Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 23rd May 2014 18:31 UTC
Windows

As we move forward, many of these lower cost devices will come with a new edition of Windows called Windows 8.1 with Bing. Windows 8.1 with Bing provides all the same great experiences that Windows 8.1 offers with the Windows 8.1 Update, and comes with Bing as the default search engine within Internet Explorer. And of course customers will be able to change that setting through the Internet Explorer menu, providing them with control over search engine settings. This new edition will be only be available preloaded on devices from our hardware partners. Some of these devices, in particular tablets, will also come with Office or a one-year subscription to Office 365.

Windows 8.1 with Bing is exactly the same as every other Windows 8.1 SKU - except for the fact that OEMs cannot change the default search engine - users still can, though. The price for OEMs will be lower, which makes me wonder why on earth OEMs would go for the other SKUs.

Order by: Score:
Seems legit.
by Kver on Fri 23rd May 2014 18:37 UTC
Kver
Member since:
2012-07-08

Nothing anticompetitive about this.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Seems legit.
by kurkosdr on Fri 23rd May 2014 20:02 UTC in reply to "Seems legit."
kurkosdr Member since:
2011-04-11

Nothing anticompetitive about this.

...just counterbalacing Google's model of offering Android and Google Mobile Services (PlayStore, Maps etc) for free, as long as Google Search is default.

Edited 2014-05-23 20:02 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Seems legit.
by Kver on Fri 23rd May 2014 20:43 UTC in reply to "RE: Seems legit."
Kver Member since:
2012-07-08

...True... The semantics are a little different (one handicaps the OS, the other forces it's config) but you're right that both are being scummy about it.

But Google's not evil though! Right! Right? ...Right?

In all seriousness, you are right; They're both trying to pull you into ecosystems, I guess I'm just more wary because Microsoft abuses *any* leeway it gets and the lock-in they present is historically much more dangerous.

Edited 2014-05-23 20:50 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Seems legit.
by kurkosdr on Fri 23rd May 2014 21:22 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Seems legit."
kurkosdr Member since:
2011-04-11

...True... The semantics are a little different (one handicaps the OS, the other forces it's config) but you're right that both are being scummy about it.

But Google's not evil though! Right! Right? ...Right?

In all seriousness, you are right; They're both trying to pull you into ecosystems, I guess I'm just more wary because Microsoft abuses *any* leeway it gets and the lock-in they present is historically much more dangerous.

At least MS allows an OEM to ship a Windows 8.1 device without Bing but with the Microsoft Store if they want to. Does Google allow an OEM to ship an Android device without Google Search but with the Play Store?

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Seems legit.
by tylerdurden on Fri 23rd May 2014 22:26 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Seems legit."
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17


At least MS allows an OEM to ship a Windows 8.1 device without Bing but with the Microsoft Store if they want to. Does Google allow an OEM to ship an Android device without Google Search but with the Play Store?


Android is free (as in gratis) whereas Windows is not. So there is a bit of a difference there, not that it matters. Since each vendor is trying to lock users down into their respective ecosystems.

All of them: Google, Apple, and Microsoft are horrible when it comes to these matters. Trying to figure out one being better than the other is like trying to investigate which part of a fece smells the least bad.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Seems legit.
by WorknMan on Sat 24th May 2014 04:45 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Seems legit."
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Android is free (as in gratis) whereas Windows is not. So there is a bit of a difference there, not that it matters. Since each vendor is trying to lock users down into their respective ecosystems.

All of them: Google, Apple, and Microsoft are horrible when it comes to these matters. Trying to figure out one being better than the other is like trying to investigate which part of a fece smells the least bad.


IMO, an ecosystem these days is more of an extension to the OS. I don't have a problem with these companies providing me with their own solution as a default, as long as I can change to whatever I want. Strangely, the only company I know of who doesn't really give you this flexibility is Amazon. You buy a Kindle, you're pretty much stuck with Amazon, unless you jailbreak.

Reply Score: 4

RE[6]: Seems legit.
by tylerdurden on Sat 24th May 2014 21:33 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Seems legit."
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

They all do it.

If you buy content through apple/google/microsoft, you have to access it through them.

We're all walking revenue machines as far as any corporation is concerned.

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Seems legit.
by WorknMan on Mon 26th May 2014 09:35 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Seems legit."
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

If you buy content through apple/google/microsoft, you have to access it through them.


Depends on what the content is. Books and movies, probably. Music? Not so much. Apps for sure, but that's pretty much a given. And besides, you can pick and choose where you get your content, so I can use iOS or Android and buy books and music on Amazon. (Amazon's ebook DRM is easy to crack.) I don't purchase movies digitally, but do rent from time to time.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Seems legit.
by glarepate on Fri 23rd May 2014 23:32 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Seems legit."
glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

With AOSP they allow the manufacturer to ship the device without Google Search, the Play Store, Google Maps, etc.

The device cannot bear the Android trademark though. And the Google apps can be installed by the end user if they wish to do so.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Seems legit.
by kurkosdr on Sat 24th May 2014 08:13 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Seems legit."
kurkosdr Member since:
2011-04-11

And the Google apps can be installed by the end user if they wish to do so.


Yeah, by infringing on the copyrights of Google. That's why no major site hosts said apps.

Essentially, installing the Google apps on a device that doesn't have them isn't any different than pirating Office and installing it on a PC which shipped without Office.

Edited 2014-05-24 08:14 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Seems legit.
by unclefester on Sat 24th May 2014 10:53 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Seems legit."
unclefester Member since:
2007-01-13

You can make a perfectly usable ecosystem using non Google alternatives. There are plenty of other app stores, maps and email services. Many of the smaller Chinese OEMs use AOSP as a base system and add non Google components.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Seems legit.
by glarepate on Sat 24th May 2014 20:10 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Seems legit."
glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

A.) It's not a copyright restriction, it's a trademark restriction. Vendors that use AOSP can't use the Android trademark.

B.) What is your definition of a major site?

More major than Cyanogenmod or goo.im?

Not major enough? Download the gapps downloader app from The Play Store.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.itslightness.gapps...

If the Play Store is infringing on Google's copyrights maybe Google should shut it down. Or not agree to host apps that they object to.

Installing the gapps package is no more piracy than installing Skype would be.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Seems legit.
by kurkosdr on Sat 24th May 2014 22:22 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Seems legit."
kurkosdr Member since:
2011-04-11

A.) It's not a copyright restriction, it's a trademark restriction. Vendors that use AOSP can't use the Android trademark.

B.) What is your definition of a major site?

More major than Cyanogenmod or goo.im?

Not major enough? Download the gapps downloader app from The Play Store.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.itslightness.gapps...

If the Play Store is infringing on Google's copyrights maybe Google should shut it down. Or not agree to host apps that they object to.

Installing the gapps package is no more piracy than installing Skype would be.

Wow. Turns out I was wrong. After CyanogenMod was forced to backup Gapps and restore them, I assumed you can't just distribute them. Guess I was wrong. I can't upvote you because I 've already posted.

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Seems legit.
by Kver on Sat 24th May 2014 01:44 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Seems legit."
Kver Member since:
2012-07-08

I consider them (Android and Play) different products; Microsoft wouldn't even allow you to use Windows if you didn't use the Microsoft store.

Google just plays all-or-nothing with apps and the trademark, the software is not only free, but open. People can and have taken the whole OS and made outright competitors (Kindle, Cyanogen, Firefox OS, to name a few)

But I do agree bundling search and the app store is sketchy, but Google does NOT prevent shipping Android-based devices because of the play store.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Seems legit.
by tidux on Tue 27th May 2014 11:00 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Seems legit."
tidux Member since:
2011-08-13

Linux Mint has monkeyed with the default Firefox search engine for years to redirect through a Linux Mint affiliate page to help raise money. Microsoft's doing the same thing on a larger scale, with a worse browser. As long as the user can change this, I honestly don't see the problem. My beef with Windows 8.x is the Restricted Boot shenanigans in the badging requirements, because that's NOT always easy for the user to manage after the fact.

Reply Score: 2

Great experiences?
by ml2mst on Fri 23rd May 2014 19:07 UTC
ml2mst
Member since:
2005-08-27

Windows 8.1 with Bing provides all the same great experiences that Windows 8.1 offers


What "great experiences"?

ModernUI, with its chaotic Windows Store and half baked (cr)apps?

Edited 2014-05-23 19:08 UTC

Reply Score: 5

RE: Great experiences?
by glarepate on Fri 23rd May 2014 23:33 UTC in reply to "Great experiences?"
glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

+3

Reply Score: 1

RE: Great experiences?
by glarepate on Mon 26th May 2014 14:57 UTC in reply to "Great experiences?"
glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

And don't forget the "great experience" of using what is no doubt the fugliest U.I on any smartphone, if not ever at least currently.

This emphasizes that great doesn't necessarily mean good even if it is commonly used that way.

Reply Score: 1

Comment by ddc_
by ddc_ on Fri 23rd May 2014 21:06 UTC
ddc_
Member since:
2006-12-05

The price for OEMs will be lower, which makes me wonder why on earth OEMs would go for the other SKUs.
K.O. suggests: to avoid Bing.

Reply Score: 2

Price tag
by pgeorgi on Sat 24th May 2014 09:23 UTC
pgeorgi
Member since:
2010-02-18

So essentially there's now a price tag on "default search engine" deals: Google, ask.com and others must offer at least the difference as kickback to OEMs, and then some to warrant the extra effort.

I wonder if they'll extend that system so not installing demo versions (antivirus 90 days trials) is cheaper, raising the kickbacks those software vendors have to offer to OEMs for that preferential treatment.

Question is, where's the limit - how about "$x cheaper if you don't preinstall Open/LibreOffice"?

Reply Score: 4

A zero price tag stripped ...
by pica on Sat 24th May 2014 13:57 UTC
pica
Member since:
2005-07-10

down,reduced to the bare essentials variant of Windows 8.1 restricted by licence to virtual machines only would be fine.

That variant can
* be restricted to 2GB RAM
* be restricted to 100GB disk space
* lack multi-user support and as a result login, but explicit user acknowledge of administrative tasks should remain
* lack FS crypto features
* ...

Uses of such a version could be
* secure web browsing environment
* try out new software w/o need to install it on the "productive" system
* as a base for virtual appliances (a 20% "tax" on virtual appliances sold, would be IMHO acceptable)
* ...

Greetings,
pica

PS IBM VM/CMS ?

Edited 2014-05-24 14:06 UTC

Reply Score: 3

Simple
by deathshadow on Sun 25th May 2014 02:30 UTC
deathshadow
Member since:
2005-07-12

Why vendors would go for other SKU's is simple -- search engines will pay to have their engine as the default and have their crapplets that make every OS suck installed -- just as vendors of other goofy crapplets like DVD burning or media downloads pay the big vendors to include their OS ruining garbage. It's why so many pre-built computers are so doped to the gills with crapware that anyone who knows anything about owning such a system will wipe it bare with a clean OS install off a real distro DVD before even THINKING about using the system.

Creating this lower priced SKU set with BING by default, is simply Microsoft's way of setting how much paying to have your search engine included per machine is going to be. They're setting the bar for their competitors.

Which IS an uncompetitive practice that given their market dominance WILL likely land them in court... AGAIN. Sadly a ruling against them will play favoritism though, since it won't apply to all vendors equally.

Just because it's wrong for an alleged monopoly with market dominance to do something, doesn't make it right for everyone else to. A concept lost on "Civil Law" nations and geopolitical groups like the EU. See the whole "bundling media player" bull from about a decade ago.

Reply Score: 1