Microsoft and India’s HCL Infosystems said they would work together to develop a Windows-based laptop PC that will be the cheapest available in any market worldwide.

The system, called the MiLeap H Series, will run Windows XP Home and will sell for 17,000 Indian rupees, or about $425 (U.S.). The MiLeap H features a 30-GB hard drive and is “broadband ready,” the companies said in a statement Friday.

Microsoft chief operating officer Kevin Turner, at a launch event in Mumbai, said the offering is meant to “empower Indian consumers and businesses with the latest and best that technology has to offer.”

Microsoft, along with a number of other vendors, is eyeing the low-cost PC market as a major growth opportunity — particularly in emerging markets where average incomes pale compared with the West. The company recently announced that it would extend the life of its Windows XP operating system, but only for deployment on low-cost systems.

Low-cost PCs that run on Linux, from Asus, Everex, and other vendors, also are becoming increasingly popular as some computer users conclude that mainstream systems running the Windows or Macintosh operating systems are overpowered for their needs.

Also on Friday, Microsoft and HCL said they would jointly establish a new Center of Excellence in India, staffed with 500 programmers trained to develop Microsoft-based solutions for various industries in the country.

India is becoming increasingly important to Microsoft — and not just as a source of low-cost programming talent. Domestic spending in India for IT services will grow by about 43% in 2008, according to Indian IT trade group Nasscom.

Microsoft moves on F# functional language

Microsoft plans to integrate F#, a functional programming language developed by the Microsoft Research group, into its Visual Studio application development platform, said S. “Soma” Somasegar, corporate vice president of the Microsoft Developer Division

The company, however, has not laid out a formal release schedule, although Somasegar pledged to both integrate F# into Visual Studio and continue evolving it.

Pronounced “F sharp,” F# is based on the concepts of functional programming, Somasegar said. Functional languages treat computation as the evaluation of mathematical functions. The mathematical slant of functional programming is appealing to professionals in domains described with mathematical notation, including financial, scientific, and technical computing, said Somasegar.

F# combines type safety, performance, and scripting with the advantages of running on a on a modern runtime, Microsoft Research said. It supports interactive scripting like Python and the strong type inference and safety of ML. F# can access.Net libraries and database tools.

Bloggers corresponding about F# on the hubFS blog had positive responses to Microsoft’s plans.

“I can’t overstate how excited I am by this news,” one blogger said.

“I discovered F# a few months ago and since then have made it my primary programming language (moving from Python and Java). I have found it to be a great language for developing simpler scripts or programming ‘toy’ implementations of algorithms. I’ve also found it to be a great language for building up real applications because of the ability to leverage everything already existing for .Net,” the blogger said.

Somasegar cited other functional programming efforts at Microsoft.

“Language features, such as lambda expressions in C# and generics in .Net 2.0, have roots in functional languages, and LINQ (Language Integrated Query) is directly based on functional programming techniques,” Somasegar said. LINQ extends C# and Visual Basic and simplifies how database and XML queries are written in these languages.

F# is designed to be a “first-class citizen” on .Net and will run on the on Microsoft CLR (Common Language Runtime), Somasegar said. Object-oriented programming is embraced and F# integrates with the .Net Framework. F# makes boosts .Net in the academic world, Somasegar said.

“We believe that through F# and languages like IronPython and IronRuby we can help offer students and educators choices beyond the current mainstream and enable the use of these languages across the curriculum. This helps educators have the option to use Visual Studio as a consistent tool set from course to course,” he said.

Also in the application development realm Monday, the Microsoft Developer Division unveiled its Tester Center Web site. The site enables testers to connect with a community, contribute content and share testing practices and experiences.

Microsoft Gives Windows XP A Limited Reprieve

In a decision that highlights Windows Vista’s hefty system requirements, Microsoft said Thursday that it would allow computer makers to continue to sell the older Windows XP operating system on “ultra low-cost PCs” for an extended period.

Microsoft said it would allow system vendors to preload the Home edition of Windows XP on ULCPCs through June 2010, or one year after the next version of Windows becomes generally available.

Microsoft defines ULCPCs as, among other things, systems that use discount-line processors and lack a separate graphics card. An example of such as system is the Asus Eee PC, which runs Windows XP or Linux and sells for less than $400.

Such low-spec machines would be incapable of running Vista.

To experience all of Vista’s features, PC users need a computer with at least a 1-GHz processor, 1 GB of memory, and a 40-GB hard drive. By contrast, Windows XP Professional requires only a 300-MHz processor, 128 MB of RAM, and a 1.5-Gbyte disk.

Without continued access to XP, vendors like Asus would be forced to offer only Linux on their systems. It’s a situation Microsoft is trying to avoid, particularly as sales of ULCPCs rise in emerging markets like India and China.

Microsoft is terminating Windows XP’s shelf life for most PC makers on June 30, though independent system builders will have access to the OS through January 2009. Microsoft has said it expects XP sales to account for as little as 15% of its operating system revenues in its current fiscal year, which runs through June.

Microsoft introduced Windows XP in late 2001. The company ordinarily makes operating systems available only for four years after launch date. But delays in producing Windows Vista, which debuted in January of 2007, forced Microsoft to continue selling XP longer than planned.

Microsoft had originally planned to shelve Windows XP on January 30th.

The New Browser War is Good for Microsoft

uddenly, Mozilla seems mightily concerned about Apple’s Safari. Internet Explorer can only benefit from the impending conflict.

Mozilla took a surprisingly proactive approach with Firefox last week, and neither move really had to do with Microsoft.

In an interview with Reuters, Mike Schroepfer, Mozilla’s vice president of engineering, claimed that “In many ways it [Firefox 3] is much more stable than anything else out there.” The story was published two days after Apple released Safari 3.1. Firefox 3 is currently at Beta 4, with a fifth still expected.

On Friday, Mozilla’s CEO, John Lilly, roasted Apple for using its updater to distribute Safari 3.1 to Windows users. Yesterday, Lilly qualified his Apple attack, asserting: “It isn’t about competition.”

Really?

Mozilla’s actions strongly suggest otherwise. Firefox 3′s release is still months away but Safari 3.1 is here, now, and it’s a surprisingly standards compliant browser. That’s a departure for Apple’s browser, which had lagged behind Firefox and Internet Explorer. Apple has bragging rights and a finished, new browser; meanwhile, Microsoft and Mozilla are still testing their next-generation browsers. Then there is the matter of the distribution tactic—Apple Software Update offering up Safari 3.1 to Windows users.

As I explained last week, one of Apple’s incentives for pushing Safari 3.1–and hard–is that little Google search box in the upper right-hand corner. Mozilla has one of those too. Safari gains could mean less Google revenue for Mozilla.

So Mozilla came out barking at the dog moving in on its territory, with statements asserting Firefox’s relevance, and accusing Apple of violating users’ trust. I disagree with Lilly. It’s all about competition. Safari gains are more likely to come at Firefox’s expense than at Internet Explorer’s.

My LinuxWatch colleague Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols reviewed Firefox 3 Beta 4 today. He disputes Mozilla’s prime-time claims: “Is Firefox 3 ready for production use? Well, my verdict is it’s not quite there yet.”

On Wednesday, my eWEEK colleague Jim Rapoza praised Apple’s browser. For users “who just want a simple and fast Web browser, Safari 3.1 might just be the best choice.”

What a lucky break for Microsoft. Firefox has nipped at IE’s tail for nearly four years. The biggest IE pain has been Firefox brand gains. Even a 20 percent market share loss to Firefox really wouldn’t hurt Internet Explorer. (I doubt the number is that high, as some people have asserted.) The market share numbers are disputable, as most analysts don’t accurately track multiple browser usage. Microsoft’s problem isn’t so much that more people use Firefox but that they now use Internet Explorer and something else.

Microsoft benefits if that something else splits among multiple browsers. More importantly, Firefox could become less of a problem if Mozilla has to focus attention behind, as well as in front.

Dean Hachamovitch, IE general manager, should send Apple CEO Steve Jobs one of those iPhone cakes. “Thanks, Steve! You’re the best!” Safari distractions at Mozilla can only benefit browser behemoth Internet Explorer.

The timing is wonderful for Microsoft. IE 8′s newfound standards embrace isn’t just about Microsoft doing the right thing, as Hachmamovitch’s March 3 blog post insinuated. Standards support is just as much a competitive tactic; a way of closing the feature gap on Firefox. While Microsoft tries to make IE 8 into the Firefox-smasher that IE 7 wasn’t, Mozilla must engage in a potentially ugly two-front war.

How ugly could it get? The answer will depend much on how many people try Safari and then adopt it. This afternoon, I reviewed browser stats from several of the firms tracking them, including TheCounter.com and OneStat.com. Safari usage/share ranged from about 2.2 percent to 3 percent, and Firefox’s was between 13 percent and 16 percent. Net Applications’s statistics puts the numbers higher, with more than 17 percent for Firefox and nearly 6 percent for Safari. Whatever the measure, Safari is more likely to take away share from Firefox than Internet Explorer.

Safari has leverage, with Apple Software Update, the iPhone and the iPod Touch, for starters—and that’s on Windows. Safari also conceptually benefits from Mac market share gains. I’m not predicting huge share gains for Safari. It’s not the amount gained, but from where, that matters and the possible distraction from Mozilla. Share loss equals revenue loss, because of Mozilla’s huge dependence on revenue derived from Google search.

The Google search relationship, which expires in November, is important to Mozilla. “Approximately 85 percent of Mozilla’s revenue for 2006 was derived from this contract,” according to The Mozilla Foundation’s 2006 financial statement. No statement has been released for 2007 (that I know of).

So, Mozilla has real financial concerns regarding increased Safari competition. Meanwhile, Microsoft executives can sit back, have a good laugh and continue their prodding IE 8 development.

Microhoo would hurt the Net

Not to put too fine a point on it, but Google doesn’t want Microsoft to acquire Yahoo.

Speaking to reporters during a visit to Beijing, Google CEO Eric Schmidt said that his company “would be concerned by any kind of acquisition of Yahoo by Microsoft,” according to a Reuters story published Monday.

Without citing specifics, Schmidt said his observation is based the “things that (Microsoft) has done that have been so difficult for everyone.”

He added: “We would hope that anything they did would be consistent with the openness of the Internet, but I doubt it would be.”

We can guess he was referring to, among other things, Microsoft’s long history of antitrust battles both at home and with the European Union. The latter has continued to fine the software maker. Microsoft’s intransigence on licensing prompted another EU fine, for $1.35 billion, just last month.

The irony here is that the EU’s approval last week of Google’s $3.1 billion purchase of ad services specialist DoubleClick has probably intensified pressure on Yahoo to consider Microsoft’s offer. Microsoft’s bid was initially valued at $31 a share, although informal talks said to be taking place between the two companies could reshape the terms of the proposed deal.