Slashdot Mirror
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.'"
Who the fuck wants this? Sure, Windows sucks but why would cramming a shitty OEM version of Android make things better?
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
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.
Microsoft, past giant of the operating system industry, will die not to OS X, not to Ubuntu, not to FreeBSD, Redhat, not to ReactOS, Plan 9, Gentoo, Hurd, BeOS, the vengeful ghost of OS/2, but to an OS designed for cell phones.
Well, okay, I guess.
A dual boot Windows 8.1 and Steam OS machine. I'm not really feeling the need for Android on a PC. Anyone else?
Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, religion destroys spirituality
Any movement away from a Microsoft dominated software market is probably a step in the right direction. As for the question of whether anyone will use these features, I will withhold judgment until I can actually see them.
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.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
I'm generally a strong open source advocate but I haven't found an open source window manager that works as well for my needs. I think having a heterogenous mix of open source and proprietary in your environment is a good thing.
I see it as the only way to compete with android. Just give it out, completely free. Still charge for the server level OS's and support, but for a desktop, MS makes money from plenty of other areas. Office is still a cash cow. Xbox is a profit center.
Google makes its money from their "free" OS through the app store. They also have a pretty neat ecosystem and various ways app makers can make money (in app advertising) They control the entire ecosystem. If MS could do the same with windows, I think we'd see the desktop come back.
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).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The problem isn't Microsoft or Windows, it's the method of consumption. People are more than happy to consume on cellphones and tablets, and desktop OS's don't fit into that paradigm. If Metro was more powerful/open and had application support, it would be a good idea to allow people to access all their purchases(media, applications, etc) across desktops and mobile devices, but it's not. I guess that's a Microsoft problem, but Android(and every other mobile OS) is equally bad as a desktop OS and none of the dedicated desktop OS's are any good as mobile/touch OS's(fuck you, Ubuntu/Unity).
The reality is that desktops are dying for a typical person's use and consumption. They're going to return to being workstations for the most part.
Android would make for a decent lightweight platform, but one of the big advantages of the desktop are workflows. Pop a screenshot of one program, switch to Word to paste it, grab some results from Excel, fetch a picture from DropBox, crop it in Photoshop, then make a PDF and attach it, as well as another picture to an E-mail. This is doable on iOS and Android, but the workflow switching is a lot harder than on a multitasking, multi-window OS like Windows, OS X, Linux, AIX, *BSD, etc.
What would be interesting is a computer that can function similar to the Motorola Atrix -- have different CPUs and operating systems that function at the same time. This way, I could use the Android side for Web browsing (since it is a lot harder to compromise a Web browser running under ARM in its own space and running with few to no extensions), then flip to the Windows side for gaming or some attempts at actual work.
Posting AC -- I fear SuperKendall's replies.
Why the hell would this scare Microsoft?
Microsoft is ALREADY making billions off Android royalties.
Plus these vendors are already contractually obligated to pay the Microsoft tax REGARDLESS of what OS they load onto a system.
This would be a perfect trifecta for Redmond. Microsoft will just look at this and go "We'll get a royalty? WIN! We'll still get our OS tax? WIN! We don't have to support it? WIN!"
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Because Android has a gazillion name-brand apps, and Chromium OS... doesn't? Granted, many of those apps have web versions which will work fine on Chrome, but it's not even close to the same number.
I'm also thinking that PC makers (who, in many cases, are also tablet and even phone makers) have a lot more product experience with Android than ChromeOS. Yeah, there are some ChromeOS device makers, but nowhere near as many and they haven't been doing it as long.
Log in or piss off.
Cover of The Wizard of ID #3:
Voice of alarm outside the window "The peasants are revolting!" and the king, inside "You can say that again."
Of course it scares MS. If it didn't, why did they even release Win8 with the UI previously known as Metro?
The purpose of Metro is obviously to get a 30% share of all application sales - with Android Google gets this share and MS want it.
If the purpose was to make a mobile UI - why try to force it on desktop users? And why force developer to sell through MS? No, the only answer is that Metro is a land-grab for a 30% sale "tax" on all applications. MS could prove this wrong by simply allowing third party installs with Metro apps but they don't do that.
What part of "multiple computer makers [are] planning a revolt" do you not understand? They're acting collectively, and if Microsoft refuses them then no Windows machines would be sold at all.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
At first I thought they would allow dual boot -- Windows or Android. Then, I could buy one and just boot Android and leave it there. On the rare occasions when I needed Windows, (for instance, to run Adobe Lightroom, which hasn't yet been ported to Android) I could boot into that.
But according to TFA, this is Android on Windows, or the ability to run Android applications on Windows 8. This sounds less like "two operating systems at once" and more like the Android API running on Windows.
This is exceedingly uninteresting. The problem with Windows 8 is the revolting GUI, and this does not fix that. Wake me when you release a tablet that will run Windows apps on Android.
Moreover, this is no particular threat to Windows. It perhaps gives a boost to the Windows 8 ecosystem by tying in whatever Androids applications happen to run (you know it won't be 100%), but the box still runs Windows, and doesn't run anything other than Windows. This is no threat to Microsoft at all, and is not a "rebellion".
Kevin Kline voice: DisapPOINTed!
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Yep - 2014 will be the year of Linux (with hot grits).
I take it you thought these devices are dual boot, Windows OR Android. They are not. Instead, the run BOTH simultaneously, so it runs Android and Windows applications on the same screen. I started to say the same desktop, but of course Microsoft has thrown out the desktop metaphor in a return to Windows 3.1 style single-tasking.
And Microsoft loses its customers.
It is already happening - that is one reason Chromebooks are selling so well.
People people people! Read TFA! These laptops are running Windows and not anything but Windows. This "two OSs at once" crap is just that. They support the Android API, so (some) Android apps will run on Windows. That's all. There's a lot less here than meets the eye.
So there's no use saying they should have picked Chrome OS or Linux or some other OS to run in conjunction with the Windows OS, because they're not running anything but the Windows OS. Sorry to be a buzzkill.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Why would Microsoft allow this? The PC manufactures must have forgotten about Microsoft shutting down the selling of machines that dual boot Windows and BeOS from the factory.
It's funny how history repeats itself. Several of the core BeOS developers went work at Danger after Be was sold to Palm. Danger was then bought by Google. Since those developers had OS experience, they were put to work on a new project called "Android".
Or throw their money and expert knowledge behind linux. It might mean a bit of restructuring - they'd probably want their own organisation making whatever distro they go with - but it could be done. Not likely to happen though, because most OEM manufacturers don't wish to also be software companies.
multiple computer makers will unveil systems that simultaneously run two different operating systems, both Windows and [...] Android
That's right! We're going to revolt by continuing to ship their OS to customers! That'll show 'em.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Wait, I thought Danger went to Microsoft, and were responsible for the Kin?
That's what killed the Sidekick/Hiptop. (I'm still pissed off about that. Sure, Android/Blackberry 10/iOS do far more than my Sidekick LX 2009 did, but what the Sidekick DID do, it did far better.)
The Atrix had two cores; but the linux 'desktop' it popped up when put into the "lapdock" accessory wasn't really a separate system (except in that there was absolutely no meaningful integration between the Android side and the 'desktop' side). It was just some Ubuntu-on-ARM stuff running as a less-impoverished-than-usual native linux userland on an Android system.
You can do much the same on basically any non-lockdown Android system; but there tends not to be much point. Getting access to pure linux applications from the Android environment is a bit awkward (X servers and terminal clients exist; but are generally aimed at talking to external hosts) and any android-related stuff (contacts, SMS, etc.) is in a more or less opaque blob as far as the linux userland is concerned(again, it can be done, and various Android tweaker/power-user modding does commonly involve hitting the Android system from the perspective of the root user on the linux system it lives on; but there is essentially zero useful integration).
Especially if you have a recent x86 to work with, I can't imagine why you would choose android as the 'lightweight VM for specific tasks' OS. VMs are absurdly useful; but android is a pretty mediocre experience on anything not designed as touchscreen hardware, usually without a keyboard or mouse.
playing them for free, the dark unfortunate secret of Android
Which used to be the dark unfortunate secret of DOS and Windows' success.
Danger was sold to MS. I read this wrong-
"Several ex-Be employees went to work for Danger after the company told to Palm. Some of them moved on to Android, which was co-founded by Danger co-founder Andy Rubin and acquired by Google. Others stayed on at Palm, but ended up joining Google after PalmSource (which was spun out of Palm) was acquired by Access."
http://readwrite.com/2011/06/29/a-look-back-at-the-beos-file-s#awesm=~orgOogOAzpeZ5m
The point stands that some of the people who created BeOS also created Android.
Having an OS that is ready to go in under 6 seconds is pretty damned handy.
Any OS can do that as long as your hardware supports suspend. My laptop, for instance, runs Xubuntu. I open the lid, and in four seconds I'm staring at the password prompt.
What makes Android better than any other distro?
Google Play Store has a large selection of Android applications, especially in categories that free software tends not to touch, such as games and video-on-demand players. Other distros might catch up should more games and clients for VOD services get ported to SteamOS (and thus to GNU/Linux), but that isn't guaranteed to happen.
Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect. - Linus Torvalds
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Growth of Windows PCs has stalled. People aren't buying it. A great many are repulsed by Windows 8.x and determined to tough it out with what they've got. A new Windows PC is too expensive and complicated, doesn't give good value.
People are buying Android and ChromeOS devices. Quick, easy, inexpensive Android and ChromeOS devices.
OEMs want to sell Windows devices, people want to buy Android and ChromeOS devices. Naturally OEMs are going to come up with the answer that all they need to do is sneak some expensive complicated poor-value Windows onto the popular Android and ChromeOS devices and they're good as gold. They really are that stupid.
That is not how it works. You are trying to sell the worst of both worlds.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Chrome OS isn't really a desktop OS either. Chrome OS is the current incarnation of the dumb terminal (I know that there is local processing but the purpose is locking you up to Googles servers and services). Chrome OS is a tool for locking your data in with Google. That is even worse than MS locking in your desktop - at least you control your data there. In Chrome OS you control neither. They have to pay ME for get me to use one.
I've been in the computer field for more decades than I care to remember, and I couldn't count the number of times I've seen people lose priceless data (because it happens so often).
They get viruses that eat their data; they don't backup their data; they backup their data incorrectly; their data and backup gets destroyed (e.g., house fires); etc.
For average people, having a company like Google hold onto your data is a good idea. Google will do a much better job keeping it safe than your average person.
Also, Google does a great job making it easy to make a local copy of all your stuff stored on Google (email, docs, spreadsheets, etc.) so I don't think your lock in comment is entirely fair.
Not to mention the care and feeding Windows requires, it's insane. It's ridiculously easy to get viruses and malware, it's ridiculously easy for your system to start running unbearably slow. It's because Windows is far too hard for average people to understand and administer properly. And it's not the average person's fault, they shouldn't have to be computer geniuses to use a computer.
Chromebooks are an absolutely fantastic solution for lots of people.
Nah, they'll leave the OEM license price alone, but point out that there's another OEM license for the patents used in Android, and that has its own price. Ka-ching!
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.
The MS Office requirement used to be a big deal for me, until I recently gave CrossOver a whirl. It supports "only" Office 2010, not 2013, but I found that it works perfectly well, no bugs yet (and I use it a lot). So, for me, CrossOver solved the last hurdle requiring Windows.
Everytime I see "doomed" in Slashdot these days, I expect a big hit around the corner...
Actually, it seems, many home users don't need full-blown MS Office and Photoshop, and are very happy with modest apps and casual games. If not more happy, because the full-blown desktop OSes give them headaches. An antivirus? System update that takes 45 minutes? My mom doesn't see how that helps her. These people love their iPads and the ChromeBooks are selling like hotcakes.
And MS is scared of ChromeBooks, enough that they've released a series of anti-ChromeBook ads.
Selling a laptop dual-booting Ubuntu is pointless (and I say that as a 100% Ubuntu supporter): but dual-booting Android indeed gives the laptop a different experience, with superfast boot and simple use, that many users will enjoy. If the laptop does touch, too, then you get a nice Android tablet, too, which is far more functional than a Win8 tablet: indeed, PC+.
Also, let me educate you: Android *is* a Linux distro.
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).
And there are a few hardware-assisted breakthroughs thanks to a freshly designed Android mentality. We probably never stopped to think 10 years ago how much shareware, paid or even free software suffered due to the *fragmentation* presented by wintel PC *diversity*
I just realized this: un-needed smartphone peripherals starting with the iPhone and Android era gave birth to a multimedia 2.0... different from the nineties' version in that there are no more drivers, sound cards, CD roms, modems, cameras and microphones to install.
Also, simplified file management and transfers to others (no need for CD burning or shady Windows shares if you have Wifi, certain apps or just bluetooth. For better or worse. It is saddening the knowledge contrast in proficient users who only can upload photos from phone GUIs, but get teary-eyed when you show remind them the 5000+ picture archive on the Windows PC won't attach itself to their emails or flat to Facebook. People do NOT want to have to deal with file sizes, folder locations AND the concept of Windowed desktops when they have an emergency to share with the world.
Back on point, devs gave us unexpected products that PCs and laptops equipped with similar hardware still have no binaries for. Things like personal barcode scanning, radio song identification, GPS and compass-assisted augmented reality that lets you
* avoid paying 100+ USD minimum for dying GPS devices
* find where you parked
* track down miles walked for personal exercise efforts
* overlay star and planet information over the night sky as you point the camera
* translate some signs on the fly
Hybrid machines would mean some hardware changes that might spur a new age of desktop based software that you can distribute for Windows Stores.
"Let's move from one monopolist to another!"
I thought Steve Bennett was the king of Symantec. But seriously, shutdown is right that the snap functionality in Windows 8.1 is more flexible than window management allowed in the Android CDD.
The reason it didn't is your premise is wrong.
I for instance am writing this using Linux, and have no windows (except for a VM that has been offline for years) for the last 12 years.
I am a Linux professional and want nothing to do with Windows or Apple things.
But even some companies that migrated their users to Linux had lots of complaints, users find issue with a button with a different name, a tiny difference in behavior from MS Office to Open Office.
Plus 95% of users never hearf of Linux until their employers force the to move. It would never dawn on them to try Linux at home.
Marketing rules the world. And Microsoft has been playing extra dirty to avoid large migrations to Linux. They have essentially given Windows for free to strategic users (that if migrated to Linux would likely cause millions of Windows seats to migrate to some years after).
Finally, Linux developers are too technical. They're not marketing people. That's one of the reasons Google tried really hard not to associate Linux with Android (although Android is Linux).