Microsoft removes 3-app limit from Windows 7
updated 07:00 pm EDT, Sat May 30, 2009
Win 7 removes app limit
Microsoft late yesterday confirmed that the final version of Windows 7 Starter Edition will not be limited to opening three applications at a time. This follows claims by observer and author Paul Thurrott, that the limit would be removed, though it doesn't appear to include allow changing wallpapers. The change is intended to improve the flexibility of netbooks, the company says.
Critics believe maintaining the three-app limit would have opened the door to stronger competition from Android and other Linux-based operating systems running on netbooks, as they remain free or low-cost but wouldn't have the same artificial restrictions. Mobile Internet devices and tablet-like devices such as the iPod touch have also put pressure on Microsoft to keep costs low.
A continued economic recession and questions over the final pricing of Starter Edition are regarded as Microsoft's few remaining concerns; the latter is unofficially expected sometime next month.
Buy a car that only turns
05/30, 10:57pm reply
Buy a car that can only make left turns. You'd eventually get to your destination, but...
Paul Huang
Forum Regular
Joined: Sep 1999
That's mighty white of em
05/31, 08:47am reply
The biggest decision for a user?
Which anti-malware app should they quit to check email?
It's mind-boggling that anyone would even THINK of such a thing!
Greed has a new name and it's Microsoft.
JeffHarris
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Oct 1999
Hypocrisy at its best...
05/31, 09:57am (2 replies) reply
Let me get this straight:
Apple could have enabled multi-tasking on the phone. They didn't. Why not? Not because it wasn't possible, but because they believed if used improperly it would be too much of a drain on battery life, etc. In other words, they limited the OS to ensure smooth operation. And the feedback from you guys.... "great idea". You agree that the performance of an OS is something to be protected. Apple didnt even limit multitasking to three apps, it turned it off completely.
Microsoft on the other hand has a version of the OS that is only supposed to run on very low-end PCs. PCs without the hardware resources to run several programs at the same time. So, in a very similar approach taken by apple, they try and limit the OS to ensure smooth operation. And the response of the mac community... "thats crazy!" And Microsoft's response... they actually listen.
After all those claims that the iphone is a netbook, your feedback to this issue is not only hypocritical, its short-sighted and irrational. Microsoft was limiting an OS to the ability to multitask reasonably relevant to the hardware capabilities. I guess the difference is people don't expect apple-esque controlling behavior from microsoft like they do from apple.
luckyday
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Apr 2008
oh please
05/31, 10:36am (2 replies) reply
Get serious luckyday! They're nothing alike.
Because MS also wasn't limiting what you could install on the netbooks running the OS, making sure everything passed some arbitrary rules.
Then again, I'm sure if they did require all apps go through validation before they could be used on Windows, the mac users would decry that, too, although that would be one way to provide "security" and "stability" and make sure no one takes down the internet.
testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Aug 2001
Diablo
05/31, 12:23pm (1 reply) reply
I think we are comparing hardware performance to hardware performance, whether it be an iphone to a desktop or a netbook to an ipod touch. My point was that apple was applauded by fanboys for taking restrictive steps to ensure optimum performance, and Microsoft was criticized.
And comparing netbooks to an iphone shouldnt be that insane to you guys. You were making the comparison yourself by the dozens when people critized apple for not having a netbook... "they do, they have the iphone". Not to mention Apple touts the iphone as running "os x"
Regarding your comparison, you're wrong. It would be more like criticizing ford for increasing fuel efficiency in their cars by limiting the engine, but applauding vespa for doing the same thing.
luckyday
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Apr 2008
Makes no difference
05/31, 12:35pm (1 reply) reply
Windows in its entirety is limited to the idiots of the world that use it or worse, knowingly go out and spend money on it.
jarod
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Apr 2005
Phooey!
05/31, 01:07pm reply
Apparently you don't visit any Windows-centric websites. They have been criticizing the original plan by MicroSoft from the beginning. This whole thing is more about control than about performance.
Trying to lay it all at the feet of Apple fans simply shows your illogical bias.
SlimGem
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Jul 2008
SlimGem
05/31, 04:27pm reply
THEY SCRAPPED THE IDEA! You fanboys are still sitting here criticizing an idea that they scrapped! If this was apple, you would have never even known because of the complete lack of transparency.
You think Microsoft is more controlling than Apple? Really?
luckyday
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Apr 2008
Say What?
05/31, 06:41pm reply
"You think Microsoft is more controlling than Apple? "
I didn't say that. Do you have a hard time comprehending what you read? It appears so.
SlimGem
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Jul 2008
Best practices
05/31, 08:53pm (1 reply) reply
I've always tried to run mo more than one app (in the Taskbar) at a time with Windows. It helps to keep it from crashing.
Mr. Strat
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Joined: Jan 2002