy, and generally fix all the various problems that can be found "

And what exactly is better? Dont tell me Linux, Solaris, or Mac OSX... Its easy to have a small user base and claim anything. Tell me what OS could support 100's of millions of business computers, as well as 100's of millions of home computers, on top of many high end workstations, servers etc etc. Now think about the lack of education on most of those users, Not tech savvy posters at anandtech/dailytech, but grandma's and youung children, soccer moms, and business users that know zero about computeres - yet still somehow it all works pretty dam well for most people. No other OS or company could handle it. Hate MS all you want,, your world runs on it.

Answer: nno-one has ever done anything close to it.


By SiliconAddict on 12/7/2007 1:26:39 AM , Rating: 2
There is ZERO reason MS couldn't have started migrating people away from the registry and made it legacy with Vista. they are making an active choice.

And I'm sorry to say that only a fanboi would support the concept of a registry. Do you have any concept how hard it is to fix a problem when its hidden deep in the reg. This is where problems with IE lay. I've seen more then a few instances where Microsoft's own support staff recommand a reimage instead of fighting this because its obviously an issue with a dead reg key. Oh and lets not get into the concept of moving an app from computer to computer. I picked up my first Mac last year. For all the bitching I do about OS X, and I do a lot, the ability to backup my app folder, redo the system and drag the apps back from an external hard drive or RUN it from an external hard drive kicks Windows in the nuggets HARD. Do you have ANY DAMN idea how much time that saves. No installs, no patches, drag and drop, done. Backups on apps? Simple. Copy\paste.
There is simply NO reason to hang onto it anymore. Its a boat anchor weighting Windows down at this point.


By retrospooty on 12/7/2007 9:00:08 AM , Rating: 2
I do have a pretty good idea, and I agree with you on the registry. I have always said that Windows worst point is its corruptability, and need to reinstall too often.

My point was that there is no other capable OS that could do what MS did, as well as they did it on an open hardware platform.


By TomZ on 12/7/2007 9:40:03 AM , Rating: 2
Don't you realize that the registry, like most other engineering choices, has pros and cons? I'm not going to argue strongly for the registry, but to basically say it is a completely terrible idea is wrong.


By tanishalfelven on 12/6/2007 11:24:07 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I'm sorry but trolling aside that is an asinine claim. Their software is the most inelegant software in the industry only a slight step up from OSS. I've been doing IT since 97, and I can say this as someone who has had to support, deploy, and generally fix all the various problems that can be found when using MS wares that while they have come a LOOOONG way they still aren't there. Frankly until the registry dies in screaming twitching fit of beautiful death MS applications will continue to suck my right ass cheek harder then a black hole.


yeah. i suppose thats why MS is so profitable. why MS has the largest share of operating systems. why even the new vista with so much bad publicity (not to mention those apple ads spreading FUD) has a larger market share already then desktop linux. hmm seems MS know what people want and knows how to give it.

and no i'm not a fanboy. my computer has XP, Vista, server 03, and ubuntu installed


By The0ne on 12/7/2007 1:57:13 AM , Rating: 2
Having those multiple OSes is suppose to make us think you know what you're talking about? Being successful as a business mostly has nothing to do with the quality of the product. This is why lean, six sigma and a host of other QA systems are in place to help solve most of these issues. And certainly having a business model to monopolize the market helps for that success don't you think?

In any case, I wouldn't be surprise if most efficient programmers, including embedded programmers, would agree windows is not the most efficient or elegant piece of software written. That's not to say it's bad but it's certain not good either, of which has nothing to do with their success.


By tanishalfelven on 12/7/2007 9:25:06 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Having those multiple OSes is suppose to make us think you know what you're talking about? Being successful as a business mostly has nothing to do with the quality of the product. This is why lean, six sigma and a host of other QA systems are in place to help solve most of these issues. And certainly having a business model to monopolize the market helps for that success don't you think?


elegent or not. doesn't matter
it is the best for what it does. allow someone to gedt their work done without excessive time spent on running the computer instead of doing work.


By herrdoktor330 on 12/6/2007 11:59:33 PM , Rating: 2
Why not run WinXP enbeded edition? Itsn't that what they use for your typical Windows thin client. And if they make most of their applications in Flash or Silverlight, wouldn't that make everything fit pretty well on that 1 gb? If you HAD to run Windows on this thing, I think that would be the most efficient, albeit limited solution. Just a thought...

Personally... I say keep the linux. It's what the thing was designed for.


By Trisagion on 12/7/2007 12:50:19 AM , Rating: 2
I wonder how they will factor in the cost. Even if Microsoft somehow subsidizes the cost, it'll still be more expensive than a free Linux OS.


Why XP?
By SiliconAddict on 12/6/2007 5:48:53 PM , Rating: 2
for the love of god just dump Windows CE on it. Not the slimmed down version that you can find on Pocket PC's and Windows Mobile, but CE the full version. If they are willing to put that much effort to get XP running on it they could drop CE and a slimmed down version of Word, Excel, and e-mail on it and call it a day.
XP was NOT designed around the system specs that the OLPC has. Period.




RE: Why XP?
By noirsoft on 12/6/2007 6:05:50 PM , Rating: 2
I think the goal is to have a higher level of binary compatibility with "full" windows than CE offers, not to produce yet another unique Windows offshoot.

When/if .NET development becomes the dominant application platform for Windows, it would be much easier to go with multiple OS flavors like you say.


RE: Why XP?
By stardude82 on 12/6/2007 8:24:13 PM , Rating: 2
I have a PII 450 Laptop with 196 MB of shared RAM, and a 6GB hard drive. It runs XP cleanly, Office 2000 and Firefox work well and it takes up less than 2GB of space.

By my experience, if you bumped up the flash memory above 2Gb, the XO should be a pretty decent XP box. It shouldn't be big problem just to bump up the density of the on-board flash memory during manufacturing.

If governments really want MS products and are willing to pay for the extra 30 bucks for the flash memory and MS software, the only people who should be offended by MS's interloping in the project are those true Open Source believers. Last time I checked, the Intel Classmate PC was generating more sales.


RE: Why XP?
By SiliconAddict on 12/7/2007 1:18:23 AM , Rating: 2
Whatever. I have a latitude CSX with a 500Mhz, 256MB, and a 20GB hard drive and its slow as hell. That and we aren't talking a Pentium Processor. I seriously question the speed that thing would perform at. Not all Mhz are created equal esp if the goal is the best battery life you can possibly get.


RE: Why XP?
By retrospooty on 12/7/2007 10:10:31 PM , Rating: 2
Its closer to say not all Windows installations are created equal.

If yours is horrible slow with those specs, you likely have winbloat or too many TSR's running for 256megs (which may not be many at all depending on thier memory). If you have a fairly fresh install without alot of crap added on WinXP can run easily with a 500mhz CPU and 256m of ram.

On top of that fact, they are trimming it down to fit, cutting out some components etc...


RE: Why XP?
By TomZ on 12/6/2007 8:11:20 PM , Rating: 2
Windows XP will give a better end-user experience and will have greater plug-in hardware compatibility than CE.

Microsoft also has something called Windows XP Embedded which is a highly moduluar configurable version of Windows XP. It is ideally suited for a resource limited device like this.


RE: Why XP?
By teckytech9 on 12/7/2007 4:33:33 PM , Rating: 2
True, but Microsoft is now trying to scramble and figure out (due to a limited number of programmers), how to strip XP down to a thin client to operate into the "open architecture " of the OLPC XO laptop.

http://blogs.technet.com/jamesu/archive/2007/12/05...

The laptop is shipping today, fully functioning with Linux.


RE: Why XP?
By TomZ on 12/7/2007 8:56:45 PM , Rating: 2
How do you figure Microsoft has a "limited number of programmers"? Microsoft has about 80,000 employees, so I think they could pretty easily cut free a few software engineers for the job.

I doubt there's any "scrambling" either - what gives you that idea? I'll bet they're quietly working on it behind the scenes.


RE: Why XP?
By teckytech9 on 12/8/2007 12:12:34 AM , Rating: 2
It seems evident that the mission of the OLPC is turning out to be very successful that Microsoft sees a big new market. If Microsoft delivers a discounted bundle for Windows XP+Office to fit this package then the mission would only be more successful. There is no competition here, albeit the only winners are the kids with the laptops.

It was previously reported that Intel had turned down support for the OLPC project in the beginning. Hence, the AMD processor used today in the XO instead of one from the Wintel camp. Regardless of any fiduciary responsibility that Microsoft now feels, I would say that they are trying to deliver their own Windows version as soon as possible.

The finite number of Microsoft engineers are minuscule compared to the worldwide community of Linux developers and users, which is growing everyday. Openness is the key to success here.


RE: Why XP?
By TomZ on 12/8/2007 2:27:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The finite number of Microsoft engineers are minuscule compared to the worldwide community of Linux developers and users, which is growing everyday.

The finite number of Linux developers and users - less than 1% of desktop computers run Linux - is actually miniscule compared to the legions of Windows developers and users - more than 90% of desktop computers run Windows.

See I can play the same game as you. :o)


Not the most efficient use of $50 million dollars?
By awer26 on 12/6/2007 4:01:24 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sure this has been posted before in OLPC threads, but isn't there a better way to spend $50,000,000 than to give kids laptops? Can't they build more libraries or put more shared desktops in schools?




By therealnickdanger on 12/6/2007 4:19:34 PM , Rating: 1
Why would you do that? The "hands off" approach is the way to go, as can be seen in American schools and homes. Less accountability, lower standards, less discipline, and more individual freedom. Why should kids in Africa be treated differently?


By thornburg on 12/6/2007 4:22:59 PM , Rating: 2
Umm, these days, I think $50mil would probably only build a few libraries, or maybe several really crappy ones.

Honestly, in a world where sports stars and CEOs are pulling in several hundred million dollars per year , $50mil is basically chump change.


By thornburg on 12/6/2007 4:24:55 PM , Rating: 2
That's weird, I was replying to the grandparent, not the parent. Does Dailytech always stack replies like that (i.e. 2 replies at the same level become stacked at two levels)?


By Ringold on 12/6/2007 6:01:57 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not sure about libraries -- the individual books, in Africa, would probably be by far the most expensive component.

On the other hand, entire businesses, such as ranches, small factories, service companies can be capitalized and opened for less than $1000 USD. Certain African countries, I can't think off the top of my head, have security contractors hireing retired Army veterans for service in Iraq. These Africans return home with a few hundred bucks and many are opening their own businesses.

I suspect $50 mil, invested properly, could do astounding things in parts of Africa. Not in food aid, the next day they'd be hungry again, but in other forms -- even microfinance.

The goal of improved education is good enough, especially for a developing country, but laptops does seem.. suspect to me. Taiwan pulled it off without laptops, for example. In fact.. every nation in history thus far has developed without laptops..


By erikejw on 12/7/2007 4:17:38 AM , Rating: 2
It's sure better than spend 10M$ a day i Iraq.

There are much to do in the developing countries and help in all areas is necessarry. Of course food,water,school is much more important but it is great that help is available in more than those areas.


WTF?
By eyebeeemmpawn on 12/6/2007 8:34:21 PM , Rating: 3
bloated?

Does no one understand the engineering philosophy???

If it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features.

Each version of windows is "just-bloated-enough" to make your old PC obsolete




RE: WTF?
By stmok on 12/7/2007 1:05:11 AM , Rating: 1
Yeah, true.

Microsoft drives the hardware industry. (in a sense...In both system/hardware sales with a new version of Windows and with video cards via newer versions of DirectX).

Unfortunately or fortunately, (depending on how you see it), the approach is getting old and people are catching on. Some have dubbed the whole process as the "upgrade treadmill".

Anyway, this is about MS trying to put XP on OLPC. They have to be in every system, don't they? Its part of their "Get them while they're young" policy. (They do the same thing with pretty much every school in the world. Massive licensing discounts to educational institutions).

Are they gonna do their usual stance of "encouraging" OLPC users to upgrade once their trimmed down XP is no longer supported? (Say, to a trimmed down Vista variant)...I mean, one particular version of Windows isn't gonna be supported forever, is it?


Hmm
By shamgar03 on 12/6/2007 10:40:47 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder if they will sell that windows "non-bloated version" to the public. Maybe it will available through alternate channels.




RE: Hmm
By kmmatney on 12/7/2007 7:58:33 PM , Rating: 2
No doubt this windows version will be crippled in some fashion, such as only running at the fixed resolution of the OLPC, or only available in certain languages.


By Dradien on 12/7/2007 8:25:32 AM , Rating: 2
Right next to the volume control is a little button that when you hit it, the source code pops up, useful for a variety of things. Looking how a program works, editing the source code to fit your means, or just plain curiosity. Unless Microsoft has this change of heart and allows the source code to be seen and edited at the touch of a button…it isn’t going to happen.




By TomZ on 12/7/2007 9:43:44 AM , Rating: 2
You're joking, right?


OLPC Input?
By bldckstark on 12/7/2007 12:36:07 PM , Rating: 2
I don't see any mention that the OLPC foundation is working with MS on this project. It seems that MS is working on this by themselves. That leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Something like MS has sour grapes because the OLPC is starting to take off and all the countries buying these will have Linux users instead of MS users building their country. They may HAVE to make it a separate OS to install if OLPC won't work with them.




RE: OLPC Input?
By TomZ on 12/7/2007 12:54:51 PM , Rating: 2
What reason can you think of that OLPC wouldn't work with Microsoft?


By VooDooAddict on 12/6/2007 5:21:20 PM , Rating: 2
I think this is great news and opens the possibility of a lighter weight windows for portable gadgets.

I'd like to see a Windows Mobile Version ... giving more reason for people to develop small lightweight apps.




Late Entrant.
By teckytech9 on 12/7/2007 4:08:44 AM , Rating: 2
Microsoft is the late entrant. I don't see any advantages to having Windows XP installed in the OLPC other than the fact of increasing its overall price due to licensing fees.

Having Windows XP stripped down to fit an 256MB SDRAM/1GB NAND flash drive system will be a challenge. Not to mention, being stable enough to scale down without frequent freezes or lock-ups (hiccups).




"A politician stumbles over himself... Then they pick it out. They edit it. He runs the clip, and then he makes a funny face, and the whole audience has a Pavlovian response." -- Joe Scarborough on John Stewart over Jim Cramer











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki