A manufacturer can do what they want with Android, see Amazon and Nokia. Google has contracted Asus to build its line of Nexus tablets. Them building a tablet that runs Android and Windows is potentially a conflict of interest.
Are they making the Nexus tabs dual bootable? Why would Googs care about other Asus tabs?
Are they making the Nexus tabs dual bootable? Why would Googs care about other Asus tabs?
No this isn't a Nexus tab, and Google shouldn't care what Asus does with its other tablets. The only reason I can think of is misguided self preservation.
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.
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.
Sure Google is working to its own self interest. Just shows that Steve Jobs was right though when he said that Google was being a bit disingenuous for attacking iOS as being "closed" and championing Android as "open". Google is full of a bunch of meaningless rhetoric or it wouldn't be afraid of letting Chrome compete with Windows on these dual boot devices (that is clearly the alternative that Google would prefer). I guess when it is protecting its turf against competition it's not stifling innovation.
Google is trying to leverage Android into making Chrome a player on the desktop much to its frustration as much as it is trying to block Windows on mobile.
Not that I'm surprised, but I find it interesting that AI insists that iPads be counted as computers when writing about Apple's share in the computer market, but leaves out Windows notebooks when writing about Microsoft's share in mobile devices.
It's not an AI conceit; I'd prefer "touch devices" or something over the phrase "mobile devices," since "mobile devices" sounds like it could include cameras and Zippo lighters. But "mobile devices" has become a well-understood term for the various modern iPhone-inspired smartphones and tablets.
Meanwhile, it's simply useful and reasonable to look at the computing market as a whole, touch and traditional OS's alike, and AI is not unique in doing so. It's useful to look at specific subsegments--touch-only, non-touch, phablets, workstations--no argument there. But it's ALSO useful to look at the whole market. How could anyone deny that?
And keep in mind: traditional notebooks are NOT eating away at the sales and use cases of iOS-like phones and tablets. But phones and tablets ARE eating into the sales and use cases of computers/notebooks--a trend that is clearly only growing.
Nobody could reasonably say that leaving notebooks out of Microsoft's mobile device share is a bias or a distortion: including then IN Microsoft's share would be intentionally hiding a very real and desperately serious problem that Microsoft is facing.
And nobody could reasonably say that only a biased source would look at how iPads/iPhones/derivatives are taking over many hours--and dollars--of computing that used to be done on "traditional" computers. (I'm reminded of those who thought laptops were not "real" computers!) In fact, failing to ever look at touch devices being part of the computer market--that WOULD be a distortion.
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.
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.
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.
I believe there are resellers doing just that. I know for sure they are selling them with a copy of Windows and Parallels.
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.
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.
Those product are hideous, it is just another product which does not know what it is. You all heard of the car planes right, have you seen any on the road recently.
One things Apple does well is not trying to be all things to all people. These convertible products are just another desperate attempt to keep PC's alive just a little longer since none of these companies have figure out how to operate in the post PC era which is about to roll over them.
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.
Of course iPads don't boot Android or Windows. And Google or Motorola branded devices don't boot Windows. That's hardly the point. The point is that Google is operating with an "Open", Horizontal, Modular model, whereby it is licensing its OS. Apple doesn't license its OS; it has a Vertical, integrated business model. Two different animals.
But Google is leveraging its muscle to horizontally dictate to its partners. Just as MS did with Linux and browsers other than IE. That's abuse. It's also hypocritical and ironic, because Apple is accused of control and "monopoly" left right and center, when there is simply no case (since, again, the vertical model is completely different).
Now, before anyone compares this to eBooks and Apple's attempt to have MFN clauses with publishers, that's also completely different. For one thing, Apple isn't the supplier, it's the storefront. But more importantly, for this to be in any way similar to Apple's "attempt at control", Google would have to say to Asus, "hey, go for it; though if you sell in the MS Store, please don't sell it for more in our Store -- make the price comparable so our store can be competitive."
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.
Really? With all the engineers Apple has, they couldn't figure out Windows could run on Intel based Macs?
It's not really an analogy so much as a paradigm at how this article is 'non-news' Obviously the goal is to get clicks by fomenting Google-haters 'Google is evil' mantra....
I don't view Apple as 'evil' for choosing not to include Windows or Android on their tablets or phones, because it would be shooting themselves in the foot. And "Apple doesn't add Windows or Android to the iPad!" would make a really dumb headline. An equally dumb headline would be "Google pressured Asus to cancel Android/Windows dual-boot devices"
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.
I would like to point out that IF this story is true - Google is doing EXACTLY the type of thing that got MS in anti-trust hot water. One word for you: BeOS
I would like to point out that IF this story is true - Google is doing EXACTLY the type of thing that got MS in anti-trust hot water. One word for you: BeOS
You can change the default search provider on Android phones to Bing if you'd like. There have even been Samsung phones with Bing set as the factory default. In fact I'm pretty sure you can replace nearly all Google services with your own preferred provider if you choose to. Google doesn't prevent it anymore than Apple does AFAIK.
EDIT: Thanks for that BeOS mention. Hadn't been aware of it. Not exactly the same thing as far as I can tell since Microsoft was being accused of not allowing competing OS's to be installed on any device if that manufacturer had a discount agreement with MS. ASUS obviously ships Windows-based devices too so if Google is trying to prevent it they're not very effective.
So, how is this not an anti-competitive move (i.e. Competition Law issue in almost all countries) on the part of Google? Seems to me that some Gov't agencies would take interest in this.
Comments
Are they making the Nexus tabs dual bootable? Why would Googs care about other Asus tabs?
No this isn't a Nexus tab, and Google shouldn't care what Asus does with its other tablets. The only reason I can think of is misguided self preservation.
Google is trying to leverage Android into making Chrome a player on the desktop much to its frustration as much as it is trying to block Windows on mobile.
It's not an AI conceit; I'd prefer "touch devices" or something over the phrase "mobile devices," since "mobile devices" sounds like it could include cameras and Zippo lighters. But "mobile devices" has become a well-understood term for the various modern iPhone-inspired smartphones and tablets.
Meanwhile, it's simply useful and reasonable to look at the computing market as a whole, touch and traditional OS's alike, and AI is not unique in doing so. It's useful to look at specific subsegments--touch-only, non-touch, phablets, workstations--no argument there. But it's ALSO useful to look at the whole market. How could anyone deny that?
And keep in mind: traditional notebooks are NOT eating away at the sales and use cases of iOS-like phones and tablets. But phones and tablets ARE eating into the sales and use cases of computers/notebooks--a trend that is clearly only growing.
Nobody could reasonably say that leaving notebooks out of Microsoft's mobile device share is a bias or a distortion: including then IN Microsoft's share would be intentionally hiding a very real and desperately serious problem that Microsoft is facing.
And nobody could reasonably say that only a biased source would look at how iPads/iPhones/derivatives are taking over many hours--and dollars--of computing that used to be done on "traditional" computers. (I'm reminded of those who thought laptops were not "real" computers!) In fact, failing to ever look at touch devices being part of the computer market--that WOULD be a distortion.
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.
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.
I believe there are resellers doing just that. I know for sure they are selling them with a copy of Windows and Parallels.
Those product are hideous, it is just another product which does not know what it is. You all heard of the car planes right, have you seen any on the road recently.
One things Apple does well is not trying to be all things to all people. These convertible products are just another desperate attempt to keep PC's alive just a little longer since none of these companies have figure out how to operate in the post PC era which is about to roll over them.
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.
Of course iPads don't boot Android or Windows. And Google or Motorola branded devices don't boot Windows. That's hardly the point. The point is that Google is operating with an "Open", Horizontal, Modular model, whereby it is licensing its OS. Apple doesn't license its OS; it has a Vertical, integrated business model. Two different animals.
But Google is leveraging its muscle to horizontally dictate to its partners. Just as MS did with Linux and browsers other than IE. That's abuse. It's also hypocritical and ironic, because Apple is accused of control and "monopoly" left right and center, when there is simply no case (since, again, the vertical model is completely different).
Now, before anyone compares this to eBooks and Apple's attempt to have MFN clauses with publishers, that's also completely different. For one thing, Apple isn't the supplier, it's the storefront. But more importantly, for this to be in any way similar to Apple's "attempt at control", Google would have to say to Asus, "hey, go for it; though if you sell in the MS Store, please don't sell it for more in our Store -- make the price comparable so our store can be competitive."
Really? With all the engineers Apple has, they couldn't figure out Windows could run on Intel based Macs?
Samsung Delivers Ad-Free Milk Music Radio Streaming to U.S.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.samsung.mdl.radio
http://www.engadget.com/2014/03/07/samsung-milk-music/
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-03-07/samsung-delivers-ad-free-milk-music-radio-streaming-to-u-dot-s
#MilkMusic #TheNextBigThing
Google may have demanded the product's cancellation ...
Well somebody had to cancel it. If Google hadn't demanded it, ASUS's management would have demanded it.
But only after months of poor sales and dozens of tepid reviews and all that wasted carbon footprint.
It's not really an analogy so much as a paradigm at how this article is 'non-news' Obviously the goal is to get clicks by fomenting Google-haters 'Google is evil' mantra....
I don't view Apple as 'evil' for choosing not to include Windows or Android on their tablets or phones, because it would be shooting themselves in the foot. And "Apple doesn't add Windows or Android to the iPad!" would make a really dumb headline. An equally dumb headline would be "Google pressured Asus to cancel Android/Windows dual-boot devices"
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.
I would like to point out that IF this story is true - Google is doing EXACTLY the type of thing that got MS in anti-trust hot water. One word for you: BeOS
Google may have demanded the product's cancellation due to concerns about giving Microsoft a new foothold in the mobile device space
Really? Google though this mutant device was going to be that popular?
according to Digitimes.
Oh, I see.
You can change the default search provider on Android phones to Bing if you'd like. There have even been Samsung phones with Bing set as the factory default. In fact I'm pretty sure you can replace nearly all Google services with your own preferred provider if you choose to. Google doesn't prevent it anymore than Apple does AFAIK.
EDIT: Thanks for that BeOS mention. Hadn't been aware of it.
I imagine he's referring to when Be sued Microsoft. That action got settled out of court.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/02/20/be_inc_sues_microsoft/
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Microsoft+Pays+$23m+to+Settle+BeOS+Antitrust+Suit.-a0107384535
Yup, read up on that one after he mentioned it. See my edit in the previous 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?