PC Makers Plan Rebellion Against Microsoft At CES

Velcroman1 writes "Fearing rapidly plummeting sales of traditional laptops and desktop computers — which fell by another 10 percent or so in 2013 — manufacturers are planning a revolt against Microsoft and the Windows operating system, analysts say. At the 2014 CES in Las Vegas, multiple computer makers will unveil systems that simultaneously run two different operating systems, both Windows and the Android OS that powers many of the world's tablets and smartphones, two different analysts said recently. The new devices will be called 'PC Plus' machines, explained analyst Tim Bajarin. 'A PC Plus machine will run Windows 8.1 but will also run Android apps as well,' Bajarin wrote. Another analyst put the threat to Windows bluntly: 'This should scare the heck out of Microsoft.'"

Comments

Yeah right.

[JeremyMorgan]

Laptops and Desktops don't need "apps" and people aren't going to buy them to play Angry Birds and Snapchat all day.

If you want to make a move away from Windows give them an OS that can actually do something useful. Nobody is trying to replace their phone with a laptop.

Re:Yeah right.

[fermion]

People are going to buy computers to do stuff. Email, facebook, ms word, that is what the average users says they do on the computer. One big problem with netbooks was that people assumed that could MS Word, and when they found out they couldn't they returned the computer. This is a solution where OEMs can expose people to other OS while still allowing MS Office to run. Maybe some people realize that they don't need MS Office. Maybe they don't want to pay a monthly fee for Office and realize that Google Docs or OpenOffice is sitting right there fore free. Maybe the next computer they buy doesn't have MS WIndows.

This is scary enough that MS, allegedly, has in the past prevented OEM from installing two OS. The last thing MS wants a computer user to know is there is another OS. Look at the misinformation on the Mac, how expensive it is, when my last Macbook Air was $1000. Yes, more expensive that they mythicla $300 MS laptop that runs everything, but about what a good laptop costs. We can argue price, but MS is scared of users knowing there is choice.

We also see this in past EULA in which certain versions of MS Windows could not be the guest OS. This is likely the future of the PC. A reasonably functional and free client OS on top of which a virtualized guest OS can be run. This is basically what MS is doing now with the instant upgrade. Start with a functionality locked out, and buy a full OS after the fact. Like the Mainframe manufacturers used to do. You have all the hardware, but have to pay extra to use it.

What might scare MS

[transporter_ii]

A dual boot Windows 8.1 and Steam OS machine. I'm not really feeling the need for Android on a PC. Anyone else?

Morons

[Karmashock]

If they want to scare MS then they need to get behind a linux distro. Any of the polished ones it doesn't really matter.

You've got Steam pushing a linux gaming line... why would you go for anything besides linux IF you're trying to unseat MS?

This is idiotic and doomed to tragic failure.

Why? Developer Developers Developers. And Games.

[SuperKendall]

Sure, Windows sucks but why would cramming a shitty OEM version of Android make things better?

Because there are a LOT of Android developers now, who would be very tempted to write for this...

But also from the user side, presumably you could play Android games, buying them at Android prices instead of Windows prices (or playing them for free, the dark unfortunate secret of Android).

Re:Any movement away from Microsoft is good.

[Anonymous Coward]

This ISN;T a step in the right direction. Putting a shitty alternative OS on will just persuade people NOT to look elsewhere. They either need to do it right or not at all, this will help MS not hurt them.

Re:Ugh

[Kensai7]

Personally, games was the last domain that kept me from ditching Windows (as they have evolved), so SteamOS is a gift from heaven, especially in the direction it is going. Microsoft should be scared to do more. Enough is enough with their dominating position. It reminds me of European cellular phone manufacturers (Nokia, Ericsson) before Apple came to shake their realities with the iPhone.

Re:Ugh

[Mr0bvious]

Windows 8 has got to be the main reason laptop and PC sales have plummeted

While I'm no lover of Windows OS's (I not a big user, Linux has been my staple for 10 - 15 years) I'm not convinced it is the major cause for the drop in desktop sales. I see other reason as being greater contributors.

1) A good proportion (I speculate) of former PC sales were to people who used the PC to "consume", being media, Internet, email, games and whatnot - these PC are obviously overkill and cumbersome for the task (locked to the desk). The rise of tablets and mobile devices that are plenty capable of performing this role has caused this echelon of users to dump their PCs and migrate to their phone or tablet (a better and more convenient tool for that job (consumption) IMO).

2) There is another echelon of users who are not 'power users' their 5 year old PC is just fine for the tasks they perform. PC's are very over powered for a good lot of users, as long as their machine boots and they can get to their browser then their PC is still good enough - no need to replace. This may have been the case for many years so I expect this has less influence than (1).

But I don't believe people are as fussy about their OS as the vocal ones would suggest - most are happy if their browser will open.

I am by no means giving a vote for or against Windows 8 (or any OS) I don't have strong feelings either way. But I strongly doubt that it's a major contributor (perhaps a minor one).

Propane cars

[EmperorOfCanada]

After MS started this whole MSDN certified shop philosophy they realized that they could trap people into their ecosystem. Nearly every product they have come up with since has not been a very good product but another attempt to lock people in. Sharepoint would be a near perfect example. It seems to be designed to be a MS glue that where you needed MS SQL, MS Server, MS Office, MS Outlook, MS Explorer, and MS Windows to make it work. Take any bit away and no more sharepoint. There would be no slowly migrating away from that one. MS probably looked at how they killed WordPerfect and Novell and said, "We won't let anyone get a thin edge of a wedge into our ecosystem like we did to them."

But they let things stagnate so much that when mobile came along all they could think about was protecting their eco system. So instead of coming up with a lightweight tablet they made the surface that integrates with their eco system.

So basically it seems that MS has become a company that is entirely based upon fooling people into making bad decisions.

But this might seem like a good idea to keep customers from leaking away. The problem is that when they do leave they leave entirely and are never coming back unless their new system sucks even more. Where this is real problem is that the MS system can really suck without losing too many customers due to inertia. But as history has repeatedly shown people don't leave one stagnant tradition for a slightly better one, they leave for something completely new and often quite different.

An interesting example from history was the end of whale oil; it was around $1900 per barrel (today's prices) while crude oil was around $90 a barrel. This put more and more pressure for people to figure out how to extract useful replacements from crude. When they did still people kept on with Whale oil but then suddenly "petroleum" products wiped out the whale oil industry almost overnight. Once the trend started there was nothing the whale industry could do; it was over.

I would say that MS is in a very bad place. Customers who switch to mobile are entirely eliminating MS from their minds. Not out of hate or revenge but simply they don't see an use for MS products in their lives. Of course some people are still using MS office to type a bit and Excel to add up a few numbers but the vast majority would be perfectly happy with Office 97.

So as I say MS has a business model based upon people making bad decisions. But now many people aren't even seeing MS as one of their options.

Re:Any movement away from Microsoft is good.

[Runaway1956]

Made which founders of which companies very rich? I'd have to do some searching, but I believe that Bill Gates bought Windows for mere hundreds of dollars.

There are very good reasons that Microsoft has lost litigation multiple times to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.

I have already granted that Google does some evil shit. I rather like Google, but I'm not blind to the bad stuff they do. Microsoft, on the other hand, is guilty of just about every crime of which a business can be guilty of, short of murder. Gates is ruthless, and the company he founded shares that characteristic.

That AARD code I mentioned above - have you ever looked at it? A few lines that instruct Microsoft software to check for the underlying operating system on which it is to be installed. If any system fails to report that it is a Microsoft system, the software simply refuses to install. There was no good reason for that - it was just anti-competitive bullshit.

Perspective. I repeat part of what I stated above. Microsoft has done more to hinder computer science than either Google or Apple. I mean, they have actively blocked advancement in many lines of research. There are no really "clean" players up there in the stratosphere, but Microsoft is just plain dirty.

I will note that Google has pulled out of China. It seems that whatever evil Google has committed, they might have a conscience. Can you make any such claim for Microsoft? Please don't tell me about the Gates Foundation. I view that nonsense the same as I view the pyramids. AFTER have destroyed dozens of companies and thousands of careers, Gates wants to achieve some kind of immortality with his "charitable works". Screw Gates. I have more respect for Jobs, who remained a selfish egomaniac until his dying day. I have far more respect for those goofy kids who founded Google. They screw up, but they are far better people than Gates or Jobs, IMHO.