Comments on: Microsoft eases up on ULCPC criteria http://www.umpcportal.com/2008/07/microsoft-eases-up-on-ulcpc-criteria Thu, 04 Dec 2008 05:36:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Dandy411 http://www.umpcportal.com/2008/07/microsoft-eases-up-on-ulcpc-criteria#comment-4723 Dandy411 Sun, 06 Jul 2008 16:09:42 +0000 http://www.umpcportal.com/?p=2789#comment-4723 Ah yet another reason Moblin will take over ... http://www.moblin.org/ Ah yet another reason Moblin will take over …
http://www.moblin.org/

]]> By: peejay http://www.umpcportal.com/2008/07/microsoft-eases-up-on-ulcpc-criteria#comment-4666 peejay Sat, 05 Jul 2008 09:22:35 +0000 http://www.umpcportal.com/?p=2789#comment-4666 I think the restriction on processor speed has a qualification for some specific chips. So I think the Atom (Diamondville) IS allowed in the definition of a ULCPC, meaning the Wind is fine. But I'm less sure that the Atom (Silverthorne) is an exception, which if true means that Microsoft is continuing to discriminate against UMPCs! I got this from here, which mentions the N270 (Diamondville): http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/27704 I'm not certain about this. Microsoft doesn't seem to be in the business of being clear. I think the restriction on processor speed has a qualification for some specific chips. So I think the Atom (Diamondville) IS allowed in the definition of a ULCPC, meaning the Wind is fine. But I’m less sure that the Atom (Silverthorne) is an exception, which if true means that Microsoft is continuing to discriminate against UMPCs! I got this from here, which mentions the N270 (Diamondville):
http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/27704

I’m not certain about this. Microsoft doesn’t seem to be in the business of being clear.

]]> By: REMF http://www.umpcportal.com/2008/07/microsoft-eases-up-on-ulcpc-criteria#comment-4660 REMF Sat, 05 Jul 2008 07:42:12 +0000 http://www.umpcportal.com/?p=2789#comment-4660 Hold on there: "This is nice but there are still more restrictive limitations in place such as the CPU which MS says can only have one core and run at no higher than 1GHz," does this mean that the eeepc and Wind don't qualify as ULCPC and thus the XP discount, because they have CPU's that run at 1.6GHz? Hold on there:

“This is nice but there are still more restrictive limitations in place such as the CPU which MS says can only have one core and run at no higher than 1GHz,”

does this mean that the eeepc and Wind don’t qualify as ULCPC and thus the XP discount, because they have CPU’s that run at 1.6GHz?

]]> By: tal http://www.umpcportal.com/2008/07/microsoft-eases-up-on-ulcpc-criteria#comment-4657 tal Sat, 05 Jul 2008 06:15:41 +0000 http://www.umpcportal.com/?p=2789#comment-4657 Silly. But the market needs will win. If you can't put an XP on your netbook, umpc or mid, you will just find something else, as the market will evolve the alternative. Silly. But the market needs will win. If you can’t put an XP on your netbook, umpc or mid, you will just find something else, as the market will evolve the alternative.

]]>