OSNews

Windows and ULCPCs are not a good mix. Firstly there is the cost issue, where the cost of Windows plus proprietary applications that you may wish to run will exceed the cost of the ULPC itself by many times over ... unless you run FOSS applications on your ULPC, in which case you are still better off not having Windows at all ... just run your ULCPC with Linux plus FOSS applications and it will stay low cost.

The ULCPC's main feature is low cost. If you kill that faeture by putting Windows and then costly Windows-only applications on it ... then you are better off spending your money on a UMPC or even a slim Windows notebook.

You typically wouldn't be running expensive, high-end, proprietary applications on a ULCPC anyway ... it just isn't meant for that. So it makes sense to stick with the Linux OS, FOSS applications ... and enjoy the low costs.

Finally there is the SSD issue. Windows doesn't have a filesystem suitable for flash memory solid-state-disks (SSD). You ideally should use a "wear-levelling" filesystem for a SSD.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wear_levelling

"On flash memory devices, such as CompactFlash and Secure Digital cards, these techniques are implemented in hardware by a built-in microcontroller. On such devices, wear-levelling is transparent and most conventional file systems can be used as-is on them.

Wear-levelling can also be implemented in software by special-purpose file systems such as JFFS2 and YAFFS on flash media or UDF on optical media. All three are log-structured filesystems in that they treat their media as circular logs and write to them in sequential passes."

Wear-levelling isn't a problem for a USB disk or SD card because the serial interface to these is slow and you need a micro-controller anyway to implement the serial interface protocols.

Many of the SSDs designed into ULCPCs however have no microcontroller, they are "direct on the motherboard bus" (for speed mainly, but also for low cost) ... and so the log-structured wear-levelling filesystem must be implemented by the OS.

Windows isn't suited.

I would argue that Windows isn't suited for much of anything at its current price point. The simple fact of the matter is that Operating Systems, and even office productivity software, are commodities. They simply don't hold a value that is equal to what MS wants to charge for them. That's been Microsoft's entire problem with Vista. I'd actually pay $30 for Vista Ultimate, but certainly not $300 when Ubuntu can do just about everything Vista can for free (even gaming is getting better, thanks to wine).

At what price point? Retail? WTF pays retail for software? Answer: Nobody.

I did not ask about costs.

I did not ask about XP.

I did not ask about costs.

I did not ask about XP.

Well, no. This was your comment:


I have never used WinCE either, so I am unable to contribute anything to this topic on that part of your post, sorry. I don't know its performance.

Having said that ... I did identify for you that WinCE is not ABI compatible with your run-of-the-mill x86 Win32 applications, and that fact rules it out as far as being a contender for "the low cost computers coming out" goes really ... performance notwithstanding.

So note that I can, and did, bring up relevant information and a fair discussion about the first sentence of your post.

Now you have to educate me further. Why does the ABI for Windows programs matter? While this means the run-of-mill Windows programs don't work with WinCE it was my understanding that all the basic computer apps (Wordprocessing, Spreadsheets, Paint programs) have all already been written for WinCE. Am I wrong?

After-all those same Win32 programs are not going to work in Linux either, and I have doubts about Wine on such underpowered machines (I could be wrong here).

I was interested in what the user's experience would be if they picked one up and started using the programs included.

If it boots Linux, how well does it run the Linux environment/programs.

If it boots Haiku, how well does it run the Haiku environment/programs.

If it boots WinCE, how well does it run the WinCE environment/programs.

I can learn to use a new program in a new OS if it is fast and snappy to operate. I would refuse to use an old program that I have known for years if it is slow and buggy on a new computer design.

Edited 2008-04-18 22:12 UTC

"Embedded" (and binary incompatible) proprietary OSes aren't going to do well in this market. Either your existing proprietary applications will work ... in which case you would run full XP, or they won't ... in which case you would probably run Linux.

http://practical-tech.com/operating-system/linux/windows-is-on-its-...
"the heart of the matter is Windows is too fat and bloated for Microsoft to change it into the kind of operating system users really want. Well, I can't disagree with that. I've been saying for a while now that Microsoft has already given up on Vista. Heck, I was even nice enough to suggest a way they could actually get a functional Windows 7 out by the end of 2009.

Still, Windows has been a candidate for Weight-Watchers for some time now. I do think that Vista being such a flop is going to give both Macs and Linux-based PCs a real shot at going prime-time. But, what I meant by that is that by 2011, we'd see Macs up to 20% of the market and Linux desktops cracking 10%.

Sound insane to you? I invite you to check Amazon's Bestsellers: The most popular items in Computers and PC Hardware list."

OK ... let's do that.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/pc/ref=pd_dp_ts_pc_1

Items 2, 8, 9, 11, 14, 19 & 24 are all various models of ASUS EEEPC - Linux based.

Items 3, 4, 6, 7, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17 are related to the MacBook, and items 22 and 25 are a Mac mini and an iMac desktop respectively.

Items 10 and 18 are two models of Nokia's Linux-based Internet tablet.

Items 1 & 5 are LCD panels - platform neutral, will work with Mac, Linux or a PC.

Items 20 and 23 are Vista laptops.

There are 9 out of the top 25 items in the current top seller hardware list at Amazon that are in the Low-cost-PC/embedded/UMPC arena ... and every one of them runs Linux.

Shape of things to come, perhaps?

No wonder Microsoft are thinking of trying to do something about this, IMO.

Edited 2008-04-17 10:53 UTC

This has nothing to do with ULCPCs. Windows Embedded is for devices; smartphones, PDAs, Kiosks, Thin clients, etc..

Look at Windows XP embedded:

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/embedded/products/whichproduct/def...

Processor: x86
OS: Full Win 32 Application compatibility
Footprint: Reduced Footprint
12,000 Individual Components; 40 MB at smallest

Low cost PC seems to be the target.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Mobile_Internet_Device

Yep, MIDs are a target.

"Enabling advanced consumer devices to run thousands of existing Windows applications and drivers.

...

to run thousands of existing Windows applications and drivers, ranging from Thin Clients to Multi Function Printers, including: ... Multimedia Internet Devices (MIDs)."

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/embedded/products/wexpe/default.ms...

... but $90 runtime license fee per unit shipped kills it stone dead.

There goes the "LC" part of "ULCPC", right there.

No Windows XP Embedded for YOU on your ULCPC.

Edited 2008-04-17 13:16 UTC

Microsoft has, if anything, proven that they can be rather flexible on OEM pricing of their Software. I don't think they would have much problem knocking a zero off the license fee for ULCPC manufacturers if they believed doing so would stop Linux posing a threat to their market share.

Unless Industrial Controls is code word for Ultra low cost personal computers, then XP Embedded is NOT for ULCPCs. Really, sometimes your obsession of everything Microsoft/Windows does get the best of you.

Naturally, you (intentionally) omitted this important detail which completely undermines your argument:

"* Runtime pricing is based on purchase volume of one unit. Volume discounts are available. Local taxes, tariffs, and other costs may apply."

Duhhhhhhhh.....

Wow, thanks for the reply. Did you notice that you are the only person to try and answer my question?

I never asked about costs, I am a BeOS/Haiku fan, so I have no plans to spend a cent on Microsoft software.

I never asked about how XP runs, I have been a computer tech for decades and have seen my fair share of XP machines and their problems.

I asked how WinCE performs on low power machines - and I got nothing but Linux/OSS fan boys.

That's not really a fair statement. You got lemur2, which is a different thing than getting "nothing but Linux/OSS fan boys". I hope this doesn't seem too rude, but such generalizations are harmful and somewhat aggravating to those of us who are strong supporters of Linux and OSS but do not go out of our way to be anti-MS, even if we do make some critical comments. I do not have much experience with WinCE, and so did not comment in this thread until now. But rest assured that some of us are interested in the answer to your question.

Edited 2008-04-18 02:52 UTC

I disagree, how were lemur2 replies answering my question?

I went back and re-read all the messages he posted. While he gave a good write-up on what is wrong with Windows on low cost computers compared to other OSs and what improvement could be done to improve Windows for lower powered machines I can not find a single line of text which answered my question which was:

"Since I have never used WinCE how does it perform on lower powered machines?"

The above question was *NEVER* answered by him. Good info/write-up yes, answer to my question, "NO".

And I would like to see more replies from those who have used it. The lack surprises me, I thought at one time a large percentage of the handheld market used it.

I do beg your pardon ... you are correct I didn't talk about WinCE.

My information was actually on this page:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/embedded/products/whichproduct/def...

... which I did not discuss at all, only linked to.

That page links further to here:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/embedded/products/windowsce/defaul...

... which is about WinCE specifically.

It says:
Run Win23 Apps: Customized Win 32 Applications

That means it doesn't run your existing applications ... it runs only special applications made especially for it.

There is not one word on the WinCE page about "existing applications and drivers". Even though WinCE has "Windows" in its name, it doesn't actually run any Windows software.

That means you won't be able to run your existing Windows software if you buy a new low-cost PC running WinCE.

Therefore, in relation to your opening comment, to whit ... "Reading XP and CE embedded suggests Microsoft is taking another look at the low cost computers coming out" ... my observation was that with Win XP embedded does indeed suggest that "Microsoft is taking another look at the low cost computers coming out" ... but that WinCE is not relevant to them at all.

I repeat ... I don't know about performance of WinCE. It has a very small footprint, that is certain.

But my point is that WinCE's performance is moot in relation to "the new low cost computers coming out" ... because it just isn't suited to that role at all.

Here is a feel for what software WinCE does run:
http://www.pda-archives.com/wince/1.htm

I just can't see people going for that over a full-featured set of zero-cost Linux applications ... sorry ... even if WinCE can runs these applets like the blazes.

Sorry that I did not expound on this. I thought that you were interested in a Windows embedded version that would work on "the new low cost computers coming out" ... and how that would perform.

You did mention Win XP embedded as well as WinCE in your post, after all.

Edited 2008-04-18 12:40 UTC

time to drop the windows / microsoft name altogether, restart as something different.

[Sarcasm mode]
Windows Vista for Embedded Systems - New!
Now with Windows NT 3.1 UI, FAT16 and... DRM!
[/Sarcasm mode]

Had to flush it out of my system

- Gilboa

Edited 2008-04-18 04:41 UTC