For most people, every word you said except "this" and "here" is gibberish.
You don't even have to take your hands off the keyboard.
For most people, the productivity bottleneck isn't the time spent moving hands to and from the keyboard; it's having to memorize 1000 commands to use the damn thing. rm, ls, cd, cp, grep, etc. and all their associated flags are not easy for most people. The one I get tripped up on the most is renaming a folder. I want to rename, so is it rn? No it's mv... but I'm not moving it so that's confusing. How about copying a directory? cp is for one file, I guess I need a flag for more, which was it again? and do I type the source first or the destination first? And what about naming conflicts? I guess if I want to deal with those I need to know some more flags...
This is going to go through your head every time if you're anything but an expert. And guess what, not everyone wants to be an expert. People use computers as tools and GUIs help them do that more effectively. I don't need to know the inner workings of a drill, I just know I press the button and the bit turns. Likewise, I don't need to know all the features of cp or mv by memorizing the man page. I just click and drag or right click rename and I'm done.
Some programs won't benefit from a new UI paradigm just like some programs are better on the command line than the GUI. How is location awareness, accelerometers, gyros, voice commands, etc going to make a spreadsheet application better? Does it really need to be better? What you see in touch only operating systems like Android and iOS is a move BACK to the desktop paradigm (keyboard and mouse) because guess what, your fancy gyroscope and light sensor and whizbang multitouch doesn't make typing a document any better.
Moreover, how many Android/iOS apps actually take advantage of all or even a few of those sensors. Most apps besides games just use multitouch. You can't even say they're reimagined, because they just use touch as a stand in for a mouse pointer. Only very few apps are fundamentally different because of touch aside from a larger more finger-friendly interface. Otherwise I see the same GUI elements as on the desktop (buttons, scroll bars, text areas, check boxes, radio control, etc) but with larger target areas. That's not a re-imagining, it's a re-scaling.
If Microsoft is making developers have to re-think their app, their UI, and perhaps their development tools
The app and UI can be completely the same. WOA supports the Windows Explorer and thus the Desktop, so it's not always metro. You can application can look exactly as it does on x86. In terms of developer tools, I don't know. Many.Net developers might just be able to select the ARM compiler flag and go. There are a lot of apps that would instantly be available for WOA if this is the case.
and how they even get their product marketed and delivered to the consumer
They can market their product same as always. Distribution has to be through the Windows Store so that would be the only big change. But given that the software would have to go through an app store for all the other platforms it doesn't seem to be a deal breaker in this case.
but more importantly, a huge third party developer base. Developers who have already significantly re-thought their apps for the new type of platform. The new UI style. The fact that touchscreen, gestures and multi-touch and voice commands are a given -- in addition to working with a keyboard, and pointing device(s). Most traditional Windows developers have not yet or only just begun to think about these concepts.
You seem to be making this assumption that there are only iOS, Android, or Windows developers... and not that most companies these days are developing for all platforms at once. This isn't a matter of stealing developers from another platform or attracting first time devs. This is an issue of a company that develops for iOS, Android, and Windows deciding if they want to support a new platform. Obviously that choice is easier to make if the install base is large (which of course is at 0 now) so it all hinges on how easily Microsoft makes it to develop for WOA.
Pags, Keynote and Numbers on iOS are an absolute joke compared to Microsoft Office. iWork on iOS might do 95% of the job (and I'd argue it's more like 50%) but when Office can do 100% of what I want to do it's an obvious choice to make.
I can now bill myself as both an Android developer and also an iOS developer.
More importantly, as both platforms rise in popularity, any serious employer is going to be looking for a developer who does not one or the other but both. If you had bailed as soon as your company started developing for iOS/Android, you would have found yourself in a difficult position where your skillset did not meet market demand.
no commercial entity have tried to install their software on a naked PC since then
I just showed you 4 examples of companies who sell Windows and an alternative OS. Dell sold Ubuntu machines but that was a bust. HP offers Free DOS on some business class machines. Asus sold Linux on netbooks. Hundreds of small shops sell Linux/clean machines. I believe even Gateway sold computers with Linux for a time. Acer sold the Aspire 5710z with Ubuntu installed. Despite this, exactly none of these products are commercial successes. Where are the hordes of consumers chomping at the bit for a retail Linux PC?
MS have even tried to suggest in the past that all naked PC's word use pirated software and Windows should be installed no matter what.
Not that this should happen, but they have a point; on consumer PCs there are probably more copies of pirated Windows 7 out there than all Linux distros combined.
Fact is there are plenty of smaller outlets that sell PCs with no OS or Linux preinstalled, even laptops. If there were a large market for these computers, people would be buying them and these smaller retailers would grow large. Seems like consumers have every opportunity in the world to use Linux yet only a small minuscule portion of geeks do. Why do you think that is?
Um, Be was released over 20 years ago. Do you have any recent evidence that this is happening? Because I can point to several companies (Dell, HP, Asus, myriad smaller vendors) who sell/sold windowless PCs or PCs with Linux. Can you point to any that were prevented doing the same by Microsoft?
What does this have to do with being a monopoly? The ruling was based on "a French law forbidding the sale of one product to be tied to the sale of another." Seems like Apple ties sales of OSX to sales of Macs. Why would my complaint be any less legitimate?
MANDATORY: On non-ARM systems, the platform MUST implement the ability for a physically present user to select between two Secure Boot modes in firmware setup: "Custom" and "Standard". Custom Mode allows for more flexibility as specified in the following:a) It shall be possible for a physically present user to use the Custom Mode firmware setup option to modify the contents of the Secure Boot signature databases and the PK.
b) If the user ends up deleting the PK then, upon exiting the Custom Mode firmware setup, the system will be operating in Setup Mode with Secure Boot turned off.
c) The firmware setup shall indicate if Secure Boot is turned on, and if it is operated in Standard or Custom Mode. The firmware setup must provide an option to return from Custom to Standard Mode which restores the factory defaults.
Good point. I was basing my argument off the fact that Sony offers a "no crapware option" for $50, and ostensibly large OEMs like Dell can buy a license for less than $50.
As an individual I can buy a Windows 7 Professional 64 OEM license from Newegg for $100. I sincerely doubt that HP is paying the same price I am. I looked at configuring an Elitebook and when you select FreeDos, it also tells you to select a different warranty. It seems like this is the document you get, which basically says you get no software support for the OS, no drivers, no hardware specific features, and there's no guarantee anything will work.
So it seems like they're refunding you support and development costs. Which I guess you could argue is a Microsoft Tax... but then again should I get a refund on any part of a product I don't like? Am I paying a synaptics tax because I have a wireless mouse I use instead? Personally I say take it or leave it. Don't like that the laptop comes with Windows? Buy something else that doesn't.
It is that there are consumers that do not wish to subsidize Microsoft, no matter whether the money is coming from their own pocket or from some parasitic software company.
Shouldn't a consumer as principled as that not buy from a vendor that sells MS products at all? I mean, Lenovo is a big customer of Microsoft. Any dollar to Lenovo is another dollar they get to spend on Windows Licenses.
They might well have trouble explaining the difference between this cost ("peanuts") and the amount that is being charged for separate licences.
I responded to you because that's exactly the principle: that no hardware should be bundled with software. If you read the website of the group who is advocating this ruling, they say: "Why should you not be able to choose, when confirming your purchase, to take or to leave the version of Windows (or MacOS or Linux) chosen by the manufacturer?" So yeah, it really is about principle, and by that principle, even Apple customers should be able to complain. But as you point out, there is absurdity in that. But I would argue that (for most people) Windows is a large part of the of the Dell/Lenovo/HP they buy in the same way OSX is a large part of Macs. Put Linux on the same Dell/Lenovo/HP, and for most people it loses all value.
It's not about getting cheaper hardware, it's about NOT BEING FORCED TO PAY MICROSOFT money for something they don't use!
Uh... so don't buy the hardware if it's a matter of principle. Who exactly is FORCING you do to buy from Lenovo or Dell? There are plenty of small companies that cater to your neckbeard needs if you're that indignant.
Random Online Comp Shop Inc. isn't going to get the volume license discount that Dell/Lenovo get for shipping millions of licenses, nor do they install the crapware that Dell/Lenovo do to offset COGS. Which raises another point, why buy Lenovo and get pissed they don't offer a blank HDD when plenty of smaller businesses sell computers without an OS?
They can either refuse Microsoft's thuggish demands (do not sell linux or we will cut off all supplies of Windows to you)
Do you actually have any evidence that this is occurring? Because I'm sure the DOJ would love to hear about it since that is clearly anticompetitive. Also why can't Lenovo get a special deal like Dell got that allowed them to sell Linux desktops?
No company is going to pay to have their software installed on a Linux machine because their software is not written for Linux. Thus the small cost of the Windows License* is completely offset by payments from these companies. Therefore pre-installing Windows has a positive impact on the manufacturer's cost of the machine which gets passed on to you.
*Again, I don't know what the actual cost of a license is for Dell, Lenovo, etc. but it has to be peanuts for them to sell $200 machines on razor margins.
Like it or not, the software bundled with your computer drives its cost down. Those companies (Norton, AOL, Roxio etc.) pay to have their software preloaded on your machine. If it becomes standard practice to offer a blank machine, hardware prices will just increase. Some manufacturers even offer a crapware free machine for a nominal fee.
Does anyone honestly think that retailers would charge you $50 less (or whatever the cost of the Windows License is, probably closer to $15) if Windows wasn't installed? Just look at Dell when they offered Linux boxes. The cost of the machine was often times more than the equivalent Windows machine.
Lesson learned here is offer an option for an unsubsidized blank hard drive that costs more than the Windows version. Problem solved, no "Microsoft Tax"
I can already do this. When people call my GV number I press * to transfer it to google talk which I can pick up on my computer. I never do this because a speakerphone tied to my computer isn't as good. What I have done is pick up my bluetooth earpiece and "transfer" the call to that.
That's pretty cool! Can it do video too?
I would never spend 60 bucks on a game that's simple enough to be played on a tiny touchscreen. I also wouldn't waste my time at home playing simple games on an xbox.
Do you own an xbox? There are many arcade games that cost a small amount but are very fun to play. I don't know why you judge worth of a game based on its price or simplicity. Many simple games are fun, no matter what platform they're played on.
Windows Phones come in a variety of form factors at a variety of price points determined by the manufacturers. True the hardware variety is not as wide as Android, but that has also allowed Windows Phone to avoid many of the problems associated with keeping the ecosystem up to date; every single windows phone past and present is updatable to the latest release. Can't say the same for Android even over a year after 2.3 was released.
Currently hardware varies by CPU speed, screen tech, memory, storage size, materials, colors, sliding keyboard, camera specs, and software features. And yes there are phones with front facing cameras. Again, this is more variety than you'll find in Apple's lineup (3 storage choices, 2 colors, everything else is the same), and less than you'll find in Android's lineup.
What this leak is saying is that in the future phones will have different resolution, cores, form factors (blackberry-like), upgradable storage, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
if Microsoft starts suing Android tablet makers for patent infringement?
Microsoft has already struck patent licensing deals with most Android tablet manufacturers, including Samsung, LG, Acer, and Viewsonic.
loopback mount this image here
For most people, every word you said except "this" and "here" is gibberish.
You don't even have to take your hands off the keyboard.
For most people, the productivity bottleneck isn't the time spent moving hands to and from the keyboard; it's having to memorize 1000 commands to use the damn thing. rm, ls, cd, cp, grep, etc. and all their associated flags are not easy for most people. The one I get tripped up on the most is renaming a folder. I want to rename, so is it rn? No it's mv... but I'm not moving it so that's confusing. How about copying a directory? cp is for one file, I guess I need a flag for more, which was it again? and do I type the source first or the destination first? And what about naming conflicts? I guess if I want to deal with those I need to know some more flags...
This is going to go through your head every time if you're anything but an expert. And guess what, not everyone wants to be an expert. People use computers as tools and GUIs help them do that more effectively. I don't need to know the inner workings of a drill, I just know I press the button and the bit turns. Likewise, I don't need to know all the features of cp or mv by memorizing the man page. I just click and drag or right click rename and I'm done.
Some programs won't benefit from a new UI paradigm just like some programs are better on the command line than the GUI. How is location awareness, accelerometers, gyros, voice commands, etc going to make a spreadsheet application better? Does it really need to be better? What you see in touch only operating systems like Android and iOS is a move BACK to the desktop paradigm (keyboard and mouse) because guess what, your fancy gyroscope and light sensor and whizbang multitouch doesn't make typing a document any better.
Moreover, how many Android/iOS apps actually take advantage of all or even a few of those sensors. Most apps besides games just use multitouch. You can't even say they're reimagined, because they just use touch as a stand in for a mouse pointer. Only very few apps are fundamentally different because of touch aside from a larger more finger-friendly interface. Otherwise I see the same GUI elements as on the desktop (buttons, scroll bars, text areas, check boxes, radio control, etc) but with larger target areas. That's not a re-imagining, it's a re-scaling.
If Microsoft is making developers have to re-think their app, their UI, and perhaps their development tools
The app and UI can be completely the same. WOA supports the Windows Explorer and thus the Desktop, so it's not always metro. You can application can look exactly as it does on x86. In terms of developer tools, I don't know. Many .Net developers might just be able to select the ARM compiler flag and go. There are a lot of apps that would instantly be available for WOA if this is the case.
and how they even get their product marketed and delivered to the consumer
They can market their product same as always. Distribution has to be through the Windows Store so that would be the only big change. But given that the software would have to go through an app store for all the other platforms it doesn't seem to be a deal breaker in this case.
but more importantly, a huge third party developer base. Developers who have already significantly re-thought their apps for the new type of platform. The new UI style. The fact that touchscreen, gestures and multi-touch and voice commands are a given -- in addition to working with a keyboard, and pointing device(s). Most traditional Windows developers have not yet or only just begun to think about these concepts.
You seem to be making this assumption that there are only iOS, Android, or Windows developers... and not that most companies these days are developing for all platforms at once. This isn't a matter of stealing developers from another platform or attracting first time devs. This is an issue of a company that develops for iOS, Android, and Windows deciding if they want to support a new platform. Obviously that choice is easier to make if the install base is large (which of course is at 0 now) so it all hinges on how easily Microsoft makes it to develop for WOA.
As others point out, what about drivers? How are you going to get third party device drivers for WOA?
FTFA: "Consumers obtain all software, including device drivers, through the Windows Store and Microsoft Update or Windows Update."
Do you think software such as AutoCAD, or Adobe Creative Suite, or um, Maya, or other highly vertical application software will be ported to WOA?
It's more likely than them being ported to iOS and Android, that's for sure.
Pags, Keynote and Numbers on iOS are an absolute joke compared to Microsoft Office. iWork on iOS might do 95% of the job (and I'd argue it's more like 50%) but when Office can do 100% of what I want to do it's an obvious choice to make.
Zune : Windows Media Player :: iTunes : Quick Time
I can now bill myself as both an Android developer and also an iOS developer.
More importantly, as both platforms rise in popularity, any serious employer is going to be looking for a developer who does not one or the other but both. If you had bailed as soon as your company started developing for iOS/Android, you would have found yourself in a difficult position where your skillset did not meet market demand.
no commercial entity have tried to install their software on a naked PC since then
I just showed you 4 examples of companies who sell Windows and an alternative OS. Dell sold Ubuntu machines but that was a bust. HP offers Free DOS on some business class machines. Asus sold Linux on netbooks. Hundreds of small shops sell Linux/clean machines. I believe even Gateway sold computers with Linux for a time. Acer sold the Aspire 5710z with Ubuntu installed. Despite this, exactly none of these products are commercial successes. Where are the hordes of consumers chomping at the bit for a retail Linux PC?
MS have even tried to suggest in the past that all naked PC's word use pirated software and Windows should be installed no matter what.
Not that this should happen, but they have a point; on consumer PCs there are probably more copies of pirated Windows 7 out there than all Linux distros combined.
Fact is there are plenty of smaller outlets that sell PCs with no OS or Linux preinstalled, even laptops. If there were a large market for these computers, people would be buying them and these smaller retailers would grow large. Seems like consumers have every opportunity in the world to use Linux yet only a small minuscule portion of geeks do. Why do you think that is?
Um, Be was released over 20 years ago. Do you have any recent evidence that this is happening? Because I can point to several companies (Dell, HP, Asus, myriad smaller vendors) who sell/sold windowless PCs or PCs with Linux. Can you point to any that were prevented doing the same by Microsoft?
What does this have to do with being a monopoly? The ruling was based on "a French law forbidding the sale of one product to be tied to the sale of another." Seems like Apple ties sales of OSX to sales of Macs. Why would my complaint be any less legitimate?
MANDATORY: On non-ARM systems, the platform MUST implement the ability for a physically present user to select between two Secure Boot modes in firmware setup: "Custom" and "Standard". Custom Mode allows for more flexibility as specified in the following:a) It shall be possible for a physically present user to use the Custom Mode firmware setup option to modify the contents of the Secure Boot signature databases and the PK. b) If the user ends up deleting the PK then, upon exiting the Custom Mode firmware setup, the system will be operating in Setup Mode with Secure Boot turned off. c) The firmware setup shall indicate if Secure Boot is turned on, and if it is operated in Standard or Custom Mode. The firmware setup must provide an option to return from Custom to Standard Mode which restores the factory defaults.
Good point. I was basing my argument off the fact that Sony offers a "no crapware option" for $50, and ostensibly large OEMs like Dell can buy a license for less than $50.
As an individual I can buy a Windows 7 Professional 64 OEM license from Newegg for $100. I sincerely doubt that HP is paying the same price I am. I looked at configuring an Elitebook and when you select FreeDos, it also tells you to select a different warranty. It seems like this is the document you get, which basically says you get no software support for the OS, no drivers, no hardware specific features, and there's no guarantee anything will work.
So it seems like they're refunding you support and development costs. Which I guess you could argue is a Microsoft Tax... but then again should I get a refund on any part of a product I don't like? Am I paying a synaptics tax because I have a wireless mouse I use instead? Personally I say take it or leave it. Don't like that the laptop comes with Windows? Buy something else that doesn't.
It is that there are consumers that do not wish to subsidize Microsoft, no matter whether the money is coming from their own pocket or from some parasitic software company.
Shouldn't a consumer as principled as that not buy from a vendor that sells MS products at all? I mean, Lenovo is a big customer of Microsoft. Any dollar to Lenovo is another dollar they get to spend on Windows Licenses.
They might well have trouble explaining the difference between this cost ("peanuts") and the amount that is being charged for separate licences.
It's called a volume discout...
I responded to you because that's exactly the principle: that no hardware should be bundled with software. If you read the website of the group who is advocating this ruling, they say: "Why should you not be able to choose, when confirming your purchase, to take or to leave the version of Windows (or MacOS or Linux) chosen by the manufacturer?" So yeah, it really is about principle, and by that principle, even Apple customers should be able to complain. But as you point out, there is absurdity in that. But I would argue that (for most people) Windows is a large part of the of the Dell/Lenovo/HP they buy in the same way OSX is a large part of Macs. Put Linux on the same Dell/Lenovo/HP, and for most people it loses all value.
It's not about getting cheaper hardware, it's about NOT BEING FORCED TO PAY MICROSOFT money for something they don't use!
Uh... so don't buy the hardware if it's a matter of principle. Who exactly is FORCING you do to buy from Lenovo or Dell? There are plenty of small companies that cater to your neckbeard needs if you're that indignant.
Random Online Comp Shop Inc. isn't going to get the volume license discount that Dell/Lenovo get for shipping millions of licenses, nor do they install the crapware that Dell/Lenovo do to offset COGS. Which raises another point, why buy Lenovo and get pissed they don't offer a blank HDD when plenty of smaller businesses sell computers without an OS?
They can either refuse Microsoft's thuggish demands (do not sell linux or we will cut off all supplies of Windows to you)
Do you actually have any evidence that this is occurring? Because I'm sure the DOJ would love to hear about it since that is clearly anticompetitive. Also why can't Lenovo get a special deal like Dell got that allowed them to sell Linux desktops?
Seems like everyone who buys a Mac is free to make the same complaint about OSX being bundled.
No company is going to pay to have their software installed on a Linux machine because their software is not written for Linux. Thus the small cost of the Windows License* is completely offset by payments from these companies. Therefore pre-installing Windows has a positive impact on the manufacturer's cost of the machine which gets passed on to you.
*Again, I don't know what the actual cost of a license is for Dell, Lenovo, etc. but it has to be peanuts for them to sell $200 machines on razor margins.
Like it or not, the software bundled with your computer drives its cost down. Those companies (Norton, AOL, Roxio etc.) pay to have their software preloaded on your machine. If it becomes standard practice to offer a blank machine, hardware prices will just increase. Some manufacturers even offer a crapware free machine for a nominal fee.
Does anyone honestly think that retailers would charge you $50 less (or whatever the cost of the Windows License is, probably closer to $15) if Windows wasn't installed? Just look at Dell when they offered Linux boxes. The cost of the machine was often times more than the equivalent Windows machine.
Lesson learned here is offer an option for an unsubsidized blank hard drive that costs more than the Windows version. Problem solved, no "Microsoft Tax"
I can already do this. When people call my GV number I press * to transfer it to google talk which I can pick up on my computer. I never do this because a speakerphone tied to my computer isn't as good. What I have done is pick up my bluetooth earpiece and "transfer" the call to that.
That's pretty cool! Can it do video too?
I would never spend 60 bucks on a game that's simple enough to be played on a tiny touchscreen. I also wouldn't waste my time at home playing simple games on an xbox.
Do you own an xbox? There are many arcade games that cost a small amount but are very fun to play. I don't know why you judge worth of a game based on its price or simplicity. Many simple games are fun, no matter what platform they're played on.
Windows Phones come in a variety of form factors at a variety of price points determined by the manufacturers. True the hardware variety is not as wide as Android, but that has also allowed Windows Phone to avoid many of the problems associated with keeping the ecosystem up to date; every single windows phone past and present is updatable to the latest release. Can't say the same for Android even over a year after 2.3 was released.
Currently hardware varies by CPU speed, screen tech, memory, storage size, materials, colors, sliding keyboard, camera specs, and software features. And yes there are phones with front facing cameras. Again, this is more variety than you'll find in Apple's lineup (3 storage choices, 2 colors, everything else is the same), and less than you'll find in Android's lineup.
What this leak is saying is that in the future phones will have different resolution, cores, form factors (blackberry-like), upgradable storage, etc.