Sun Says Hardware Will Be Free

ron_ivi writes "Reuters reports that Sun's President and COO thinks hardware will be free and that people will pay for software subscriptions instead. Reuters quotes Schwartz: 'In our world, you will subscribe to the software and the hardware is free.' 'Directionally, our expectation is that in fiscal 2005 you're going to see a rapid departure from selling hardware, software and services apart.' 'Bill Gates and I agree that within four to five years hardware will be free.' We've recently read here on /. how Gates thinks hardware will be free."

Comments

A return to appliances?

[tepples]

First off, notice the apparent lack of any mention of the free software community in the article. Also, remember the difference between gratis hardware (subsidized by publishers of proprietary software as part of the license fees) and Free hardware (the more general purpose, the more Free).

It appears that like video game console hardware subsidized by licensed game sales, the gratis hardware will probably be locked to the particular applications, turning them into the equivalent of appliances. As publishers of proprietary software shift their business model from running on customer-owned hardware to running on hardware rented from the publisher, does this coming "appliance era" spell the end of affordable general-purpose PC hardware for residential use?

Re:A return to appliances?

[rsmith-mac]

And more importantly, how will consumers of such a system be treated? Is it going to be like the console system you describe, or is it going to be something akin to the cell phone market, where you're locked in to multi-year contracts, and locked to specific vendors through the life of the product?

Re:A return to appliances?

[JudgeFurious]

I believe it does mean that very thing. "Free" is not going to be a good thing in this particular instance. Free is just going to be a euphamism for "trapped".

I want no part of this.

Re:A return to appliances?

[tambo]

A return to appliances?

An excellent point, tepples. Yes, this does appear to be a sea change toward the Apple model - or, even worse, the Commodore 64 - where the hardware is locked to an OS. Even worse: it may be locked to a particular OS version or class of versions - e.g., Pentium IV for Win2k/WinXP. No better way to push a hardware upgrade than to make it compulsory!

I consider this the "consolization" of the PC.

Interestingly, this happens at a time when game consoles are becoming more diverse. The PS2 was the first console to be natively compatible with another console (the PS1.) More importantly, most software is released on multiple platforms (Soul Calibur II was simultaneously released for all three major platforms!)

But even more insidious than the OS lock-in is the software rental model. Goddamnit, if I pay $200 for Office 2000, I expect the right to use that shit whenever I want. I will not tolerate a $10-a-month utility plan on my software applications.

America faces this creeping threat of having an increasing share of its goods offered only on a rental plan. The concept of consumer ownership is eroding. So you'll pay less now... but much more in the long run. And at the end of your lifetime, you will still own nothing.

This is corporate greed combined with corporate laziness - yet another tactic to extract more value out of the market for providing the same basic services. Excellent for the Great White Males who are shareholders/CEOs; bad for the rest of us. America looks more like a caste system every day. The only check on it is the hope of government regulation to say, these things are "goods" and these things are "services"... but sadly, our current federal government is a shameful example of "regulatory capture." - David Stein

They got it backwards

[tritone]

Software will be free and you'll pay for hardware.

Just an excuse to force DRM adoption.

[garcia]

Of course they want it to be free. Then they have full justification for a complete and utter lockdown of the hardware via DRM'd BIOS and OS with threats under the DMCA if we try to break it. No true ownership of the hardware by the user is exactly what they want.

Are general computer users going to buy a computer that isn't DRM'd just to use free software? I don't think so. They are going to use what's given to them as part of their OS license fee.

"Run our OS and never have to worry again! Just sign your name right here. The fine print doesn't say anything about selling your soul. Nope, not at all. Right there... That's riiiight."

Re:Just an excuse to force DRM adoption.

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

This is so insightful it diserves to be on billboards across the country (and i'm talking about the ones on the highways) and not bbs's :)

Frankly the DRM fight is already lost, and by lost i mean we've lost. The public is just too dumb when it comes to the subtle aspects of computers. That includes proper pc security, installing software, even knowing what a directory is. Hell half of the folks out there think they're called "folders" ;)

And those folks dont know what to put in those folders.

They have such a poor grasp of technology. The masses that is. They're not the geeks that we are. They didnt grow up with vic20s, apple 2es, c64s, atari computers, 12mhz 286s, or 486's running teleguard bbs's housing pirated warez. They never had to learn what an IRQ is, or what autoexec.bat does...

They never had to learn HAYES modem commands to reset their models, or init them.

These are the same folks that use PC's like toasters, and how many Americans do you know that can explain how their toaster works?

Point made i think.

We've lost the fight because the industry will do as it pleases, and the public will accept whatever marketing they throw at them. And the marketing will not mention a dam thing. If SUN has its way... it would go somethign like this....

"Pick up your FREE COMPUTER at BESTBUY when you buy a copy of our OS"

It wont mention a dam thing about the DRM restrictions. People will flock to the new marketing idea. "WOW A FREE FUCKING PC?!... I'm so there dude"

Its a lost cause... DRM is going to succeed because we dont have an educated civilization that understands the finer points of technology, or even the basics of the constitution.

If in the near future, you can buy longhorn and get a free top of the line pc... forget it. War over. The masses will flock to it faster than flies to shit.

Its still worth fighting for though. I'm glad folks are still up for the task... because its a mountain bigger than any other.

We're already in the hole because of this very fact. Look at the EULA situation You agree that you're liscensing, and not OWNING your copy of windows. Frankly this is just bullshit, and the public simply doesnt understand, or care about it at all. They dont even read the EULA, and yet they're forced to agree to it.

Consumers arent that smart, and that is why capitalism has become pretty perverse from the top down.

Its the publics responsibility to insure that they are not taken advantage of. The problem is the public simply does not have the education to recognize every specific detail reguarding every unique buying situation, no matter what the product or item.

How many here are car experts? Computer experts, Biologists, etc.. How many know the finer points of HDTV, or a washing machine?... How about law, or how your plumbing works?... How many of us... KNOW IT ALL?

None of us know enough to protect ourselves as consumers in every situation especially those outside the fields of geek like interest (and that could be cars, computers whatever you're geeky about)

The public barely understands computers. They teach flash in highschool these days... and 1 out of 30+ kids in the class can actually do anything with flash.

Its amazing that they teach flash, when they should be teaching programming, or computer manufacturing... how to configure your pc for security, what irq's are... etc I mean theres so much more that needs to be taught before people jump into Flash, or AOL :)

Its just too dam risky for folks to be that ignorant.

And its that fact that DRM will be implemented whenever the software/hardware makers want. Because we're not big enough, loud enough to make a difference, and some of you even work for the suits that push DRM in the first place.

Free, for a fee

[1010011010]

I'm sure Microsoft and Sun won't give me a new Netra or XBox if I call them up.

What Schwartz ("Use the schwartz!") and Gates really mean is, "your software fee will include the hardware fee, and you won't really have a choice about that. Plus, we will add restrictions to the hardware, such as DRM. Thank you, come again!"

Counter-Intuitive

[philovivero]

Those guys are geniuses. Hardware will be free. Software will cost money.

Because making hardware is as simple as typing "cp SunE450 SunE450.2" and making new software requires factories, tooling up, shipping, and maintenance.

I disagree. I think both Microsoft and Sun will become obsolete and useless as they continue to try to trap people into their DRM and obsolete-by-design software while manufacturers of good hardware will continue to make some money, and software will become more and more Libre ("free").

I think that the only money that will come in from software will be from developers and coders that maintain existing Open Source software, and create novel new Open Source software for contract (hourly wages).

But I'm just a lowly DBA, not a forward-thinking visionary overpaid stuffed-shirt like these guys, so by all means, bank your future on their brilliance.

Re:Free Market

[general_re]

I don't think the free market, specially normal consumers, will like subscription based goods. They want to pay once and then own the thing they paid for, not pay all the time they use it.

I'm constantly amazed by how popular auto leasing is in this country, and how many people are thereby effectively carrying car payments in perpetuity. With that in mind, I think your prognosis is iffy at best.

Wrong

[Bertie]

For one simple reason. Hardware's tangible, software isn't. No matter what these guys do, people will always struggle to get their heads round the idea of paying for software, because it doesn't take up space in their room and can be reproduced ad infinitum. Same goes for music, films, etc., and I'd say it always will. If the Suns and Microsofts of the world don't start accepting this and going with the flow, they're sunk.

I mean, here I am working on my PC (which I bought and put together myself) running Gentoo (which I downloaded and didn't pay a brass farthing for). Microsoft sell as many copies of Windows as they do because they bundle them with new hardware. Who do you know who's ever bought a copy of Windows off the shelf? If the PC came out of the factory with no OS and I wanted to put Windows on it, I'd ask around till I found a friend with a pirate copy - there's just no way I'd haul myself to a shop to buy one. Yeah, yeah, I know it's not right, but that's the way it is, and these guys should embrace it instead of fighting it.

Re:Free Market

[DrEldarion]

Really? Tell that to the people who live in their rented apartments and drive to work in their leased cars while talking on their cell phones that they got for free with a 2-year contract.

Re:Free Market

[wankledot]

But see the difference between cars and computers is that cars lose their value very fast... oh... wait.

It's not even gratis.

[Arker]

They're completely twisting the language here, which is nothing new. They don't mean free as in speech, or free as in beer (gratis) what they mean is the price will be hidden in the software price. You'll be paying as much or more, they just won't itemise it or offer the hardware for honest sale.

So you'll get a software 'subscription' and the hardware to run it on in a single package, totally locked in.

No one in their right mind would sign up for this without huge, unsustainable bribes and/or being taken in by confusing double-talk and deception. I expect they'll be trying to use both in spades to get a stranglehold on the market, then make it back in rent once they have that. But it seems unlikely they'll succeed, thankfully. One more desperate attempt to try and lock competition out of the market.

Rented life

[GrouchoMarx]

We went through this once before with Ma Bell. You didn't own your phone, you rented it from the phone company, who could futz with it whenever and however they wanted. They also had no incentive to ever upgrade it. My parents still have an ancient phone in their kitchen that is owned by the phone company, even though legally they are required to let you connect your own phone.

Now, these companies want to do the same with computers. You don't own anything, you merely rent it as part of a service contract. Car companies want you to lease a car, rent an apartment...

HELL NO! When possible, you always want to own your stuff instead of leasing it. For one thing, its financially more advantageous. (Take good care of it, and the cost over its lifetime is lower.) For another, it gives you equity for loans and other transactions. For another, it frees you of the control of the leasing party.

Me: You know, I want to try some different software that MS doesn't offer in their archive.
MS: OK, fine, give us your computer back.
Me: What? No way, dude, all of my personal files are on here.
MS: Gee, sucks to be you. Guess you're stuck giving us money just to read your own data. Neener neener!

And that's just one example. The only compromise point I could see would be the way mobile phone companies subsidize the cost of a mobile phone with a service agreement, but that's a "lease to buy" arrangement at best. When it's over, that is YOUR phone by law, and even before that it's still your phone, you just have to pay an early termination fee and the phone is still yours. MSN used to do that with low-end PCs before they realized that no one wanted it.

Live Free. Own your life. Own yourself.

Re:Free Market

[JamesKPolk]

That's why Microsoft, Sun, and others support laws that make ownership impossible. They want their customers to be licensees, not owners.