Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 8th Mar 2014 14:39 UTC
Google

Google is the force behind a potential delay in the first tablet to instantly switch between Windows 8.1 and Android 4.X using Intel technology, a fresh report from Asia says. A CNET source backs up this claim.

The original source is DigiTimes, so some salt may be required, but sources confirmed it to Cnet. There's no detail on exactly which steps Google has actually taken, but it's clear this reeks quite strongly of the same illegal and despicable acts Microsoft committed 15 years ago to pressure OEMs into not shipping BeOS.

Order by: Score:
v Where's the difference?
by franzrogar on Sat 8th Mar 2014 14:55 UTC
RE: Where's the difference?
by kwanbis on Sat 8th Mar 2014 15:48 UTC in reply to "Where's the difference?"
kwanbis Member since:
2005-07-06

Because this is not "google's hardware"?

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Where's the difference?
by porcel on Sun 9th Mar 2014 14:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Where's the difference?"
porcel Member since:
2006-01-28

You cannot sell Apple software on non-apple hardware as a few companies have learned. I completely disagree with this stance, but let´s be very clear about where things stand right now.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Where's the difference?
by linux-lover on Sat 8th Mar 2014 15:55 UTC in reply to "Where's the difference?"
linux-lover Member since:
2011-04-25

Apple produces a mobile operating system. Apple does not give the license to use this operating system to third party OEMS. Therefore nobody but Apple is permitted redistribute this operating system.

Google and Microsoft both produce mobile operating systems. Both give licenses to third party OEMS to use their respective operating systems. Thom says one of these operating system vendors trying to impede an OEM from licensing the operating system from the other vendor is "illegal and despicable". This situation is obviously different from the Apple situation.

I do not know how this could be made more clear to you.

Reply Score: 5

We need Microsoft and Google
by ConceptJunkie on Sat 8th Mar 2014 16:16 UTC
ConceptJunkie
Member since:
2012-05-18

Too bad Google wasn't around to keep Microsoft in check back when Microsoft was doing everything it wanted to with impunity. We need a balance of power, and despite being a despicable company, Microsoft's value lies in keeping Google from becoming the same thing.

Reply Score: 4

RE: We need Microsoft and Google
by glarepate on Sat 8th Mar 2014 16:45 UTC in reply to "We need Microsoft and Google"
glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

Good concept.

Apparently not popular though.

Reply Score: 2

RE: We need Microsoft and Google
by hobgoblin on Sun 9th Mar 2014 14:43 UTC in reply to "We need Microsoft and Google"
hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

And this is why MS was brought up on antitrust charges, but then the US government flinched (and the EU regulators didn't do much better).

Reply Score: 2

Jump to conclusions too fast?
by acobar on Sat 8th Mar 2014 16:34 UTC
acobar
Member since:
2005-11-15

OK, I am not what would be qualified as a "Google" user. My preferred browser is Firefox, my main email is not gmail (it is not even my third) and most projects I'm more interested are on github or sourceforge. I use their search engine (and like it) but also Bing and duckduckgo.

It looks like two sources said that Google is behind the delays but we need to know how trustful they are and, much more important, we should know what are the reasons for the delay, it may very well be related to drivers not been ready yet on Android side. Without these informations everything is just wild speculation.

Reply Score: 11

Dual boot is unusual...
by rklrkl on Sat 8th Mar 2014 17:24 UTC
rklrkl
Member since:
2005-07-06

It's rare to see any OEM to commit to shipped a dual boot setup pre-installed, mainly because it can potentially double any support (or licensing) costs they may have to incur.

Also, how much sharing goes on between Windows and Android in this setup? Can both OS'es see each other's filestore? Can they even share Android app installs (Windows side using Bluestacks or something perhaps)? Can you run Windows apps on the Android side? Is identical pre-installed software (e.g. browsers, mail clients, office suites etc) present and, again, able to share config/data between the two OS'es?

If the answer to any of the above is no, then I'm struggling to see the point of shipping dual boot. Having said that, I set up my desktop PC dual boot simply to run games in Windows, which is basically all that OS is good for really (Linux tops it in every other department, IMHO).

Reply Score: 4

RE: Dual boot is unusual...
by riha on Sat 8th Mar 2014 19:49 UTC in reply to "Dual boot is unusual..."
riha Member since:
2006-01-24

But that is up to each hardware vendor to choose, not Google (or Microsoft).

Edited 2014-03-08 19:49 UTC

Reply Score: 3

Triple-boot.
by leech on Sat 8th Mar 2014 18:51 UTC
leech
Member since:
2006-01-10

I've been trying to get a nice Triple-boot going on my HP Touchsmart TX2-1025. I just about have it all working. Windows 8.1, Android-x86 4.4-RC1 and Tanglu (which is a Debian based distribution with newest Gnome/KDE, based on Testing).

Literally the only thing I've found in testing Android on it that doesn't work (granted it's a big one) is the touch screen, which seems like I should be able to fix it with modifying the defconfig file and building a new ISO.

Wouldn't it be kind of cool for an OEM to start selling triple boot systems. Hell, they could even do a triple boot with Windows 8.x, 7 and Android. Now if I could only add Sailfish to my Touchsmart as well... ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Triple-boot.
by andih on Sun 9th Mar 2014 22:52 UTC in reply to "Triple-boot."
andih Member since:
2010-03-27

I reboot my system once a month. For anything like testing things, playing with setups and stuff, I virtualize it using kvm:)

dual boot is so 1995 :p

Reply Score: 3

Not "usual" dual boot
by Ithamar on Sat 8th Mar 2014 20:21 UTC
Ithamar
Member since:
2006-03-20

As it seems TFA mentions "instantly switch ... using Intel technology" I suspect it is using hypervisor tech or so to "instantly" switch between Windows/Android....

This is all guessing, but if that's it, it is actually a pretty neat solution, basically running both at the same time...

Reply Score: 4

RE: Not "usual" dual boot
by Temcat on Sun 9th Mar 2014 09:40 UTC in reply to "Not "usual" dual boot"
Temcat Member since:
2005-10-18

Does it mean that about half of the hardware resources stay unused when you use any one of the two OSs? If so, I'd prefer the real, "slow" dual-boot. I'd mainly use the thing as an Android tablet, but occasionally, when there is a need to work on the go, I'd boot into Windows, and use all resources for each of the OSs at all times.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Not "usual" dual boot
by Ithamar on Sun 9th Mar 2014 09:44 UTC in reply to "RE: Not "usual" dual boot"
Ithamar Member since:
2006-03-20

Too little information in TFA to tell, but I'm sure looking at the original wording it is more then just the "classic" dual boot setup... That might also be why Google is concerned (for side effects or so)....

We will not know until more technical details are revealed I guess...

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Not "usual" dual boot
by hobgoblin on Sun 9th Mar 2014 14:47 UTC in reply to "RE: Not "usual" dual boot"
hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

Nope. A modern chipset these days, from both AMD and Intel, can do address remapping. Meaning that code that wants to talk directly to hardware, like say GPU drivers, will think they have free reign. While in reality they are assigned different address ranges for each VM.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Not "usual" dual boot
by Temcat on Sun 9th Mar 2014 17:18 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not "usual" dual boot"
Temcat Member since:
2005-10-18

OK, what about processor cores? Can one of the OSs take over all the cores?

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Not "usual" dual boot
by hobgoblin on Sun 9th Mar 2014 18:30 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Not "usual" dual boot"
hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

If the other is idled, sure. We are pretty much talking virtual machines here, but ones running as close to the hardware as technically possible.

Reply Score: 3

No sympathy for the devil
by bert64 on Sun 9th Mar 2014 11:00 UTC
bert64
Member since:
2007-04-23

While Google's acts may well be despicable, given their past history i have absolutely no sympathy for microsoft in this case.

Reply Score: 2

RE: No sympathy for the devil
by bnolsen on Sun 9th Mar 2014 13:34 UTC in reply to "No sympathy for the devil"
bnolsen Member since:
2006-01-06

Patent trolling by MS extracting fees from manufacturers that caved in to pressure to undisclosed patents is one. The other is adding an extra MS tax to what could be seen as a Google device. I would have no sympathy if I were Google in this case.

for all we know MS could be the ones who initiated the dual boot push in the first place. I might bet on that.

Edited 2014-03-09 13:37 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Despicable?
by vtpoet on Sun 9th Mar 2014 15:40 UTC
vtpoet
Member since:
2013-12-31

If true, it's probably more accurate to consider the move in a broader context. MS has declared war on all competing OS's from day one, and not just in the marketplace of ideas or merit. If they can't beat them, then buy them, sue them, troll them, 'predatory price' them out of existence, yadda, yadda, yadda. MS has no scruples.

So, I take Thom's posturing with a bus-sized grain of salt. This is the way the game is played, like it or not. If it's truly illegal (which isn't clear) then there are lawyers to sort that out. You might not like the rules but if some bully were constantly trying to knock your teeth out I expect you wouldn't want to share your seat on the bus with them; despite what Thom -- like some little Miss Molly Doright with curly locks -- thinks of it.

Reply Score: 3

Excuses...
by bowkota on Sun 9th Mar 2014 16:51 UTC
bowkota
Member since:
2011-10-12

Love that whenever he posts news that reflect negatively on Google, he'll always start with excuses before going on to the real news.
Close enough to the definition of bias.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Excuses...
by Thom_Holwerda on Sun 9th Mar 2014 17:28 UTC in reply to "Excuses..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Love that whenever he posts news that reflect negatively on Google, he'll always start with excuses before going on to the real news.
Close enough to the definition of bias.


Except, of course, that I normally skip DigiTimes news altogether - including all those times they ramble on negatively about Apple.

But hey, don't let reality and truth get in the way of your narrative!

Reply Score: 3

Those who...
by Drunkula on Mon 10th Mar 2014 13:02 UTC
Drunkula
Member since:
2009-09-03

Those who don't learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.

Reply Score: 2