Google and Microsoft Both Want To Stop Dual-Boot Windows/Android Device

An anonymous reader writes "The laptop has undergone many changes over the past decade. At various times, netbooks, ultrabooks, and Chromebooks have been en vogue. Over the past several months, we've seen signs of the next step in the laptop's evolution: Android/Windows dual-boot laptops. Several companies have built these machines already, including Asus and its upcoming Transformer Book Duet TD300. However, neither Google nor Microsoft seem to want such an unholy marriage of operating systems, and they've both pressured Asus to kill off the dual-boot product lines. Asus has now complied. 'Google has little incentive to approve dual-OS models, since that could help Microsoft move into mobile devices where Android is dominant. ... Microsoft has its own reasons for not wanting to share space on computers with Google, particularly on business-oriented desktop and laptop PCs that could give the Internet giant an entry point into a Microsoft stronghold. Computer makers that make dual-OS machines risk jeopardizing a flow of marketing funds from Microsoft that are an important economic force in the low-margin PC business.'"

Comments

Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

So neither perspective or any reason has the customers interests in mind.

Re:Forget the customer

[Njovich]

Quite the contrary, if the customer didn't want this, they wouldn't care about it.

Re:Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

But can they spell "anticompetitive behavior" ? Strong arming a vendor to drop an otherwise legal use of the product has no leg to stand on in court.

Re:Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

But are there more than a handful of customers who want this? I've always seen dual-booting as a very niche market, and to be honest, usually more of a pain than a benefit.

Re:Forget the customer

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

If these guys had customers in mind, they wouldn't make a half baked half assed hybrid between windows and android.

Not that I'm slamming either, but, this makes about as much sense as a toaster refrigerator combo.

Re:Forget the customer

[roc97007]

I dunno, I see it as a toaster meatloaf peeler combo. In an environment where your job required a meatloaf peeler (although you don't see the use) and what you personally really need is to toast some bread.

Ok, that sounded better in my head.

Re:Forget the customer

[Archangel Michael]

Actually, that made perfect sense. AND I thought it was funny. I have mod points, but wanted to let you know beyond +1 Funny or +1 Insightful

Thanks

Re:Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

What kind of job do you do that requires a meatloaf peeler? What kind of meatloaf do you have that needs peeling? I've eaten a lot of meatloaf in my day and I've never had to peel it first.

Re:Forget the customer

[s.petry]

Whether it's a niche market or not makes no difference. Many of us dual boot systems because our jobs require us to have knowledge of numerous operating systems, and to stay abreast dual booting has been a cheap way of using hardware I purchased to learn and grow in knowledge. I know many people who use dual boot for the same reason. Whether it's a phone or a PC makes no difference. It's "my" hardware that "I" purchased with "my" money. In my case, my company also purchases hardware and dual boots for the same reason that I do.

Neither Google or Microsoft give away the hardware, so they should not be able to force customers to use their operating system. Obviously they should not be at risk of a device gets bricked by someone setting up dual boot or a 2nd OS, but that's not the same thing.

Re:Forget the customer

[Skuld-Chan]

I really don't care about dual booting - in my experience the machine spends most of its time in one environment, and the one time you do switch its got a months worth of patches to install.

Re:Forget the customer

[FatdogHaiku]

If these guys had customers in mind, they wouldn't make a half baked half assed hybrid between windows and android.

Androws!

no no no, wait...

Windroid!

Re:Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

Half baked meatloaf, try to keep up.

Re:Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

So neither perspective or any reason has the customers interests in mind.

It's time to die Goog; it's time to die.

Re:Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry, the free market will sink this companies and create new ones who will care about the users, it always has.

Re:Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

To be honest, dual-boot has traditionally been a very bad user experience as each OS has different ideas about where user files should go, how permissions on the filesystem should work, etc. Each OS is so isolated from each other that getting your files across OSes is a total pain. Not to mention the fact that reboots are incredibly destructive to user state anyway - I have three or four OS installs on my desktop and I only bother using the Ubuntu install because it's the most balanced for my needs. I don't bother using apps that require a reboot into Windows anyway.

Re:Forget the customer

[tepples]

How is it "an otherwise legal use of the product"? The Windows operating system and the Google Play Store application are copyrighted.

Re:Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

I would want it. Have you seen the convertibles like the Lenova Yoga 2 Pro? It's a nice ultrabook, and ok for sometimes use tablet. You can use it as a giant tablet if you have a surface, such as a lap or bed, to put it on. In tablet mode, you don't have a keyboard or mouse. The problem is that in tablet mode, it's a Windows 8 tablet, which doesn't have very many good apps. If I was in the mood to use it like a tablet, I would love to be able to boot it into Android, so that I get good apps, especially games. I can't afford a nice ultraportable and a separate android tablet. Android on the Yoga 2 would make it much nicer and more useful. Without Android, I use my Yoga in tablet mode a small percent of the time. With Android, I would have it in tablet mode at least 20% of the time.

Re:Forget the customer

[nurb432]

As long as you dont have alternatives, the customer's interests come last. There is a line you dont want to cross when you start to lose customers, but that point hasn't been reached.

Re:Forget the customer

[slapout]

It's more like having a refrigerator with a freezer.

Re:Forget the customer

[tlhIngan]

I really don't care about dual booting - in my experience the machine spends most of its time in one environment, and the one time you do switch its got a months worth of patches to install.

Not a problem here. If you spend all your time in Windows that is, because you can bet the Android side won't get a lick of patches!

Re:Forget the customer

[Penguinisto]

How is it "an otherwise legal use of the product"? The Windows operating system and the Google Play Store application are copyrighted.

So is nearly every book in my little home library**, but I'll be damned if any publisher or author will tell me what shelf those books go on, or what books I can set any given book next to. Put it this way: If I want to set my Isaac Asimov novels next to my Robert Heinlein novels, I will. Any publisher who objects? Screw 'em; no court will enforce such a demand on me by either party.

For relevance, I can safely say that no software house will be able to successfully litigate against someone who successfully multi-boots any computing device they paid for. Therefore, by default it's quite legal.

** I have a few books of late 19th Century vintage, so it's safe to assume those to be public domain by now.

Re:Forget the customer

[Penguinisto]

What kind of job do you do that requires a meatloaf peeler?

Among others, Oracle ASM disk management.

...next question?

Re:Forget the customer

[mspohr]

When you burn it in the oven, it needs to be peeled first.
Some people do this repeatedly so I imagine there is a market for a meatloaf peeler.

Re:Forget the customer

[lgw]

Let's remember who Google's customers are (hint: it's not the users). I think Google is specifically thinking of their customers in this move. It's the opposition from MS that baffles me.

Re:Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

MS has been trying to get out of allowing multi booting of PCs for years, now they have a case for it "but Google doesn't allow dual booting".

Re:Forget the customer

[xystren]

Yeah, just sell me the hardware and let my choose my OS or OSes. I Would be perfectly happy with that. If I want multiboot, I'm make my system multiboot. What is this crap about Microsoft/Google not wanting to share space with Google? WTF - it isn't even their hardware, it's the purchaser's hardware!

Re:Forget the customer

[mikael]

It undermines the whole point of having a locked in operating system on the system and all the security features. Now you can poke and prod at one OS from the other. I like the idea - if one OS gets bricked by some update you received the minute you got off the plane, you can flip to the other one.

Re:Forget the customer

[mikael]

I'm thinking more of a dish washer with a built in spin dryer.

Re:Forget the customer

[Dcnjoe60]

How is it "an otherwise legal use of the product"? The Windows operating system and the Google Play Store application are copyrighted.

ASUS wasn't installing illegal copies of the product, they had licenses for both. As such, unless the license states you can't install on a system with any other OS, which it does not, then how was it illegal? I can buy an ASUS with Windows 8 and I can buy one with Android. Evidently, I can't buy one that lets me choose Windows 8 or Android at boot time.

ASUS conceded, not because of legality, but because of business relationships with the two software giants. If they were dual booting debian and fedora and were told to stop, they would have flipped them a bird because debian and fedora don't heavily influence their bottom line. Microsoft and Google, however, do, and used their vast market power to force ASUS into submission or face the consequences. It's bad enough for one company too big to fail to do it, but for two of them to gang up and do it, seems like the US Justice department should be investigating what happened. Oh, wait, Microsoft and Google already control the USJ department.

Re:Forget the customer

[Khashishi]

But customers can still dual boot if they install it themselves, right?

Re:Forget the customer

[Stalks]

Whilst I agree with you on principal, you comparison has a flaw.

Having books on a shelf in your own home, is like taking any laptop and making it dual boot yourself. Nothing stops you from doing that.

I believe the issue here is if you sold a book that was a bastard marriage of Tolkiens Lord of the Rings and Kings Dark Tower all in one.

Re:Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

Shades of BeOS?

I can see why Google would be worried, Windows is well known to f*ck with other operating systems on a dual boot system, how many times has a Windows update or tool wiped over the MBR or other important part of the disk and destroyed GRUB? EFI is only going to make things worse, I've got an EFI laptop that does not have enough intelligence at boot time to change any boot settings and required the Windows tools to do this, and of course the Microsoft boot loader refused to acknowledge the existence of the Ubuntu or SteamOS partitions. Now the disk is 100% SteamOS, the only way of booting is to choose "Boot from EFI file".

Microsoft is worried, because when consumers actually have a choice, the usually and quite overwhelmingly choose the not-Microsoft option.

Re:Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

Because, more often than not, it was done right the first time.

Re:Forget the customer

[farble1670]

nobody is saying that you can't dual boot your own hardware, they are just saying they aren't going to sell it like that out of the box, which is their prerogative.

Re:Forget the customer

[dryeo]

It would be like packaging Lord of the Rings along with the Dark Tower and Huckleberry Finn. As long as the Tolkien and King books were purchased legally and the packaging didn't use artwork and such, what would be the problem?
.

Re:Forget the customer

[jc42]

And next we'll read of publishers suing Amazon to the their "Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought ..." lists. This is just encouraging customers to ask for a package that contains books from different authors or different publishers. (But they do also use it to suggest other works by the same author.)

The most rational response to such perversions might be to simply eliminate the copyright laws. The primary function of such laws is for blocking useful things like we're discussing here.

Re:Forget the customer

[jc42]

What kind of job do you do that requires a meatloaf peeler? ... I've eaten a lot of meatloaf in my day and I've never had to peel it first.

You obviously don't work for the company that I do. The meatloaf-peeler vendors have persuaded our management that meatloaf peeling is an important capability these days, and any company that hasn't adopted this new approach to meatloaf consumption is doomed to quick obsolescence. So, whether our jobs need it or not, we are all being supplied with the top-selling meatloaf peeler, and other brands are banned from our desks.

But don't worry, your bosses will see the light soon, and a new MS meatloaf peeler will be installed on your desk, too.

Re:Forget the customer

[Runaway1956]

They are merely copyrighted. Once I have the license to use it, I can use it in any fashion that I choose. Car analogy? I purchase a brand new Rolls Royce, and drive it straight to a body shop to have it altered to my tastes. Chop the top off, extend the frame. install a suana and a bar, and go cruising around like some Hollywood mogul. Or, instead, I install a collapsible deer stand so that I can go hunting with my hunting club. Rolls certainly didn't envision my use of their brand new car, did they? Do they have any right to interfere with my plans? Hell no!

Re:Forget the customer

[dryeo]

MS has a history of breaking dual booting systems. I had OS/2 which included the IBM Bootmanager to allow dual booting. Installed Win95 (and same with Win98, never tried ME) and at the end of the install it informed the user that the OS/2 partition was no more. No warning to back up your data or anything. I was knowledgeable enough to use fdisk to set the active partition to the Bootmanager partition and was back in business as the OS/2 partition was still there. How many people didn't know the fix and lost everything? And people wonder why some of us hate Microsoft.
Win2k had a different problem which killed Bootmanager and was harder to fix, involving hex editing the boot sector if I remember (perhaps a different sector) and may have been just lack of testing, though hard to believe, by Win2k service pack 2, the first I tried, it actually did tell the user how to re-enable the Bootmanager.
I did like that about IBM, OS/2 came with 2 methods of dual booting and could be installed on any partition though had to be installed on C: for one type of dual booting with DOS.
There are also numerous reports of MS overwriting the boot sector therefore breaking Linux, especially in the LILO days.

Re:Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

I cannot find anything online, someone else might be better at searching that I am, but years ago in the pre-Google times, a fellow at Rainbow Beach in Queensland, Australia wanted to do a four wheel drive conversation to a Rolls Royce. He actually had the balls to phone Rolls Royce and ask if they had a rear facing diff for it and after an explanation of what he wanted to do, they asked him to remove all Rolls Royce badging and insignia and to never actually refer to it as a Rolls Royce.

So, while you are right that Rolls Royce cannot stop you from doing whatever you like to the physical car once you own it, they can protect their trade marks like The Spirit of Ecstasy and what you think you can do with that.

Re:Forget the customer

[dryeo]

Totally eliminating copyright seems a bit extreme though it really needs to be massively shortened and simplified.
Be a good starting point in negotiations though. Unluckily elected governments always seem more interested in supporting business then the people. As much as people don't like the idea of an unelected house such as the House of Lords, it was them who originally forced the original copyright terms to be reasonable (14+14yrs) with works then entering the public domain for "The Advancement of Learning" instead of the infinite copyright that the elected house defaulted to.

Re:Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

Andrew Martin is the sporty luxury version.

Re:Forget the customer

[rtb61]

Both are working to target the same concept, tying the operating system to the device. They both hate the idea of the consumer believing the operating system that came with the device is disposable and can be readily replaced with the OS of your choice, say a flavour of Linux. Two OS's on a device, hmm why not three or more specifically why not replace those two with a third alternate OS. So basically both companies are using the size and predatory power to try to keep other Operating systems out of the market, either as pre-installs of post installs.

Re:Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

I can see why Google would be worried, Windows is well known to f*ck with other operating systems on a dual boot system

That is certainly a legitimate concern. However, they probably also don't want to give MS another vector in the mobile market, esp. one that positively correlates with their own success. That is, the more market penetration Google has, the more opportunity MS has.

Microsoft is worried, because when consumers actually have a choice, the usually and quite overwhelmingly choose the not-Microsoft option.

Most users I deal with will stick to what they know, which is Windows for the majority. But your point holds because it still provides one more path for Google in the enterprise. This is esp. true when enterprises migrate from one version of an MS OS to another. MS is fairly safe as long as enterprise Windows 7 licensing is still available and Windows 7 receives updates, but Windows 9 will need to undo the damage from Windows 8.

For the first time in a long time, MS is vulnerable in the enterprise. Apple seems to have no interest in going after it -- not even the markets willing to pay the Apple premium -- outside of their traditional enterprise territory. That leaves Google, which is capable of fighting that fight, and capable of winning it.

Re: Forget the customer

[Stalks]

No it wouldn't. It is one laptop not two.

Re:Forget the customer

[FatdogHaiku]

Not wanting to speak ill of the dead, but I just can't trust anyone with five first names...
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0551912/

Re:Forget the customer

[s.petry]

"They" were not selling it that way (being Google and MS), it was a company being a bit creative and offering dual boot to customers. They (MS and Google again) are strong arming companies not to be creative with their revenue stream. If I owned a company and we saw revenue from that type of solution why not, and should "they" be strong arming my company away from revenue?

Re: Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

Do it now while it is still legal (cough) like phone rooting.

Re: Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

I have 5 OSes installed on my laptop now. XP, Vista, 7, Kubuntu, and Backtrack.

Re: Forget the customer

[dryeo]

So. I have numerous books on one shelf and pick which ever I want to read. I have numerous partitions on my computers hard drive and pick which ever I want to use. Just like the books are partitioned by their covers, the operating systems on my computer are separated by logical partitions.
Just like someone could sell me a pre-populated bookshelf or box of books, they should be able to sell me a pre-populated computer.

Re:Forget the customer

[tepples]

unless the license states you can't install on a system with any other OS, which it does not

As I understand this article and others like it, the license of the OEM version of Windows and the license of Google Play Store probably have exactly such a provision.

Re:Forget the customer

[Kalriath]

Of course it overwrites the boot sector - how else would it enable the boot loader to run? Complaining that it installs the boot loader is just stupid. And expecting them to add Windows to grub's conf file is a bit rich, considering I don't believe I've ever seen a Linux install suggest "Do you want to install the boot loader, or add Linux to the Windows BCD?"

Re:Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course it overwrites the boot sector - how else would it enable the boot loader to run? Complaining that it installs the boot loader is just stupid. And expecting them to add Windows to grub's conf file is a bit rich, considering I don't believe I've ever seen a Linux install suggest "Do you want to install the boot loader, or add Linux to the Windows BCD?"

You don't think Microsoft could figure out how to write a boot loader that could also boot Linux? Talk about "just stupid".

Re:Forget the customer

[Anonymous Coward]

Then trust U.S.Robotics. All their products are three laws safe, except when they want to become a human.

Re:Forget the customer

[Kalriath]

The boot loader can boot Linux. Edit boot.ini/BCD to add vmlinuz (or a physical disk specification with a Linux boot loader) to it, and Linux becomes another option on NTLDR's boot menu. You can even make it default if you want.

I think I have my next project, then?

[spiritplumber]

I think I have my next project, then? Does anyone want to buy one of these?

Re:I think I have my next project, then?

[Anonymous Coward]

A partially emulated Android environment might be good enough. Compile the open part of the OS for x64, and use dynamic recompilation to run the closed Google services parts and apps. You could have an Android "window" on Windows desktop, and a full-screen mode that would work like the real thing. No need for dual-booting, either.

Re:I think I have my next project, then?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh yeah, and I'm aware of the slow-ass Android emulator that comes with the dev kit. I get the feeling it wasn't build for speed, though, and you could probably do much better.

Re:I think I have my next project, then?

[tepples]

Compile the open part of the OS for x64, and use dynamic recompilation to run the closed Google services parts and apps.

But how would your emulator obtain a lawfully made copy of "the closed Google services parts" and any applications that happen not to be available through Amazon Appstore, through F-Droid, or as a loose .apk?

Re:I think I have my next project, then?

[Kalriath]

Actually, that would be really cool. Run Android under a hypervisor (Hyper-V maybe? It's a Type 1 so runs on the bare metal) and allow it to just open up in a window and communicate over the VMbus with the management OS (under Hyper-V, there is no host OS - the OS you see is actually just another VM but with access to more information about the metal it's running on). Possibly even snap it to the side somewhat like the Xbox One (actually, why can't Hyper-V be snapped?). Be awesome for devs.

Okay, now I can say it. And be happy.

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck Google AND Microsoft.

Re:Okay, now I can say it. And be happy.

[jedidiah]

Always TWO Sith there are...

nothing new...

[Anonymous Coward]

why not just spend the hour that it takes to set up your own linux/windows dual boot?

Re:nothing new...

[Anonymous Coward]

Then why not spend the 100ms that it takes to press Shift key at the beginning of a sentence?

Re:nothing new...

[sunderland56]

If you're going to spend the time, why not configure your own virtual environment, where you can run both simultaneously?

Finally, a valid use for the Windows key: to switch your machine in and out of Windows!

All at your expense

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't make any mistake about it anymore. Google has been falling into the old footsteps of 1990s Microsoft for some time. They're moving to close source anything of value, they're moving to prevent anyone who isn't on board with Google from making decent Android devices, and they're moving to prevent multi-boot.

Welcome to 1999. Google is evil.

Re:All at your expense

[ArcadeMan]

And in the meantime, Apple had Boot Camp since early versions of OS X and are also providing the Windows drivers for their own computers.

Welcome to 2014. Apple are the good guys.

Re:All at your expense

[Kremmy]

What was the cover charge on that one again?

It's really time to move to an honestly open computing model, so we can rely on long term supported systems that aren't being screwed with on a whim by people wearing business hats.

Re:All at your expense

[tlhIngan]

And in the meantime, Apple had Boot Camp since early versions of OS X and are also providing the Windows drivers for their own computers.

Welcome to 2014. Apple are the good guys.

And having installed Macs using Boot Camp, it's one of the slickest ways to install Windows. The tool basically creates a boot (DVD/USB/etc) with the drivers slipstreamed in and everything, so you install Windows and everything just works.

Previous versions of Boot Camp did require you to install the drivers after Windows, but modern versions slipstream them in, so after installing, everything is loaded. No need to hunt through Windows Update and websites downloading and installing drivers.

And no crapware, either. Only Apple can make installing Windows easy.

Re:All at your expense

[Richard_at_work]

Except Apples drivers for Windows are really bad, not fully featured and they regularly deprecate versions of Windows on their kit for no reasons - for instance Windows 8 on 2006 Quad Core Mac Pros with 16GB ram, or indeed any 64bit install of Windows on that hardware will cause Bootcamp to say "nope", despite it working perfectly well.

Re:All at your expense

[Algae_94]

Maybe I'm missing out on something here, but I find installing Windows to be extremely easy all around. It's been years since I've had to hunt down drivers after an install.

Re:All at your expense

[cbhacking]

Seriously crappy drivers, mind you (I've found trivial EoP-to-kernel-from standard-user bugs in them), but at least they exist...

Re:All at your expense

[cbhacking]

Some people think still using 12-year-old OSes is a good idea.

"And having used Apple's AutoEngineStarterCrank, it's one of the slickest ways to start your car. Sure, early Apple cars required you to turn the crank by hand, but these days you just get out, plug the AutoEngineStartCrank into the front of the car, and it does the work for you!"

As "no crapware", somebody hasn't looked very closely at the Apple drivers... Feature-crippled and riddled with security vulnerabilities compared to the standard ones that Apple often keeps just barely incompatible with their otherwise-standard hardware. Report the latter problem and Apple might fix it in the version of BootCamp for the next OS X release. Unless that's any time soon, in which case you'll have to wait for the version after that. In my more cynical moments, I figure it's because Apple has a vested interest in making Windows appear insecure, so long as it can't easily be traced back to their hardware or software being the problem.

Re:All at your expense

[Anonymous Coward]

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

you so funny!

Apple, good guys

no stop it, I can't, ooooh sides aching!

Re:All at your expense

[david_thornley]

My personal experience is that installing Windows often runs into snags.

Confederacy of Dunces

[mfwitten]

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him." —Jonathan Swift

Re:Confederacy of Dunces

[TechyImmigrant]

good quote, crappy book.

What does the consumer want?

[MeNeXT]

Personally I don't care what OS I use as long as I can accomplish the task at hand. I find all OS's missing some functionality. Some do it deliberately and others are missing the developers and/or resources. Android is my preferred mobile platform and OSX is my referred desktop platform. As it stands now both will lose from this choice since I may go for the Air instead of a combo.

Typical

[Anonymous Coward]

Greed vs Greed, and the consumer loses.

NeXTSTEP?

[The Grim Reefer]

we've seen signs of the next step in the laptop's evolution

Who would want a dual boot a laptop with an OS that has been dead for almost 20 years?

But... but... but...

[sootman]

Open! Right?

Re:But... but... but...

[cheesybagel]

I think they shouldn't forbid vendors from going this route. But it seems like a major waste of money. Its always going to be more expensive than either a Chromebook or a Windows netbook.

The major problem it has is it needs to pay the Microsoft tax to exist. That is no way to displace Microsoft from the market.

Re:But... but... but...

[Anonymous Coward]

More like "but who will get paid for the patent licensing if it's both a Windows and Android device?"

Re:But... but... but...

[squiggleslash]

FWIW, it doesn't matter if Google buys a baby mulching building (all running OpenBSD, natch'...), starts selling your information to advertisers (I mean really, not selling services to advertisers that work more effectively because Google has information about you, I mean actually selling your name, address, and fetishes to anyone who wants to advertise with them), arranges a Presidential assassination, blows up the Empire State Building, and worst of all, builds a private monorail to ferry employees between San Francisco and its offices.

Even if Google does all of those things, Android is still open.

This story is not about whether Android is open. It's about whether Google is putting pressure on its partners to ensure they stick with Google's vision about Android when distributing it, and likewise whether Microsoft are doing what they've done since the dawn of time.

Is Google right to this? Probably not. That said, the backlash seems far greater than it ought to be, probably because of a combination of anti-Google shill campaigns of late, because people expect Google to be better than this (nobody expects this of Microsoft which is why it's not a shock), and because several other things they've done lately with Android, such as pushing GMS, which were actually aimed at ending criticisms of Android for being "Fragmented" have been closed and against the entire perceived ethos of Android.

Also their search engine is worse than BIng these days, and that's not because Bing is any good.

Android? It's still open. Ask Amazon. Ask CyanogenMod and the non-commercial phone modding community. Google can't, and probably won't try to, close it. They will continue to try to control it, understandably, but the cat is out of the bag.

A pox on...

[roc97007]

Well, you know.

I hope they keep it up!

[Anonymous Coward]

with such stupid fighting, people may be willing to try real opensource operating systems. I switched my father to a LTS Ubuntu distro and even my technophobe mom only asked how i got windows to look so different when she went to use it. Neither had any complaints when it came to usability for their typical computing activities.

I can't freely switch between Android and Windows?

[Kremmy]

Alrighty kids, now go back to your sandboxes and let the big boys do the real work on the Linux systems.

Eh.....

[mfwitten]

* Apple has Boot Camp because they have to allow Dual Booting in order to lure in the majority of computer users—Windows users. They sure as hell aren't helping Linux users out.

* Apple introduced Boot Camp when they were still user-friendly—before they started constructing their walled guarden (located at 1984 Infinite Loop).

* Of course Apple provides the Windows drivers for Apple's own machines; every vendor that supports Windows has always had to do so.

Re:Eh.....

[ArcadeMan]

Can't you use Boot Camp for Linux or any other operating system?

Re:Eh.....

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope.

Re:Eh.....

[mfwitten]

Just because you can does not mean it's supported.

Guess what? It's not supported.

Re:Eh.....

[sunderland56]

* Apple has Boot Camp because they have to allow Dual Booting in order to lure in the majority of computer users

Most users who want to use Windows software on a Mac will use some virtual solution like Parallels; then they can run Windows and MacOSX software at the same time, without waiting 5 minutes for a reboot.

Really, I think someone deep inside Apple did it as a prank. It is great fun to hang out at Starbucks, and watch the reaction of all the other MacBook users when they suddenly realize that you are running Windows.... on a MacBook.... heads have been known to explode.

* Of course Apple provides the Windows drivers for Apple's own machines; every vendor that supports Windows has always had to do so.

There are enough drivers built in to a standard Windows distribution to allow most common hardware to just run, no special vendor drivers needed.

Re:Eh.....

[Anonymous Coward]

That's *exactly* like asking can you use Windows for Linux?

It makes no fucking sense.

Re:Eh.....

[tepples]

Let me rephrase: Does Boot Camp allow the user to install and boot GNU/Linux alongside the OS X that ships on the machine?

Re:Eh.....

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. Nothing stops you from doing that, also there is no retarded Secure Boot setup.

Re:Eh.....

[Anonymous Coward]

Just like the other 98% of desktop/laptops where Linux is not supported.

Re:I can't freely switch between Android and Windo

[Anonymous Coward]

Alrighty kids, now go back to your sandboxes and let the big boys do the real work on the Linux systems.

Do let us all know when you have solved basic issues like drivers for printers, scanners,
sync with mobile devices, etc.

Because unless and until you have done that, your silly little Linux toy is useless for
those of us who need computers to get work done.

Re:Okay, now I can say it. And be happy.

[MightyMartian]

Where do Zuckerberg and Ellison fit into this Lucasian demonology?

Dual boot is a bad idea anyway

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a tacit admission that both operating systems fail at doing what you want.

Blue Stacks

[Anonymous Coward]

I run many Android apps on Blue Stacks now. ( http://www.bluestacks.com/ )

Yes, it's in Beta, and yes you need a supported video card (most Intel HD Graphics seems to work), but if you have all that, it lets you run many Android apps on a Windows or Macintosh.

Bluestacks seems to be marketed towards games (angry birds, fruit ninjas, etc), but I use it for all sorts of things. For example, Bluestacks allows me to use my USB webcam to direct deposit checks to my bank account using my bank's mobile android app from my desktop PC. Sure, I could use a smart phone or tablet, but with a big screen and real keyboard, there are some real advantages to running apps on a laptop or desktop, IMHO.

Re:Okay, now I can say it. And be happy.

[Anonymous Coward]

Bounty Hunters. The Bounty is your wallet. No matter what you do, they will always get their bounty.

WinDroid: Guaranteed to be a shitty experience

[rsborg]

If you think it's a bad experience when you have a single OS (plus first-party apps) vendor, and a separate manufacturer (e.g.: my Lenovo and it's bevy of task-tray items), try it now with two fully supported OSs out of the box.

While I agree that it sucks that Google and Microsoft both are trying to defeat this initiative, I can also say with a 95% certainty that even if the both condoned it, it would still be a really bad experience.

Google's hypocrisy with android being "Open" is what's really exposed here - in honesty, both Microsoft and Google are as bad as Apple in desiring closed platforms. It's just that Apple seems better at delivering said platform.

Silly me ....

[Anonymous Coward]

... I thought they were concerned with security?

Note to OEMs, ODMs:

[rainer_d]

If your product relies on a 3rd-party to actually attract customers (and/or make a profit), your business model is flawed and you're doomed.
.

Re:Okay, now I can say it. And be happy.

[Anonymous Coward]

They're just douchebags in any demonology or alternate reality.

Re:I can't freely switch between Android and Windo

[Kremmy]

Which would be totally true, if all those services you're relying on to make all those devices useful weren't running on racks of Linux servers.

Antitrust much?

[Anonymous Coward]

So both Google and Microsoft are afraid of the competition this would provide.

So they are both anti-competitive.

Isn't that what our antit-trust laws are about?

Re:Antitrust much?

[WillAffleckUW]

Silly rabbit, the US hasn't used anti-trust law enforcement since Reagan.

Divide et impera

[houghi]

That is Latin for Devide and conquor.

Re:I can't freely switch between Android and Windo

[jellomizer]

All sounds good, until you need to lug around either a heavy bulky laptop or spend a lot of money for a light one, with the enough battery so you can go around with a full work station for real work. When you are web browsing and running simple apps most of the time. You are better of getting a cheap tablet or chromebook with a Data Plan and have your Linux running on a server where you can access for nearly anywhere.

So if you are going to access your server from a low end thin client. What should your core OS be?

Re:I can't freely switch between Android and Windo

[pr0fessor]

Why are you trying to sync your mobile toy with my LAMP!?!?

Re:Okay, now I can say it. And be happy.

[mindwhip]

Where do Zuckerberg and Ellison fit into this Lucasian demonology?

One is from Naboo and the other from the forest moon of Endor. I'll let you decide which is which...

Dual boot is stupid

[symbolset]

Nobody wants this.

Re:Dual boot is stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah yes. I don't like it, so obviously nobody wants it. The mating cry of the shill and the fanboy.

android-x86.org?

[maotsan]

I am suddenly struck by the urge to dual boot on my 8.1 laptop. Is Android-x86 prefect and wonderful?

Information just wants to *SIGNAL DROP*

[WillAffleckUW]

Information just wants to be free.

Or at least 1/20th the cost we get overcharged for substandard service in the US while real First World nations get real Internet, real dual boot, and real security.

You can always dual boot the other way and not "tell" the Win side about the removable 2 TB SDD you have.

Re:Okay, now I can say it. And be happy.

[oodaloop]

Ah, but which is the master and which the apprentice?

XP non-up-dateable

[Msdose]

I want to install android on my XP box so I can still surf the net on android and use my XP programs walled off from the net.

Trusted?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wouldn't dual boot interfere with the level of control these two companies want over devices in their ecosystem? Such as: with a chromebook you usually go into nasty developer mode to run something else. Warning! Warning! Hit a key in 30 seconds, otherwise we will bring you back into the fold! I am sure Windows expects the same thing. Enjoy your puny Win8 tablet but don't you dare install Fedora on it! Why would you do that, don't you want the protection of our Trusted software? Good luck logging into that VPN...

NeXTstep Mavericks

[tepples]

NeXTstep is alive and well; it's just called OS X now. Mac users can use Boot Camp to switch between OS X and Windows. I don't know how well it'd work with Android/x86 though.

Like Linux? Get an HP printer and scanner.

[tepples]

Do let us all know when you have solved basic issues like drivers for printers, scanners

The printer and scanner on my HP OfficeJet 4500 work well with Ubuntu, and any PC running Chrome can act as a proxy for printing from an Android device.

sync with mobile devices

True, GNU/Linux has had trouble communicating with Android over MTP. But Android Debug Bridge works, as does setting up a Samba share on your GNU/Linux PC and accessing it with Rhythm Software File Manager for Android.

Price of a data plan

[tepples]

until you need to lug around either a heavy bulky laptop or spend a lot of money for a light one

I learned on Scroogled.com a couple weeks ago that 10" Windows laptops are back in production.

You are better of getting a cheap tablet or chromebook with a Data Plan and have your Linux running on a server where you can access for nearly anywhere.

If you're going to just use a Chromebook as an X11 or VNC terminal for a GNU/Linux VPS, how much does a data plan for that cost over the 48-month expected service life of a laptop? And how well does 3D graphics (e.g. Blender) tunnel over such a connection?

Re:I can't freely switch between Android and Windo

[Anonymous Coward]

You're stuck in 1999 mate, now days I have more problems trying to get the silly proprietary printer drivers and associated crapware working on Windows than I do getting the same printer to work in Linux.

I actually don't have a problem with this.

[Anonymous Coward]

I own a PC I built myself that is running Windows 7, and I have a Samsung Galaxy S4 running an Android 4.2 custom ROM, and I think the market is already competitive enough. Don't like a Windows phone? Get an Android. Don't like android tablets or laptops? Get a Microsoft Surface, or the like. Each company has their own way of doing things, and I think that it is fair to say "We want a device that is as efficient and functional as possible, while being as inexpensive as possible, and we want you to do it better than everyone else." I think it is unfair to say "Now we want you to design your hardware to be able to run your competitor's OS." That is going too far.

@ s.petry who was talking about dual booting saving them money in their job. You know why your job exists in the first place? Because there are different companies that have created separate, yet popular ways of doing things. Because of this separateness, your knowledge of both OSes is valuable because you can do business with either. How efficiently you obtain that knowledge is your responsibility, but the separateness is universal; the companies should not be expected to make an exception for you just because your job requires it. You want knowledge of both OSes? Then buy both devices, or try to tinker with one device until you can dual boot. But I don't blame the companies for not wanting hardware that makes it as easy as falling off a log. This is actually a catch 22; did you consider that the very device you want to make your job easier is the same device that can make your job obsolete?

When a company is competitive, we get functional devices and they get money and market share. Having a device that can dual boot would be even more functional for the end user, but potentially suicidal for the company. I like Google's services. I don't want them to commit suicide. Sure I might have a cool dual boot device for a while, but what happens when that device dies? No more Google means no more cool next gen Android devices to look forward too, not as well supported as today's devices are anyway.

Re:I actually don't have a problem with this.

[WaffleMonster]

I own a PC I built myself that is running Windows 7, and I have a Samsung Galaxy S4 running an Android 4.2 custom ROM, and I think the market is already competitive enough.

Yea and my oven dispenses delicious chocolate chip cookies if you put the right ingredients inside of it and open the door at just the right time.

I think it is unfair to say "Now we want you to design your hardware to be able to run your competitor's OS." That is going too far.

As a consumer I am sick of the silos, walled gardens and license to fuck over the customer that comes with each vendors try at "ecosystem lockin"

Reality is there is too much value bottled up for the current state of affairs to be sustainable over the long haul. Both hardware and software will become more modular like PCs in the future. Prior technical excuses of severely limited room and processor space has not been true for a number of years and any added costs in generalizing software and hardware interfaces will quickly pay dividends as the barrier to entry is reduced.

Because there are different companies that have created separate, yet popular ways of doing things. Because of this separateness, your knowledge of both OSes is valuable because you can do business with either.

Operating systems are commodities like gas and cookies. The sooner we all get to treating them that way the better off we all are.

But I don't blame the companies for not wanting hardware that makes it as easy as falling off a log. This is actually a catch 22; did you consider that the very device you want to make your job easier is the same device that can make your job obsolete?

Relax, you can always find work in Oregon and New Jersey working the pumps.

When a company is competitive, we get functional devices and they get money and market share. Having a device that can dual boot would be even more functional for the end user, but potentially suicidal for the company.

It really isn't that hard a concept. If you want to stay in business you provide value customers are willing to pay for. The second you have nothing to offer is the second you die.

Modularization is happening whether OS vendors like it or not. I invite those opposed to ignore it.

Re:I actually don't have a problem with this.

[s.petry]

@ s.petry who was talking about dual booting saving them money in their job. You know why your job exists in the first place? Because there are different companies that have created separate, yet popular ways of doing things.

Why my job exists is because I'm awesome (in addition to being modest)! I started working IT before Windows existed, but I have not been locked into Windows, Redhat, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, IRIX, SCO OpenServer, TRUE, OS-400 or MVS. I have surely worked on all of those things at some point, but absolutely none of my career has relied on a specific company or "popular" product. I'm adaptive, I can deduce and solve problems, I can look at large environments and implement my own software when no product exists. Don't assume everyone is dependent on a particular vendor for a job, because many of us have no problems moving around. Many of us that are good at our jobs enjoy doing just that every once in a while for a new view of the world.

To claim I should have to purchase 2 devices to run two operating systems for the same device is foolish. The whole point in developing dual boot long long ago was so that we could increase productivity in addition to saving money on hardware. Companies have no rights to force this either, look at the feedback from Microsoft's secure boot for an example. Consumers don't want it.

A company should have every right to sell expertise in setting this up for people with no knowledge or limited knowledge. This is what entrepreneurship is.

Re:I actually don't have a problem with this.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea and my oven dispenses delicious chocolate chip cookies if you put the right ingredients inside of it and open the door at just the right time.

Huh? What does that have to do with my first sentence? I was simply stating that I own devices from both markets, therefore I speak from experience, that's all. Not sure what the confusing reply is all about...

As a consumer I am sick of the silos, walled gardens and license to fuck over the customer that comes with each vendors try at "ecosystem lockin"

Fuck over the customer? Nobody is twisting your arm, forcing you to buy a phone or computer. Also, if you don't want to be locked in to one ecosystem, like I said before, buy one of each device.

Reality is there is too much value bottled up for the current state of affairs to be sustainable over the long haul.

Sorry, but I call bullshit. Who exactly is creating that value? Not you, not me, and it doesn't magically appear out of thin air. No, the COMPANIES invent, innovate, produce, sell, and support these devices that supposedly have hidden value. They want the advantage of the devices they make, and they don't want anyone else stealing their thunder; what is the problem with that? You seriously expect a company to spend $millions on R&D and then sell their devices, at cost, as a neutral platform? As if they were nothing but warehouse distributors? Dream the fuck on, man. Talk about unsustainable, THAT is.

Both hardware and software will become more modular like PCs in the future. Prior technical excuses of severely limited room and processor space has not been true for a number of years and any added costs in generalizing software and hardware interfaces will quickly pay dividends as the barrier to entry is reduced.

Even PCs aren't really that modular. For the average consumer/end-user, the alternatives to Windows generally are, for the most part, Linux and Mac. Even with x86 Macs, cross comparability is still shaky, with drivers being the biggest barrier. I have tried to get x86 Mac OS to run on my PC a couple times, and while it worked somewhat, it didn't work well enough to be useful. So that leaves Linux, which runs fine. Yay for linux! Know what Android is? Google's Linux. So even if hardware and software are made more modular, who is going to make it that way without trying to leverage some advantage out of the effort?

Operating systems are commodities like gas and cookies. The sooner we all get to treating them that way the better off we all are.

I don't see how you can compare those two. They have nothing in common. Gas and cookies are consumables that take a small amount of effort to make. They aren't that expensive, but once you consume them you have to buy or make more. Operating systems take a substantial amount of effort to make, and they last throughout the life of the physical device. Even if it breaks down you can just re-install another copy. Despite this, Microsoft is the only company that sells their OS. Mac, Android, and Linux are free. The catch is that they are only designed to run on certain hardware, which is how the company that made the free OS gets their advantage.

Relax, you can always find work in Oregon and New Jersey working the pumps.

Really? You just being silly or what? Who the hell would want to give up a lucrative tech job in California to do grunt work in Oregon just so you can have a phone that dual boots?

It really isn't that hard a concept. If you want to stay in business you provide value customers are willing to pay for. The second you have nothing to offer is the second you die.

I agree with you there. The value that companies provide to paying customers are functional physical devices with useful software, and the services they offer through such devices. They stay alive by leveraging every possible adv

Re:I actually don't have a problem with this.

[Anonymous Coward]

I am glad you are that adaptive! That IS awesome!

To claim I should have to purchase 2 devices to run two operating systems for the same device is foolish.

But they aren't the same device. Windows phones are made by Microsoft, and Android phones are made by Google, Samsung, etc... While it might be technically possible to allow the competitor's OS to run, they don't want to do that because of support and market share.

The whole point in developing dual boot long long ago was so that we could increase productivity in addition to saving money on hardware. Companies have no rights to force this either, look at the feedback from Microsoft's secure boot for an example. Consumers don't want it.

Unfortunately the companies that have the money and ability to build the hardware that you work with don't care about all that. They don't have the right to force the consumer to do anything, but they do have a right to design the hardware they make to do or not do whatever they want. When you buy an Android phone, you aren't buying a device that is capable of running any OS out of the box. You are buying a device capable of running variations of Google's OS/Linux, which may be capable of running other OSes after substantial effort and tinkering by the consumer. This is the standard rule of thumb for many devices and their manufacturers.

Let me put it another way. Say you have a nail and a screw, and you want to use both to fasten down a board. Would you try to use a screwdriver on both? A hammer on both? Or get a screwdriver and a hammer? When you buy a screwdriver, it is generally understood that it is designed to drive screws, not nails. The screwdriver handle might be used as a makeshift hammer, but it wouldn't work very well and you might damage it. When you buy a hammer, it is generally understood that you are not also buying a screwdriver; the hammer is only mean to drive nails, not screws. You might try using the hammer on the screw, but you might break it while driving it in, and even then it might not hold very well as you probably stripped out the wood. You want a single tool that does both of these well? Good luck, because I haven't seen one. Such a tool would have a very niche market. Fortunately, I have a toolbox in which I can put lots of tools to be ready for anything. No need to limit myself to 1, and expect it to do everything. Now if Google makes hammers and Microsoft makes screwdrivers, why the hell should they be expected to make a tool that does both?

Re:I actually don't have a problem with this.

[s.petry]

But they aren't the same device. Windows phones are made by Microsoft, and Android phones are made by Google, Samsung, etc..

First things you should do is some homework to see how wrong you are. Phones use the same basic hardware to function no matter what the OS running on them. This is intentionally done to make the cost lower and not something a consumer has any control over.

I have a WebOS tablet that runs Android, and I have PCs that run Debian, Redhat, Backtrack, and Windows. There are people at work running several versions of Android on the same phone, as well as a Windows phone that can also run Android. So they are the same device, it's just a different OS running at a given time.

Your example is wrong, there is no "screw" vs. "nail" analogy to be had. Read the chipset specs for Windows and Android phones and you will find the similarities. This is what people do to save money with development and gain knowledge.

Companies don't generally save money by dual booting in the traditional sense because a phone or PC is not very expensive. They save money in productivity and development time. You are arguing that lethargic single boot systems are the only way to do business, which means you believe virtual machines are out too. We run simulators for chipsets on VMs before we ever touch a phone, and we run numerous virtual Operating systems to accomplish this task.

Change your analogy to a virtual operating system and see if it works out. It won't because virtual machines are very effective, especially in development and testing. Virtual machines came about for the same reason dual boot did. Why have lost cycles on a device you purchase when you can run multiple operating systems and programs and actually use the device to it's fullest potential.

Re:I actually don't have a problem with this.

[WaffleMonster]

Huh? What does that have to do with my first sentence? I was simply stating that I own devices from both markets, therefore I speak from experience, that's all. Not sure what the confusing reply is all about...

What does building PC and owning an S4 have to do with your assertion of an already competitive enough market? Makes no sense hence the cookies.

Fuck over the customer? Nobody is twisting your arm, forcing you to buy a phone or computer

I am forced to use computers and mobile phones just as I am forced to drive a car. It is not possible to elect not to do these things without suffering unacceptable consequences. Hence my desire for viable solutions free of vendor bullshit.

Sorry, but I call bullshit. Who exactly is creating that value? Not you, not me, and it doesn't magically appear out of thin air.

App vendors. They have every interest in the world in maximizing their customer base which means tearing down those silos. Likewise people need to effectively communicate and transact across devices unimpeded by vendor specific hoops and proprietary crap. Todays write 20 times run anywhere nonsense is unsustainable.

They want the advantage of the devices they make, and they don't want anyone else stealing their thunder; what is the problem with that? You seriously expect a company to spend $millions on R&D and then sell their devices, at cost, as a neutral platform?

I expect hardware vendors to make great innovative hardware and sell it for what market is willing to accept. I don't expect vendors to tell me what operating system I can or can not run or otherwise impose artificial limits on what I can or can't do with the hardware once it has been sold. I vote with my dollar.

Even PCs aren't really that modular. For the average consumer/end-user, the alternatives to Windows generally are, for the most part, Linux and Mac.

I can choose from any of a dozen PSU vendors, DRAM vendors, form factors, a few processor, GPU vendors, persistent storage vendors, plug all manner of expansion hardware into any number of standardized interfaces, dozens of motherboard vendors, cooling solutions, keyboards, displays, mice, printers, audio, network. I am free to run any operating system that will run without artificial limits.. Windows, Linux, Solaris, FreeBSD, ESX, Android, ReactOS, DOS, OS/2...ad nauseam.

In the tablet and mobile handset spaces too often hardware is locked down to where it is not possible to install other operating systems without having to exploit system defects. Windows phone loader is intentionally locked down to prevent execution of anything except windows and carriers are increasingly enforcing the same restrictions on their modified android builds.

I don't see how you can compare those two. They have nothing in common. Gas and cookies are consumables that take a small amount of effort to make. They aren't that expensive, but

The point is anyone's gasoline works in my vehicle in the same way anyone's software should work on my computer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...
is the essence of what makes a commodity a commodity.

Really? You just being silly or what?

Underlying point is no joke. Limiting value to consumer for sake of employment is indefensible Malthusian dogma.

Re:I actually don't have a problem with this.

[Anonymous Coward]

What does building PC and owning an S4 have to do with your assertion of an already competitive enough market? Makes no sense hence the cookies.

I can't believe this isn't obvious. The whole point of a competitive market is to make quality products at reasonable prices, right? I think my devices are amazing, and quite fairly priced given their functionality. Therefore, I think the market is competitive enough to provide products I am happy with, which is all that matters; making the consumer happy.

I am forced to use computers and mobile phones just as I am forced to drive a car. It is not possible to elect not to do these things without suffering unacceptable consequences. Hence my desire for viable solutions free of vendor bullshit.

Ah, but you aren't forced to drive a car. A car takes a fair amount of upkeep in the form of gas, repairs, registration, etc... Some people decide to ride bicycles. Who decides what "unacceptable consequences" are for you? You do. That is a choice. You may be forced to make other choices based on your first choice, but it all still boils down to a choice. Nobody is forcing you.

App vendors. They have every interest in the world in maximizing their customer base which means tearing down those silos. Likewise people need to effectively communicate and transact across devices unimpeded by vendor specific hoops and proprietary crap. Todays write 20 times run anywhere nonsense is unsustainable.

App vendors wouldn't have a platform to write apps for without the hardware vendors, and many of the awesome apps we have rely on specific hardware innovations created by the R&D of the hardware vendors.

I expect hardware vendors to make great innovative hardware and sell it for what market is willing to accept. I don't expect vendors to tell me what operating system I can or can not run or otherwise impose artificial limits on what I can or can't do with the hardware once it has been sold. I vote with my dollar.

Ok, first of all, they aren't necessarily artificial limits. Second, do you realize how much more expensive hardware might be if it was sold truly without limits? An example of this is with gaming consoles. Consoles are sold nearly at cost or sometimes even at a loss because the game company intends to make their money back on the games they sell for that system. That's why they try so hard to prevent homebrew. I still have a Xbox 360 that I modded, but the difference is that I was willing to take the risk with my own hardware by modifying it to run things other than official games. I would not expect Microsoft to make a game console that can run any homebrew out of the box and sell it at a loss and hope that people buy their games anyway so maybe they can break even. That's just silly.

I can choose from any of a dozen PSU vendors, DRAM vendors, form factors, a few processor, GPU vendors, persistent storage vendors, plug all manner of expansion hardware into any number of standardized interfaces, dozens of motherboard vendors, cooling solutions, keyboards, displays, mice, printers, audio, network. I am free to run any operating system that will run without artificial limits.. Windows, Linux, Solaris, FreeBSD, ESX, Android, ReactOS, DOS, OS/2...ad nauseam.

The keyword here was "average." The average consumer doesn't build their own PC from all the part choices. The average consumer buys a Dell or something. The average consumer doesn't even know what FreeBSD is.

In the tablet and mobile handset spaces too often hardware is locked down to where it is not possible to install other operating systems without having to exploit system defects. Windows phone loader is intentionally locked down to prevent execution of anything except windows and carriers are increasingly enforcing the same restrictions on their modified android builds.

When I first got my SG

Re:I actually don't have a problem with this.

[Anonymous Coward]

You are arguing that lethargic single boot systems are the only way to do business,

No I am not. My PC triple boots Windows 7, Linux Mint, and Windows XP.

which means you believe virtual machines are out too.

Oh hell no! I have a couple instances in Virtual Box that I use for testing. I use Basilisk II to run my software on the old Mac OS system 7. I use various other emulators such as Mame 32 and Snes9X to run old games. Please do not assume I am coming from a certain perspective and then put words in my mouth.

All I am saying, is that we cannot expect companies to make cool hardware for us and then expect them not to keep the advantage of what they made. We can't expect Google or Microsoft to make/allow the production of a hybrid phone/PC and then also expect them to support both OSes. Not unless they merge or something, and I am pretty sure we don't want that, and anti trust laws will prevent that. So as long as big companies are forced to remain separate so as to be in competition with one another, we should fully expect them to do whatever they can to gain advantage, including making awesome devices which their competition cannot take advantage of.

They don't need to stop it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nobody will buy it except a very small niche group. Dual booting is too much hassle for most people.

Re:I can't freely switch between Android and Windo

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd argue that all of the things you mentioned are not only possible, but work better in Linux. You just have to avoid devices that don't support Linux. Whodathunkit, right? If you buy crap hardware that only works in one environment, it won't work outside that environment!

I honestly don't mind your shitty attitude, though. It means one less uneducated asshole using my OS of choice and pretending it's the OSes fault that their awful printers, scanners, and handhelds don't sync with it. Next you'll start blaming others for Apple's hostile policies, too.

Less competition

[Hentes]

Seems like neither Google nor Microsoft wants to compete with the other, so they partitioned the PC market with Google getting the mobile part and Microsoft the desktop. Business as usual.

no.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's "Divide" you illiterate scrotum.

Let us know...

[Anonymous Coward]

...when you can hold a job for longer than 3 months at a time.

The road to irrelevance

[WaffleMonster]

Begins with fucking over your customers for selfish reasons.

Rreferring to complementary goods in general?

[tepples]

If your product relies on a 3rd-party to actually attract customers (and/or make a profit), your business model is flawed and you're doomed.

Are petrol stations doomed because they rely on automakers to bring in customers? Are game console makers* doomed because they rely on third-party developers to attract customers, and vice versa?

* Other than Nintendo, whose consoles rely heavily on the first-party lineup.

Re:Rreferring to complementary goods in general?

[rainer_d]

If your product relies on a 3rd-party to actually attract customers (and/or make a profit), your business model is flawed and you're doomed.

Are petrol stations doomed because they rely on automakers to bring in customers?

Petrol works for all cars.
Software and OSs doesn't work on all hardware. Esp. mobile.
In addition, petrol stations usually don't get kickbacks from car-manufacturers.
AFAIK, though, a couple of years ago, independent petrol-stations in the UK went bust when supermarket-chains started selling gas below cost for a couple of months...

But hey, if you think that ASUS, Acer et.al. have a viable, future-proof business model: go ahead, their stock is publicly traded ;-)

Think of all the names

[koan]

We could have given their bastard children..
Metroid
Winroids
Andows

Re:Chrysanthi Lykousi

[koan]

Because Linux devs still haven't made an REALLY good default GUI to this day *holds up Unity as an example*

Re:Chrysanthi Lykousi

[ChunderDownunder]

Elop.

When do we get to start killing all the

[Anonymous Coward]

business trash that's fucking up our world? Why should some Microsoft or Google fucks have any say over what Asus does?

Re:Chrysanthi Lykousi

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought so too until I tried xubuntu with XFCE. It's been by far the best desktop experience in Linux for me, and I think i tried them all.

Anyway dual-boot? People still do that? Why not run VM's instead?

A good enough reason

[rossdee]

for people, consumer organisations and politicians to promote dual (or more) boot devices...

Opposite of what I want.

[Anonymous Coward]

they had licenses for both.

Ugh! That's the opposite of what I want.

I want to buy one with NO OS preinstalled, and want to install whatever software I want myself.

Anyone else remember back to 1975 when the Justice Department accused I.B.M. of charging anticompetitive prices for bundling hardware and software services. Same's happening now, just with cartels of collaborating vendors instead of by one company.

TL/DR: Could ASUS please sell one without either Android or WIndows?

Then I'd actually buy one.

VirtualBox to the Rescue

[Anonymous Coward]

I run Android in VirtualBox on my dual boot Linux/Win7 laptop, I use Linux as the host computer, but I'm sure I could use Win7 as the host and use the same Android virtual machine. I would even be able to run them at the same time.

What?

[Anonymous Coward]

"and the one time you do switch its got a months worth of patches to install"

Wait! Android phones have updates?

One copy of two works

[tepples]

U.S. copyright law defines a "copy" as a distinct physical object. If you have installed two works on one hard drive, you have one copy of two works, just as if you had a short story anthology.

Model name: Blivet

[coinreturn]

Ten pounds of shit in a five pound bag. Ten pounds of OS in a five pound box.