MS's "Choice:" No Wallpaper Changing in Windows 7 Starter

[Vincent Ferrari]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.downloadsquad.com/2009/03/29/microsoft-drops-personalization-from-windows-7-starter-locks-wa/' target='_blank'>http://www.downloadsquad.com/2009/0...arter-locks-wa/</a><br /><br /></div><p><em>"Chances are good that almost everyone download and installing the freshly-leaked Windows 7 build 7068 ISO is installing Ultimate Edition - after all, it's the one our product keys work with and it'll run for over year with a valid key. Paul Thurrott, however, has taken the pains of installing each version- including Starter - to get a feel for what's coming. We already knew that Starter would be extremely feature-limited. How full an experience would you expect from an OS that can only run three programs at once? Regardless, one feature has been crippled that has a lot of people confused. In Windows 7 Starter Edition, the personalization option on the context menu isn't available. Worse yet, users can't even change their wallpaper."</em></p><p><img src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/600/at/auto/1238417683.usr18053.jpg" style="border: 1px solid #d2d2bb;" /></p><p>Okay, it's not like anyone being reasonable was expecting a full-blown experience from something called "Starter Edition."&nbsp; Seriously.&nbsp; The problem is that changing wallpapers is one of the most basic things people do to customize their computer.&nbsp; In fact, for most people (like myself) that's all the customization that ever happens.&nbsp; I run stock themes on all of my computers and change wallpapers every three months or so; I'm not a huge tweaker that way.&nbsp; But to take even that away from consumers sounds, to me, just flat out stupid.&nbsp; I would say "imagine if Apple had done this," but I reckon that really is already floating through a lot of your minds already.</p><p>I have a feeling this will change before the release just based on the negative buzz it's attracting from the folks I've seen writing about it.</p><p>The linked article has a workaround for you, if you're toying with Starter Edition, because, as everyone knows, in a life without walls, you don't really need wallpaper, right?</p>

[ptyork]

Seems silly, but I'm going to guess this was at the request of the folks selling the systems and not an evil MS plot to get upgraders. This way, the wallpaper can be fixed to a logo as a quasi-advertisement--or maybe even changed dynamically by the provider to show an ad in the background. Sucks, but I'm guessing that AT&T and Verizon are going to be giving away netbooks with Win 7 and this is another form of junkware. Yes, another good thing about a Mac, though I doubt you'll be seeing a Mac netbook for $0 on contract any time soon.

[Vincent Ferrari]

Seems silly, but I'm going to guess this was at the request of the folks selling the systems and not an evil MS plot to get upgraders. This way, the wallpaper can be fixed to a logo as a quasi-advertisement--or maybe even changed dynamically by the provider to show an ad in the background. Sucks, but I'm guessing that AT&T and Verizon are going to be giving away netbooks with Win 7 and this is another form of junkware. Yes, another good thing about a Mac, though I doubt you'll be seeing a Mac netbook for $0 on contract any time soon.

Whatever the reason, it's the kind of anti-choice thing Microsoft seems so dead-set against in its new campaign. Now you can choose whatever you want, just not your background. :rolleyes:

No one's gonna buy Windows 7 Starter anyway; it's just the principle of it that annoys me. As if letting all these crapware companies pay their way onto my desktop wasn't enough income already, now they have to buy the wallpaper, too?

[Jason Dunn]

Seems silly, but I'm going to guess this was at the request of the folks selling the systems and not an evil MS plot to get upgraders...

I believe it's basically part of Microsoft's effort to get Windows out to the next billion people on the planet - Starter Edition is a "developing nations" OS that sells for uber-cheap. HP, Dell, etc. are pushing into new markets and they need an ultra-affordable OS license. Microsoft doesn't want them using Linux, so they're trying this approach. Apple doesn't have this challenge because they don't care about those markets - it's easy to have one version of your operating system when you're going after a certain type of customer.

What WILL disappoint me is if we see Starter Edition coming on netbooks later this year - if I can't change my wallpaper, yeah, that will piss me off. I doubt that will happen though - netbooks will probably come with Windows 7 Basic. I'll pay a bit more to get 7 Home Premium on there though...

[Sven Johannsen]

I would say "imagine if Apple had done this," Done what? Build a very basic stripped down version of the OS. I think folks would have been floored if Apple built more than one version at all.

Wouldn't surprise me in the least if one of the first utilities available for 'Starter' is a wall paper changer. Can't imagine MS went through the effort to not have the stock background a normal file format, and prevent access to it. I can imagine that the target audience for this edition might be one that wouldn't care less what the background is, as long as it isn't obnoxious.

[Ed Hansberry]

I would say "imagine if Apple had done this," but I reckon that really is already floating through a lot of your minds already

I agree. It would be as dumb as if Apple has built a world-class smartphone that didn't support MMS or copy/paste.

Wait...what??

[Vincent Ferrari]

I agree. It would be as dumb as if Apple has built a world-class smartphone that didn't support MMS or copy/paste.

Wait...what??

Yeah... That same smartphone that no one is happy with and everyone is returning, right?

Wait...what??

[Vincent Ferrari]

Done what? Build a very basic stripped down version of the OS. I think folks would have been floored if Apple built more than one version at all.

No no no... Now come on Sven...

What I clearly meant was controlling the UI. It would be held up as a shining example of Apple's "my way or the highway" approach to computing, and a rising example of the kind of arrogance that Steve Jobs brings to a company. Instead, since it's MS, it's just a feature omission.

Again, I don't think people in the US are going to even see a copy of Starter, but these are the kinds of things that Windows folks criticize Apple for with regularity.

[doogald]

Ok, that said, any Windows users who is accustomed to changing UI controls to a pretty discrete degree (colors of menu bars, colors of desktop background, color of desktop text, etc.) is likely to be frustrated by Apple's lack of control of similar features.

Sure, you can change the background on OX S, but I cannot change UI elements like the title bar active and inactive windows; the only choices for something called "appearance" are "blue" and "graphite" and, from what I can tell, don't do much but change whether the minimize/close/maximize button controls are in color or gray.

Complaining about this lack of customization in Windows Starter edition is like calling the pot calling another pot a pot.

[Vincent Ferrari]

Complaining about this lack of customization in Windows Starter edition is like calling the pot calling another pot a pot.

***long quote trimmed by mod JD***

That's exactly my point, and thank you for making it for me :-)

Apple's lack of customization is quite frustrating if you're a tweaker type guy. Me? I like the default UI of pretty much every OS (except for Gnome on Ubuntu) so I don't care either way. Windows people have certainly come to expect more (even though themes are locked down since XP unless you get a program to do otherwise like Windowblinds) and if you can't even change your background, that might cause a rebellion.

Of course, that's assuming Starter makes its way into the US market, but like Jason, I sense it popping up on Netbooks and such, which would be terrible.

[Fritzly]

I would wait to see what the "Official" RC build or the RTM one , once released by MS, will allow to do.
This debate is based on how a leaked build behaviour, not a very reliable scenario.
We do not know to whom it was addressed so it could be that certain functionalities are locked in order to test something.
Said that I would not too surprised if MS will lock down such basic functionalities in the Starter Edition; terrible things happen when companies are run by bean counters alone.

[Jason Dunn]

Of course, that's assuming Starter makes its way into the US market, but like Jason, I sense it popping up on Netbooks and such, which would be terrible.

Well, not quite. :) I said that I think netbooks will be getting Basic edition - which is one notch up from Starter edition and has no such limitations around customization. Starter edition, the version we're talking about, has never been sold in North American AFAIK - and I doubt it ever will be. But I guess we'll see what happens in the next six months...

[David Tucker]

The people who care about it would never buy this OS. The ones who don't care (and probably don't even know you can), should they wind up using it (which seems pretty unlikely anyway), wouldn't even know they were missing out on a feature.

[jdmichal]

I agree. It would be as dumb as if Apple has built a world-class smartphone that didn't support MMS or copy/paste.

Wait...what??

First, QFT. How well the iPhone has sold is not relevant to the discussion, especially since there's zero market data on a beta product to compare against. In fact, now since I'm thinking about it, you actually reinforce the point... You can remove stuff considered as "basic functionality" from a system and still sell it!

Second, I would give hackers approximately 4 weeks to figure out how to change the background. Considering that up to now that the background settings have been completely defined in registry settings, I'd be surprized if it takes more than a couple days. The 4 weeks is more in case they actually pulled some voodoo and hard-coded it into the system. In which case that's how long it will take them to find the assembly with the wallpaper resources and hack up a new version of it.

[runbuh]

Second, I would give hackers approximately 4 weeks to figure out how to change the background. Considering that up to now that the background settings have been completely defined in registry settings, I'd be surprized if it takes more than a couple days. The 4 weeks is more in case they actually pulled some voodoo and hard-coded it into the system. In which case that's how long it will take them to find the assembly with the wallpaper resources and hack up a new version of it.

It was done by the time this article was posted. "The linked article has a workaround for you, if you're toying with Starter Edition, because, as everyone knows, in a life without walls, you don't really need wallpaper, right?"

[Vincent Ferrari]

It was done by the time this article was posted. "The linked article has a workaround for you, if you're toying with Starter Edition, because, as everyone knows, in a life without walls, you don't really need wallpaper, right?"

Thanks for at least reading the article before commenting on it :-)

[jdmichal]

Thanks for at least reading the article before commenting on it :-)

Well, I don't normally get proven correct so quickly! As I'm commenting on your article and not the original, I don't see any problem. I'd actually be more disappointed with such a glaring omission in your article.

[Vincent Ferrari]

Well, I don't normally get proven correct so quickly! As I'm commenting on your article and not the original, I don't see any problem. I'd actually be more disappointed with such a glaring omission in your article.

You don't see any problem with you commenting on something you obviously didn't take the time to read? I specifically said in the article you said you were commenting on that there was a workaround in the linked article. Apparently, you missed that in your zeal to correct me for no reason.

I didn't omit anything, you just didn't read the article. Admit you're wrong and move on.

[jdmichal]

OK, I was wrong about you not including it. My original statement was not wrong though. There's also a comment (http://www.withinwindows.com/2009/03/28/surprise-you-cant-change-your-wallpaper-in-windows-7-starter-edition/#comment-2962) in the workaround post indicating it might not work.

Also, this comment (http://www.withinwindows.com/2009/03/28/surprise-you-cant-change-your-wallpaper-in-windows-7-starter-edition/#comment-2951) is full of win, basically stating Jason's point in another way.

And the zeal for correction is mutual, I can assure you...

[doogald]

Now, apparently, Microsoft is talking about a version of Windows Starter being for Netbooks and being restricted to running 3 apps at a time?

http://www.tgdaily.com/html_tmp/content-view-42069-136.html

[Jason Dunn]

Now, apparently, Microsoft is talking about a version of Windows Starter being for Netbooks and being restricted to running 3 apps at a time?

I think it's important to remember that ultimately Microsoft could have 20 different versions of Windows 7 - it comes down to the OEMs and what they decide to bundle. If some of them want to go ultra low-end on cost and ship with a limited version of Windows 7, that's up to them. I'm going to hope/assume that some netbook OEMs are going to grasp that people don't want a crippled user experience and will put Windows 7 Home Premium on there.

[Ed Hansberry]

yeah, for the basic netbook, that might be fine. you can upgrade to a full version of Win7 though, which i expect most will do. Still, this will allow OEMs to advertise Windows based netbooks for a low price, hoping to pick up $75 or so in an upgrade price.