As we all know, the Eee PC, running a modified Xandros, has been a major hit for Asus, and because of that, also a major hit for Linux. The device proved that a computer with a pre-installed Linux distribution can still be s successful machine, and many hoped that this would push Asus and other vendors to produce more computers with Linux pre-installed. This hope could be in vain after all if the new Windows XP-based Eee PC has anything to do with it.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-06-29
Excellent observations. I personally think Asus was able to get a successful Linux-based laptop under Microsoft's radar simply because they were a relatively minor player in the portable market. Unlike Dell, who is constantly under pressure by Microsoft to under-advertise and devalue their own Ubuntu laptops and desktops, Asus was free to partner with Xandros quietly and successfully. Now that their EeePC has caused an explosion of interest in alternative OSes, Microsoft is having to play catch-up and attacking first in Australia where they have even more market penetration than here in the States. Once they really start turning the screws on Asus we'll see less and less of the Linux-based models available.
I think it's a desperate move by a giant whose head was in the clouds for such a long time he didn't notice the townspeople chopping away his feet until it was almost too late. Even Apple is seeing record-setting OS penetration while sales of Vista -- both on new PCs and boxed/OEM -- are stagnant compared to XP's first two years. I don't see Microsoft dying off any time soon, but there's a permanent shift brewing and I'm looking forward to it.
Member since:2006-12-07
I think that Xandros is a small company which must make profit from this. Microsoft is rich, they can accept temporary loss in order to gain in the future. They could afford themselves to give away XP for free, they are going to discontinue it anyway.
I don't think there was a conspiracy behind it.
DG
Member since:2007-02-17
Without doubt this is the case.
The problem will be demonstrating that this is the case to the ACCC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Competition_and_Consumer_Co...
It is clearly "illegal anti-competitive behaviour" and also against "consumer rights & business rights" for Microsoft to be able to force Asus to not offer to Asus customers the option to get the best deal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_Practices_Act_1974
The things that could potentially apply here I have shown in bold from the Wikipedia extract:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_Practices_Act_1974#Part_IV:_Rest...
===================
These provisions prohibit:
* Most Price Agreements (see Cartel and Price-Fixing)
* Primary boycotts (an agreement between parties to exclude another)
* Secondary boycotts whose purpose is to cause substantial lessen competition (Actions between two persons engaging in conduct hindering 3rd person from supplying or acquiring goods or services from 4th)
* Misuse of market power - taking advantage of substantial market power in a particular market, for one or more proscribed purposes; namely, to eliminate or damage an actual or potential competitor, to prevent a person from entering a market, or to deter or prevent a person from engaging in competitive conduct.
* Exclusive dealing - an attempt to interfere with freedom of buyers to buy from other suppliers, such as agreeing to supply a product only if a retailer does not stock a competitor's product. Most forms of exclusive dealing are only prohibited if they have the purpose or likely effect of substantially lessening competition in a market.
* Third-line forcing: A type of exclusive dealing, third-line forcing involves the supply of goods or services on the condition that the acquirer also acquires goods or services from a third party. Third-line forcing is prohibited per se.
* Resale price maintenance - fixing a price below which resellers cannot sell or advertise
* Mergers and acquisitions that would result in a substantial lessening of competition
=====
... There is also a prohibition on "predatory pricing" of product on a market in order to remove a competitor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_pricing
http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/816375
Finally, in Australia, AFAIK product "tying" is also illegal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying_(commerce)
"Some kinds of tying, especially by contract, have historically been regarded as anti-competitive practices. The basic idea is that consumers are harmed by being forced to buy an undesired good (the tied good) in order to purchase a good they actually want (the tying good), and so would prefer that the goods be sold separately. The company doing this bundling may have a significantly large market share so that it may impose the tie on consumers, despite the forces of market competition. The tie may also harm other companies in the market for the tied good, or who sell only single components."
Edited 2008-05-08 12:49 UTC
Member since:
2006-05-19
Microsoft is terrified of any linux computer having broad market penetration and is likely subsidising the Windows version and putting pressure on Asus to sell more Windows versions than Xandros versions. When you have a near monopoly you will do almost anything to protect it. Even if it ends up costing Microsoft hundreds of millions, it is worth it to them. Just my $0.02.