<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Windows 7 Starter Edition is a consumer PR nightmare</title>
	<atom:link href="http://arid.net/p26/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://arid.net/p26</link>
	<description>Technology Innovation for Business and Life</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:08:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Thephon</title>
		<link>http://arid.net/p26/comment-page-1#comment-23</link>
		<dc:creator>Thephon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jun 2010 12:36:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://arid.net/?p=26#comment-23</guid>
		<description>this is rufff!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>this is rufff!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: brian</title>
		<link>http://arid.net/p26/comment-page-1#comment-5</link>
		<dc:creator>brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 05:18:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://arid.net/?p=26#comment-5</guid>
		<description>Thats true, but would you use remote desktop on a netbook?  I would assume MS admins would want a full version of Win 7 anyway and not be running a lite version.  In a similar vain though, techies wouldn&#039;t be able to use a 3 app limit OS either.  Most MS admins are doing so through their enterprise and would install the enterprise version of Win 7 on the machine, not the &#039;free&#039; netbook addition that comes with it.  At least, thats what i do.  I wipe out whatever OS comes on a laptop and put a real (ie. full) OS on it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thats true, but would you use remote desktop on a netbook?  I would assume MS admins would want a full version of Win 7 anyway and not be running a lite version.  In a similar vain though, techies wouldn&#39;t be able to use a 3 app limit OS either.  Most MS admins are doing so through their enterprise and would install the enterprise version of Win 7 on the machine, not the &#39;free&#39; netbook addition that comes with it.  At least, thats what i do.  I wipe out whatever OS comes on a laptop and put a real (ie. full) OS on it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: paul</title>
		<link>http://arid.net/p26/comment-page-1#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Apr 2009 19:51:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://arid.net/?p=26#comment-4</guid>
		<description>I can&#039;t think of a computer I&#039;d want to own that couldn&#039;t run Remote Desktop. Cut that out of an OS and MS admins shouldn&#039;t want to use it...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can&#39;t think of a computer I&#39;d want to own that couldn&#39;t run Remote Desktop. Cut that out of an OS and MS admins shouldn&#39;t want to use it&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Wilson</title>
		<link>http://arid.net/p26/comment-page-1#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Wilson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Apr 2009 07:59:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://arid.net/?p=26#comment-3</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m not convinced that this is a better way.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;All of the discussion around Starter Edition&#039;s limitations is academic if we don&#039;t know how much the various editions will cost (i.e. the various product editions have been announced, but not the pricing).  Who says that Starter Edition won&#039;t be free or low cost?  The simple fact is that we don&#039;t know but, if Microsoft does make Starter Edition free, I can see the headlines already... &quot;Microsoft caves to consumer demand for free netbook OS&quot; - which of course would be a complete misrepresentation as that might always have been the intention.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;From personal experience, even Ultimate runs fine on a netbook... so, if you can get on with Starter Edition then fine (the 3 app limit doesn&#039;t include quite a few things so it&#039;s not as onerous as it first sounds).  If you can&#039;t get by with Starter Edition, then pay for an upgrade.  And I wouldn&#039;t be surprised if many OEMs ship netbooks with Home Premium on (after all, it is the default consumer version for Windows 7).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#39;m not convinced that this is a better way.</p>
<p>All of the discussion around Starter Edition&#39;s limitations is academic if we don&#39;t know how much the various editions will cost (i.e. the various product editions have been announced, but not the pricing).  Who says that Starter Edition won&#39;t be free or low cost?  The simple fact is that we don&#39;t know but, if Microsoft does make Starter Edition free, I can see the headlines already&#8230; &#8220;Microsoft caves to consumer demand for free netbook OS&#8221; &#8211; which of course would be a complete misrepresentation as that might always have been the intention.</p>
<p>From personal experience, even Ultimate runs fine on a netbook&#8230; so, if you can get on with Starter Edition then fine (the 3 app limit doesn&#39;t include quite a few things so it&#39;s not as onerous as it first sounds).  If you can&#39;t get by with Starter Edition, then pay for an upgrade.  And I wouldn&#39;t be surprised if many OEMs ship netbooks with Home Premium on (after all, it is the default consumer version for Windows 7).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
