or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Rumor: Google pressured Asus to cancel Android/Windows dual-boot devices
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rumor: Google pressured Asus to cancel Android/Windows dual-boot devices - Page 3

post #81 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

You're assuming Digitimes is spot on then.

DigiTimes is only accurate when you agree with it, inaccurate when you don't. 1wink.gif

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #82 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

DroidFTW and Gatorguy,

I gonna go out on a limb here and assume you have no issues buying Android tablets.  Would you buy this Intel based Android product w/ keyboard vs the other ARM based Android tablets offering which don't come with keyboard?  If you did, would your motivation be based on the fact it has Intel HW inside and/or includes a keyboard?  My assumption is it will be priced higher than ARM based tablets which don't come with keyboards.

It's not a product I would have any interest in.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #83 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroidFTW View Post
 

Now this is a tangent.  :)

don't let it bug ya. ok? just an observation. 

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #84 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

DroidFTW and Gatorguy,

I gonna go out on a limb here and assume you have no issues buying Android tablets.  Would you buy this Intel based Android product w/ keyboard vs the other ARM based Android tablets offering which don't come with keyboard?  If you did, would your motivation be based on the fact it has Intel HW inside and/or includes a keyboard?  My assumption is it will be priced higher than ARM based tablets which don't come with keyboards.

It's not a product I would have any interest in.

Gatorguy,

thank you for your honest response.

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #85 of 127

Apple does allow the use of Microsux Windoz on their machines with Bootcamp. Apple isn't designing a computer to be sold running Windoz. Windoz isn't included with the purchase of any Apple product. The user must purchase Windoz separately. There is a difference. What ASUS could do is offer a download of their version of Android to people who could then load it onto their machines as a dual boot. If they can make it work well then good for them.

 

Would ASUS be able to make Android work better than Windoz? If so then Microsux might lose even more customers in the future.

 

As someone who likes the Google Chrome OS I visit forums and look at new devices for sale using it. Most of the people getting it are from the Microsux camp. They are finding that for everyday computing they love it and are forsaking Windoz. I have no direct experience with Android. What I do know is that there are many people who prefer it to iOS. So it must be good for a large amount of consumers. If a dual booted computer runs Android very well it could also make people forsake Windoz. Microsux would be endangering their market share if they found that people remained logged in to Android more than Windoz. It would just be a matter of time before customers realized that they didn't really need Windoz at all, especially with the great cloud services available today.

post #86 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post
 

Apple does allow the use of Microsux Windoz on their machines with Bootcamp. Apple isn't designing a computer to be sold running Windoz. Windoz isn't included with the purchase of any Apple product. The user must purchase Windoz separately. There is a difference. What ASUS could do is offer a download of their version of Android to people who could then load it onto their machines as a dual boot. If they can make it work well then good for them.

 

Would ASUS be able to make Android work better than Windoz? If so then Microsux might lose even more customers in the future.

 

As someone who likes the Google Chrome OS I visit forums and look at new devices for sale using it. Most of the people getting it are from the Microsux camp. They are finding that for everyday computing they love it and are forsaking Windoz. I have no direct experience with Android. What I do know is that there are many people who prefer it to iOS. So it must be good for a large amount of consumers. If a dual booted computer runs Android very well it could also make people forsake Windoz. Microsux would be endangering their market share if they found that people remained logged in to Android more than Windoz. It would just be a matter of time before customers realized that they didn't really need Windoz at all, especially with the great cloud services available today.

Smallwheels,

 

Its apparent that you dislike Microsoft. I am no fan either. However, why buy an Intel tablet w/ added cost in the first place over ARM tablet, if it does not come bundled with Windows? What relevance does Intel have for people interested in running only either ChromeOS or Android? Being only Android tablet, why even provide a keyboard?  There are keyboards out there for iPad and Android already, they haven't exactly lit the world on fire. Its a niche market. Why force a keyboard and more expensive x86 cpu and chipset upon your buyers of Android tablet. What does it buy you? Just to stand out as an odd product looking for a purpose?


Edited by snova - 3/7/14 at 3:41pm
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #87 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


Wonder why that is. 1wink.gif

Well, at the time that Steve Jobs announced the inclusion of Boot Camp, which enabled the process, he stated that it eliminates one more barrier to people buying a Mac. Really simple - I admired his willingness to just talk plainly about this stuff.

Microsoft did not agree with the way Apple chose to enable Windows on the Mac - they wanted to port the Virtual PC product they bought from Connectix to the Intel Macs, so that they could sell that product, & a Windows licence, at a huge mark-up.

post #88 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post
 

don't let it bug ya. ok? just an observation. 

 

No worries.  There was no tangent in the first place so there isn't anything to get worked up about.  ;)

post #89 of 127

Well, there is not much evidence of their hand being forced.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


Yes but they don't boot Windows from the factory. Would Apple allow a reseller to sell Macs with Windows already installed? It was hackers that discovered the ability for a Mac to run Windows not Apple, but they took a negative and turned it into a positive for them.

Apple used the ability to run Windows on a Mac as a way to eliminate one barrier to people buying a Mac - so yes, a positive.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by genovelle View Post


Actually long before Android existed apple resale shops offered a daughter card that Apple supplied drivers for that ran windows. I remember being shown this expensive feature.

Yep, Apple had offered the ability for years, as add-ons, or pre-installed. Apple even sold MSDOS & Windows 3.1 with those machines.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


Really? With all the engineers Apple has, they couldn't figure out Windows could run on Intel based Macs?

Yes, they had it figured out quite a while before the public announcement of the Intel switch.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


Would it be the first time hackers got something to work that a company's developers said couldn't? This is from the BBC article.
To answer your question, could they? They probably could, but why would they?

There were no Apple employed engineers quoted in the article linked to. And no comment in the public record by any Apple employees about the matter. There were a couple of obscure articles in the Apple & Microsoft press at the time implying that Apple were going to dump OS X for Windows - reported as the alcohol primed ramblings of a group of Microsoft engineers, who were in part privy to the discussions between Microsoft & Apple at the time.

Why would they? Well Apple became a Microsoft developer around 2003 (I have the exact date somewhere), ostensibly to write iTunes & Safari for Windows, after Eddy Cue convinced Steve Jobs that the iPod needed to go cross platform (a decision which Steve was NOT happy about).

Apple engineers were extremely familiar with Windows development, & Apple as a company were & are, better than any other company as far as enabling platform switches (Apple II emulation for the Mac, the PowerPC transition with it's emulation environment, the Mac OS X transition with it's Classic & dual boot OS X/Mac OS 9 environments, the Intel transition with it's Rosetta environment). The simple answer is, to eliminate barriers to Mac adoption. The more complex explanation is that it immediately positioned Windows as the new Mac Classic environment - in other words, an operating system that would be there as a fall back or stop-gap, for those who needed it, but that would be deprecated (by the user) over time, to the point where it would no longer be needed or used at all by most people buying a Mac. It was a brilliant business decision.


Edited by aussienorm - 3/10/14 at 12:12pm
post #90 of 127

I don't think Google had anything to do with this.  Its just a bad product, period.  We have already seen that Windows 8 tablet is a fail. x86 Android tablet with keyboard is just as bad, IMHO.   I don't think Google needed to pressure ASUS to kill this. Google would gain nothing as it would be losing another Android capable Tablet on the market.  Windows 8 tablet w/ keyboard has already proven that it is fail all by itself. x86 in an Android tablet, just makes for weaker value proposition.  Force a keyboard onto the buyer, its even worse.

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #91 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post



Google works with partners.  It is a different model.  If one of those partners takes a step to shoot Google in the foot, I'd expect Google to tell them to stop.  That's not really being evil or newsworthy.  Cancelling business dealings with them wouldn't be out of order, certainly.  If they threatened to cover them in honey and throw them on a fire ant nest, that would be a 'break out the popcorn' headline and newsworthy.

So Google is only newsworthy if they threaten to cover their partners in honey and throw them on a fire ant nest.

Got it.
Post from mstone to Benjamin Frost - "Perhaps that explains your lack of mental capacity. If I was your brother, I probably would have repeatedly smashed the side of your head with a cricket bat."
Reply
Post from mstone to Benjamin Frost - "Perhaps that explains your lack of mental capacity. If I was your brother, I probably would have repeatedly smashed the side of your head with a cricket bat."
Reply
post #92 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post
 

 

If only they didn't keep blathering on about how open Android is.

 

See that's the difference, it's called hypocrisy and Google has it in spades.

 

As usual people leap to Google's defence.

What is meant by the term "open"? Do they mean "open" in the sense that users can set default apps? "Open" as in anyone can access and modify the Android source? Or "open" in the sense that people can fork the source code and still call their product Android? Just what do people mean by the word "open"?

post #93 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by genovelle View Post


In other news, Apple Macs boot Windows, and Apple doesn't claim to be open. So they are not dictating what another company puts on their device. If they thought it would provide a good consumer experience they would offer it like on the mac.

 

Not true.  I can't go to an Apple Store and buy a Mac that runs Windows.

 

Apple, again acting in its own self-interest, made an additional boot capability where *users* can choose to install Windows.  Apparently quite a few do because OSx doesn't meet all of their or their workplaces needs.  

 

Which is the greater evil or greater benefit though?  I certainly don't know the answer.  Windows phone OS as well as Blackberry already have utilities to run Android.  They need the ecosystem and are willing to sacrifice their own 'identities' to get it.  In doing so, developers ask 'Why develop a native WinPhone or Blackberry App.  Just develop for Android and it runs on both.  So by offering it, are Windows and Blackberry helping or hurting themselves by promoting Android?  Without Android, their native App pool would be so small few would buy.

 

The Mac is a similar story.  Apple wouldn't quite stoop to actually including Windows, but it all but does by making it easy for their users to do so and they even promote the capability on their Mac site.  Apple isn't doing that because they magically decided in one case they wanted to be 'open and free'- its because even today Mac sales would tank if they couldn't run Windows.

 

Windows is already considering adding the Android capability to their desktop OS as well (not just through existing third party apps).  Not sure who benefits more from that one.

 

Personally I think Android/Google would actually gain more benefit from the dual booting Windows/Android unit.  Android is open and Asus is free to still make the device if they choose to.  Google is a business and is free to alter its relationship with them if they feel their interests aren't aligned.

post #94 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post
 

 

Not true.  I can't go to an Apple Store and buy a Mac that runs Windows.

Yes, you can.

Post from mstone to Benjamin Frost - "Perhaps that explains your lack of mental capacity. If I was your brother, I probably would have repeatedly smashed the side of your head with a cricket bat."
Reply
Post from mstone to Benjamin Frost - "Perhaps that explains your lack of mental capacity. If I was your brother, I probably would have repeatedly smashed the side of your head with a cricket bat."
Reply
post #95 of 127

Don't be pointlessly pedantic, you know exactly what he means.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #96 of 127

Google has spent years cultivating the image of Android being "open" and it has used this to paint Apple as the big, bad, evil corporation with its "walled garden" and "closed OS." Yet for years, there have been many whisperings about how the Android platform works which cast serious doubt on the openness of Android.

 

There is a mounting pile of evidence to indicate that Android isn't truly "open," at least not in a way that's of any benefit to the customer. Android is open in the way Windows is open-OEMs get to use whatever components and hardware they like. Many like to tout this as "offering choice" to the customer, but it also leads to the risk of OEMs producing products that use substandard components, leading to a substandard experience.

 

Android is not "open-source" by any stretch of the word. By definition, any entity must have unfettered access to the source code. If Google places restrictions on how Android is used, Android is not "open source."

post #97 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by vvswarup View Post

Google has spent years cultivating the image of Android being "open" and it has used this to paint Apple as the big, bad, evil corporation with its "walled garden" and "closed OS." Yet for years, there have been many whisperings about how the Android platform works which cast serious doubt on the openness of Android.

There is a mounting pile of evidence to indicate that Android isn't truly "open," at least not in a way that's of any benefit to the customer. Android is open in the way Windows is open-OEMs get to use whatever components and hardware they like. Many like to tout this as "offering choice" to the customer, but it also leads to the risk of OEMs producing products that use substandard components, leading to a substandard experience.

Android is not "open-source" by any stretch of the word. By definition, any entity must have unfettered access to the source code. If Google places restrictions on how Android is used, Android is not "open source."
http://source.android.com/source/initializing.html

There are several Android variants. Nokia recently built one starting with Android open-source code to use for their commercial purposes. A few years back Amazon did the same thing, taking Android open-source code to build their own Kindle OS, and again for commercial purposes. Foreign manufacturers have taken open-source Android and adapted it to their own uses. Even the Chinese government got in on the act.

While you have "unfettered access to the source code" the variants based on it are certainly not open-source. Google Android is one of those not-open-source variants, and going forward they'll probably contribute less and less of the good-stuff they come up for their variant back to open-source. Over time things have a habit of changing. Always have. But claims of being more "open" aren't the same as "open-source" anyway.

There's still open-source Android code available tho. Get it while it's hot.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #98 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


http://source.android.com/source/initializing.html

There are several Android variants. Nokia recently built one starting with Android open-source code to use for their commercial purposes. A few years back Amazon did the same thing, taking Android open-source code to build their own Kindle OS, and again for commercial purposes. Foreign manufacturers have taken open-source Android and adapted it to their own uses. Even the Chinese government got in on the act.

While you have "unfettered access to the source code" the variants based on it are certainly not open-source. Google Android is one of those not-open-source variants, and going forward they'll probably contribute less and less of the good-stuff they come up for their variant back to open-source. Over time things have a habit of changing. Always have. But claims of being more "open" aren't the same as "open-source" anyway.

There's still open-source Android code available tho. Get it while it's hot.

Agree with all that you have said here.

The previous poster to whom you are replying to is also correct in that Google has harped on about the "open is good, closed/walled garden is bad" thing for quite a while. I think the poster sees this as hypocritical.

Google does so, in case anybody here doesn't realise it, because it serves their purpose. Google is using this tactic as a rallying cry to us the people (those of us who are really in to tech stuff - all 1% of us), to motivate us to go in to battle, defend Google's stand, & convince others to join with us (& go out & buy more of Google's product). It's the same thing that Apple was brilliant at -"1984", "Think Different", "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC", for just three examples.

"Over time things have a habit of changing. Always have."  

I am going to take this quote out of context, just to serve to illustrate a point I want to make. The biggest change in tech that has occurred is one that is not easily identified at first glance, & there are many factors at play that have contributed to it. That change is that Apple's model of vertical integration has wiped the floor of the accepted model of horizontal partnering in the IT industry (not saying that Apple is going to displace hundreds of thousands of PCs in businesses all over the world, though). Owning & controlling the technology that your product/service is based on (& licensing a small minority of parts that you don't/can't own), has turned out to be critical for long term success. It's a lesson that Microsoft's partners have now learnt, & one that Google's partners will learn (I think Samsung has a clue that things need to change). It has allowed Apple to disrupt entire industries.

And finally, 

There's still open-source Darwin code available tho. Get it while it's hot.

post #99 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post

And if the rumor *were* true, what would the headline be:

Google acts in Google's self interest?

In other news, iPads don't boot to Android or Windows.

iPad is made by Apple. If Apple decides to enable users to dual-boot, I'm sure Apple will not stop Apple from doing that.

T300 is made by Asus. If Asus wants to make dual boot possible, Google OR Microsoft should not be able to blackmail them into not doing that. After all, you can dual-boot laptops and desktops, including Apple machines.

I don't know if this rumour is true... but after Google's little YouTube stint with Windows Phone, I would not be surprised. They know Apple/iOS are already too strong to be fooled with (though they did try with maps, back in the days) but Windows Mobile (both phone and tablets) is infant enough to be easily bullied... for now.
post #100 of 127
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post
With all that silly names variations, you sound like 13 year old exhibiting mild b*tch fit...

 

Hey, since AI manages to automatically censor “9to5Mаc” when you type it, couldn’t we edit that censor list to change all variations of Google and Samsung to just ‘Google’ and ‘Samsung’? Then the mockers get to keep mocking and everyone else gets to see the proper thing.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #101 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell View Post

Microsoft might be desperate, but a large percentage of Nokia phones are too underpowered to run Windows. It is likely considering running Android for the very low end of the market so it can quit developing its own OS for the low end of the market. It can also take the approach of Amazon, which uses the Android kernel, but strips out everything Google. Google hates that.

Doesn't make sense. From everything I have read so far, Windows Phone is more efficient than Android. If WP is under-performing on any hardware, Android will do even worst. But I think you're wrong. Much as I played with Lumia 520 - which is the lowest current WP on the market - it behaves quite well.
post #102 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowitall View Post

Windows is and was the definition of evil, so Google is off the hook here.
They should get a standing ovation when true, because they did a Microsoft to Microsoft.

Microsoft was evil one, but after being wrist-slapped for monopolistic crap time ago, they turned quite benign.

In the last few years, among the other things Google did:

  • Trojan-horsing Apple with Eric Schmidt and pulling some tricks with Oracle, too.
  • Try to undermine Apple with feature-lacking Gmaps, only to relase - their own words - "the best Gmap application on any platform" after Apple showed them middle finger and released their own in-house maps.
  • Blocked MS from having quality MS-made YouTube app for WP by creating very artificial rule that only they can make Youtube app in native code, while everyone else must code it in inferior HTML5. Good old catch 25 - Google is not interested in creating their own WP YouTube app, but also doesn't want anyone else to do so. MS argued that phones hardware (back when that happened) is not strong enough to run app comparable to iOS/Android versions completely in HTML5, especially on lower end phones, but Google didn't show any sympathy there. If MS could release service comparable to YouTube, I am quite confident we would see Google's native WP app within weeks.
  • Back in 2011, "Google Inc. reached a long-awaited $500 million legal settlement with the U.S. Justice Department to avoid prosecution on charges that it knowingly accepted hundreds of millions of dollars in illegal ads from Canadian online pharmacies" (from Wall Street Journal)
  • Potentially blackmailing Asus fro releasing dual-boot tablet. There's quite a bit info about this trickling out, we'll see how that goes.

I think they could use one good slapping from US/EU, they seem to be growing too fast and feeling too overpowered for their own good.
post #103 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frood View Post

Google works with partners.  It is a different model.  If one of those partners takes a step to shoot Google in the foot, I'd expect Google to tell them to stop.  That's not really being evil or newsworthy.  Cancelling business dealings with them wouldn't be out of order, certainly.  If they threatened to cover them in honey and throw them on a fire ant nest, that would be a 'break out the popcorn' headline and newsworthy.

Microsoft works with partners, too. Cannot recall they recently tried preventing them from creating dual-boot computers, or dropping support for non-Windows OSes. Obviously they didn't complain that this tablet will dual-boot with Android. True, they are underdog in mobile devices, but even in area they dominate - desktops and laptops - they are not forcing OEMs to lock their machines to Windows, which would be easily possible.
post #104 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post


With all that silly names variations, you sound like 13 year old exhibiting mild b*tch fit...


I owned Vista. Isn't that a good enough explanation?

 

If Vista were a car it would have been recalled and junked. Since it wasn't a car, Microsux got to rip-off millions upon millions of people and waste years worth of productivity around the world.

 

Microsux knew then and still knows about the flaws in their Windoz OS yet they continue to sell it as is. That is a criminal enterprise. It is deliberate. I refuse to give any more funds to that company or use their products, and I definitely won't give them any respect as far as using the actual names of their products or their company. I don't support criminals.

post #105 of 127
What flaws in Windows come anywhere near justifying the "criminal" hyperbole?

Not being as elegant as OS X isn't illegal.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #106 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

What flaws in Windows come anywhere near justifying the "criminal" hyperbole?

Not being as elegant as OS X isn't illegal.

The whole IE thing I'm guessing.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #107 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post


I owned Vista. Isn't that a good enough explanation?

If Vista were a car it would have been recalled and junked. Since it wasn't a car, Microsux got to rip-off millions upon millions of people and waste years worth of productivity around the world.

Microsux knew then and still knows about the flaws in their Windoz OS yet they continue to sell it as is. That is a criminal enterprise. It is deliberate. I refuse to give any more funds to that company or use their products, and I definitely won't give them any respect as far as using the actual names of their products or their company. I don't support criminals.

No, it isn't.

I owned and still own one PC with Vista. It was my main gaming/photo editing machine back in the days - and it served me bloody well. I did wait until SP1, when OEMs (approximately) fixed crappy drivers they had on Vista's release, and Vista became more stable OS than XP ever was. Sure it needed more resources than XP, but hey - it was 6 years newer than XP. On decent machine with 4GB of RAM, it was my conclusion that it carries load much better than XP on same configuration. XP seemed a bit snappier under simple load (single app running), but with increase of open apps it was just slowing down really bad. Vista was carrying additional programs with much more grace.

My brother is still using my old HP ProBook 6370b with Vista 32 Business, and has no intention to change it - until it works.

Beside slow OEMs response to new drivers model - and it looks like almost everyone got lazy after 6 years of same-ol' XP - major problem with Vista was MS marketing who was keen to tag almost everything as Vista-ready. Technically, all of those "Vista Ready" machines could run Vista, but not all could run it comfortably. But that is Vista's problem as much as it is x86 OSX problem for not being able to run on legacy PowerPC hardware. Microsoft was over-eager to replace everything-XP to Vista, after not making any money on Windows upgraders for 6 years, but again - that is problem of MS marketing department, not Vista itself.

Regarding rest of your reply, nope, sorry - you still sound like raging 13 years old. Check this link, check date - almost 3 years after Vista was released - and, maybe, reconsider.

http://www.dailytech.com/US+Army+Says+No+to+Windows+7+Yes+to+Vista+Upgrade/article15217.htm
post #108 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

The whole IE thing I'm guessing.

Microsoft got kicked hard in the... for their IE/Netscaoe and Word/Wordperfect stints, and emerged reasonably benign corporation after that... To the degree where they don't even try to - for example - retaliate to Google for quite obviously trying to undermine Microsoft's recent mobile efforts.

Treatment I honestly think that other big players should have, especially Google. For such beasts, a lesson in humility is almost always worth it's price.

I'm pretty sure they cannot do much, but I'm also sure they could find way to make Google's life a bit more miserable, considering that desktop Windows is still major platform for distribution of Google services. What if MS would demand that 3rd party browsers for Windows must be made in specific programming language, or that software for windows must have both Metro and Desktop versions included? Or that security mechanisms of OS have specific requirements that Gmail isn't fulfilling at present - required protocols etc.? I'm not programmer, nor lawyer, but I do believe that couple of smart individuals from both sides, locked in a room for a while, would come up with some funny ideas.
post #109 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post


Microsoft works with partners, too. Cannot recall they recently tried preventing them from creating dual-boot computers, or dropping support for non-Windows OSes. Obviously they didn't complain that this tablet will dual-boot with Android. True, they are underdog in mobile devices, but even in area they dominate - desktops and laptops - they are not forcing OEMs to lock their machines to Windows, which would be easily possible.

Microsoft certainly has pressured partner OEMs to NOT offer dual boot PCs (specifically HP, ASUS & Dell, who all wanted to release Windows/Linux PCs).

post #110 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by aussienorm View Post

Microsoft certainly has pressured partner OEMs to NOT offer dual boot PCs (specifically HP, ASUS & Dell, who all wanted to release Windows/Linux PCs).

Preinstalled, maybe (though I wouldn't mind if you share some info). But PCs are much easier to dual-boot (as long as they don't come with some sort of uEFI level OS lockdown, and I cannot recall seeing any) and Windows itself allows for dual boot.

Android, to my knowledge, isn't that friendly to idea of other OS presence.
post #111 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

What flaws in Windows come anywhere near justifying the "criminal" hyperbole?

Not being as elegant as OS X isn't illegal.

Windows Me
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #112 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Windows Me
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

The whole IE thing I'm guessing.
Smallwheels said that Microsoft "knew then and still know about the flaws in their OS yet they continue to sell it as is".

So Windows ME and IE (while issues) don't really meet the spec for the "flaws" being talking about.
Edited by Crowley - 3/11/14 at 5:40am

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #113 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post


Preinstalled, maybe (though I wouldn't mind if you share some info). But PCs are much easier to dual-boot (as long as they don't come with some sort of uEFI level OS lockdown, and I cannot recall seeing any) and Windows itself allows for dual boot.

Android, to my knowledge, isn't that friendly to idea of other OS presence.

Yes, we are obviously talking about pre-installed in this thread.

post #114 of 127

This is old but it's a start for understanding how Windoz sort of works: "Why I Hate Microsoft" http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/microsoft/IhateMS.html .

 

I didn't write this but I've read the whole thing. Pick any chapter and start.

You might read about how Microsux operated in the business world. I doubt that anything Google has done to date with hardware manufacturers would compare to this.

post #115 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post
 

This is old but it's a start for understanding how Windoz sort of works: "Why I Hate Microsoft" http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/microsoft/IhateMS.html .

 

I didn't write this but I've read the whole thing. Pick any chapter and start.

You might read about how Microsux operated in the business world. I doubt that anything Google has done to date with hardware manufacturers would compare to this.

Yeah, I read the whole thing a while back & a lot of other similar stuff. Even downloaded the whole DOJ Findings of Fact in the abuse of monopoly trial. Microsoft were out of control. Glad those days are over.

post #116 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post



He said that Microsoft "knew then and still know about the flaws in their OS yet they continue to sell it as is".

So Windows ME and IE (while issues) don't really meet the spec for the "flaws" he's talking about.

 

Windows Me was criminal, worse even than Vista it was the y2k bug presented as an OS.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #117 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post

This is old but it's a start for understanding how Windoz sort of works: "Why I Hate Microsoft" http://www.vanwensveen.nl/rants/microsoft/IhateMS.html .

I didn't write this but I've read the whole thing. Pick any chapter and start.
You might read about how Microsux operated in the business world. I doubt that anything Google has done to date with hardware manufacturers would compare to this.

That is one hell of an article! And I'm not talking about the length of the article. Thanks for the link.
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
post #118 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

Windows Me was criminal, worse even than Vista it was the y2k bug presented as an OS.
That may be true, but Microsoft aren't selling it right now, so it doesn't match what Smallwheels said.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #119 of 127
I imagine this is a tad galling to Microsoft. It's recommended that Window XP users dump IE and move to a different browser such as Chrome or Firefox after MS discontinues support next month.
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2014/031114-us-cert-urges-xp-users-to-279601.html?source=NWWNLE_nlt_daily_pm_2014-03-11
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #120 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I imagine this is a tad galling to Microsoft. It's recommended that Window XP users dump IE and move to a different browser such as Chrome or Firefox after MS discontinues support next month.
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2014/031114-us-cert-urges-xp-users-to-279601.html?source=NWWNLE_nlt_daily_pm_2014-03-11

Only had a quick gander, but IE7 still works, right? Over here in NL, many banks discourage the use of XP, but don't disable access.

As for Chrome, what are the benefits? Is it really 'sending browser usage' back to Google. Is it mandatorily using their 8.8.8.8 DNS servers? I hear they have an incredible large market share,, something like >50%? Is that right? Could that be because it's installed in the background when people upgrade their PDF viewer?
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Rumor: Google pressured Asus to cancel Android/Windows dual-boot devices