pffft
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tjhanson9 Jan 17, 2012 3:50 AM EDT |
I'm having trouble getting worked up by this. This isn't 1990, when Microsoft could drive the market for PCs due to its hold over IBM and Intel. These days Microsoft, across all product lines, has paralysis when it comes to executing. Google Android and Apple products have the market for ARM devices locked up. Both are aggressive competitors and have the appropriate wariness about entering into deals with Microsoft. Neither is beholden to Microsoft for any business needs. Google has even moved to other solutions for its office computers. I'm sure, like Bing and the Kin phone, new Microsoft smartphones and tablets will be the hands down favorites of Microsoft employees worldwide, and little else. |
| cr Jan 17, 2012 4:09 AM EDT |
What Kin phone? They're Kinslayers, remember? |
| jacog Jan 17, 2012 4:10 AM EDT |
I might be misunderstanding this whole thing, but it seems the agreement Microsoft is forcing hardware makers to agree to only applies to ARM devices that plan to ship with Windows 8. So companies shipping non MS ARM devices should be unaffected. |
| tracyanne Jan 17, 2012 5:40 AM EDT |
And ARM devices shipping other thsn Windows 8 will be unaffected. |
| Jeff91 Jan 17, 2012 5:52 AM EDT |
Exactly tracyanne. For some reason people are freaking out like all ARM devices everywhere are suddenly only going to be running Win8. ~Jeff |
| cr Jan 17, 2012 6:01 AM EDT |
It makes sense to worry about a Microsoft that's ARMed and dangerous. |
| gus3 Jan 17, 2012 8:00 AM EDT |
"Only devices that ship with Windows 8" is exactly the manufacturing catch Microsoft hopes for. When you buy an appliance, how many languages are in the instruction manual and on the packaging materials? Lots. It's cheaper to make a run of a million units with all the languages, than to order a dozen runs of smaller quantities, with just one language each. I can easily see the same cost reduction justification coming into play here. And yes, I realize I argued the other side on another thread... |
| montezuma Jan 17, 2012 8:11 AM EDT |
Gus, Surely if MS blocks Linux then it will block Android and Apple as well so your concern may be moot. If a manufacturer wants to ship an ARM unit that runs all languages they cannot ship Windows 8. This sounds more like a stupid move by MS. Of course this is based on my (very) limited understanding of the details.... |
| JaseP Jan 17, 2012 10:02 AM EDT |
M$ will be leveraging their influence with OEMs to make sure that if an Android device ships, the same device (hardware) will ship with a Win8 version at the same or reduced cost, preferably with more features,... ...OR ELSE. Wanna bet?!?! Any takers?!?! M$ is out from under their consent decree with the US DoJ. And they still have loads of money and real competition from Apple. They've gotten out of their "time out," none worse for the wear. They're emboldened... And back to their old tricks. |
| skelband Jan 17, 2012 1:09 PM EDT |
It is interesting that we take this situation for granted on phones and tablets. The interesting point is that Microsoft are open and honest (for a change) about this mandate. Don't get me wrong, I'm vehemently opposed to this kind of thing, but I'm surprised that Microsoft is not more shifty about this situation. It was bound to be inflammatory, so I'm not really sure what their end-game is in all this. |
| helios Jan 17, 2012 1:23 PM EDT |
Skelband, they don't have time for shifty games. Their horse was asleep in the chutes when the gates opened and the race began without them. They are pathetically lagging behind, almost limping. No. their strategy is to strengthen their product name and making ARM "theirs" is their way of doing so. It might work, but then again, when you are dealing with a snake, you never take your eyes of off their head. |
| skelband Jan 17, 2012 2:16 PM EDT |
@helios: I agree with most of what you say. I'm just not sure why they have done it so publicly. Normally these OEM agreements are company confidential documents. In this case they have elected to make this a public document and pushed it out to the web. I don't think time really has anything to do with it. Perhaps they were naive enough to think that nothing would come of it in the media? I don't think so. As I said so elsewhere, the offending piece of text is in italic and bold. It's like they're baiting us in the free software community. I just don't see what their strategy is here other what is blatantly obvious. |
| JaseP Jan 17, 2012 6:03 PM EDT |
They backpeddled on x86... So they feel confident that being bolder'll work on ARM. Guess what?!?! It is... Now the MS shills are saying that UEFI Secure Boot was a FUD cry from Linux advocates... And they're getting some apologist agreement on that,... They'll take the inch, then the mile, and then a light year... just watch. |
| caitlyn Jan 18, 2012 1:33 PM EDT |
I agree with JaseP. I don't think the matter is dead and buried on Intel at all. Also, people, please remember that HP ships servers with ARM processors. There are netbooks with ARM processors. This isn't just about phones and tablets. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!