I originally wrote this post about six months ago and never published it. Given the current discussion about different editions of Windows Vista, and especially the contention from Robert McLaws that Microsoft still hasn’t decided on the product mix for Windows Vista, I thought it made sense to update it.
The Internet has a big problem: People continue to use old, insecure versions of Windows. I can’t find any up-to-date statistics, but my WAG is that between 10 and 20% of people on the Internet today are running operating systems from the Windows 9X family. These old computers are less reliable and far less secure than they would be if they were running Windows XP, and they aren’t able to install many modern programs.
Why don’t these people upgrade? Because upgrading is expensive. The upgrade package is $90-100 if you’re a good shopper. A new PC is going to run between $400 and $500. That’s a lot of money for people who are on a fixed income or who are struggling to make ends meet.
Microsoft already has a solution: Windows XP Starter Edition. It was designed for use in emerging markets where the average annual income can’t justify the cost of a full Windows XP license. First released in Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia, it soon spread to Russia, India, and Brazil, and it’s now available in 22 countries and in six languages. (There are some interesting details in this article from Microsoft Watch and a very Microsoft-friendly profile, with screen shots, at Paul Thurrott’s site.)
Well, we have plenty of people in this country who can’t afford the cost of a new PC or an expensive upgrade. But they might pay $30, especially if they got some bonuses kicked in with the deal, like a six-month subscription to Microsoft’s OneCare security software, or a limited version of MSN.
Would Starter Edition cannibalize sales of existing Windows versions? I don’t think so. The operating system has some serious limitations that would rule out its use by any computer enthusiast:
- Only three programs run at a time. (Hey… You can’t reliably run more than a handful of programs on Windows 9X anyway.)
- The display runs only at 800 X 600 resolution. Most people who are stuck with old hardware and an old version of Windows are probably running at this resolution anyway.
- No home networking or multiple user accounts.
- Settings are preconfigured for novices.
But think of the serious advantages. Upgraders would have all the security fixes of Service Pack 2. They’d be able to run IE7 when it’s available later this year. They could run Windows AntiSpyware. They’d have an easier time with digital cameras and portable music players.
So why not make Windows XP Starter Edition (and the Windows Vista equivalent, when its time comes) available here? Sell it for $29.99. Make it available only as an upgrade to Windows 98 or Windows Me. Maybe the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation could set up a program with clinics in low-income neighborhoods that could offer upgrade services or low-cost, Starter Edition-powered computers for families with school-age kids and seniors.
I suggested this back in January, but the more I think about the idea, the more I like it. Windows 98 and Windows Me are long overdue for retirement, and a move like this would help make the Internet a better, safer place.
Ed Bott 
You said it yourself: The Internet has a problem.
Microsoft Internet
Selling Starter Edition makes sense in the 3rd world because Microsoft is gaining revenue it would otherwise never see. Better to get a few bucks, than get nothing when users turn to piracy or Linux.
In the “richer” markets, the “I can’t afford XP” group is going to be much smaller… I really doubt that those sales could come close to making up for licenses lost on new PCs when someone can take their 2000 model PC and put a 2006 OS on it.
Don’t forget the support costs, too. When somebody buys a new $500 Dell, Microsoft doesn’t have to do anything besides cash the check. Starter Edition upgrade customers are going to skew towards the miserly, the apathetic, and the poor, with old and flaky hardware. Sounds like a lovely target market, huh?
As a Microsoft shareholder, I would have a hissy-fit if they tried this… But, I’m pretty confidant they won’t. Making the internet a “better, safer place” is an admirable goal… But not with my money, thank you so much.
Ooops… the angle brackets were stripped out of the response.
The second line should read “Microsoft (does not equal) Internet”
Utter rubbish. Completely made up nonsense.
Win98se, running behind a hardware firewall, with some common sense (don’t open untrusted attachments, etc.), works fine.
Xp needed SP2 because it has become the most widely and frequently attacked OS. Before that, it was Win2k, and before that, WinNt. Win9x was no fun to hack, after all, what would you ever get from it? Someones’ credit card details, or something that you could sell to a competitor? Very unlikely. Also, the implementation of SP2 was rubbish, it caused very serious system problems for many Xp system users who already had anti-spyware and anti-virus running. This never happened with any patch for 9x, for which, by the way, all the same vulnerabilities were covered (up to June 2005).
If you haven’t been able to make 98Se work for you, perhaps you should get a different job, one where you don’t touch computers.
No home networking and only three apps at a time ! Don’t make me laugh (at you).
Win98Se has absolutely no problems running 10 apps at once, memory is the only constraint in this respect, which you should know.
People like you (writing out of their back sides, so that people who don’t even know as much as you believe them) make me sick. I bet you’re a christian too.
–jez
Congratulations. That’s probably the single most idiotic comment ever posted to this site. And I’m including every piece of comment spam I’ve ever received.
Well Ed he dose have some what a good point there, But I never touch Windows Vista with WPA (Windows Product Activation), even more DRM (Digital Rights Management) and Phone Home in it.
As a person on a fixed income in the United States, I’d like to see a middle ground.
Obviously, XP Starter would be a non-starter here. For one thing, I run more in my system tray under XP Home (which was given to me by a friend who had an extra copy) than XPS allows to run at all.
Perhaps the Gates Foundation could make copies of XP Home and/or Vista (when it hits shelves) available to low-income people at reduced or no cost, conditional upon them meeting certain guidelines (similar to most charities). As it stands now, the only way I could ever upgrade to Vista is to use a pirated version.
I admit, the “no other choice” market is small, but it is significant.