Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 2nd Nov 2009 23:59 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 392725
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[12]: Windows market share
by PlatformAgnostic on Wed 4th Nov 2009 07:32
in reply to "RE[11]: Windows market share"
RE[13]: Windows market share
by lemur2 on Wed 4th Nov 2009 09:08
in reply to "RE[12]: Windows market share"
Do you have actual evidence of this? I believe that this particular thing is against the Consent Decree Microsoft agreed to with the DOJ. This is supposedly being enforced by the US Federal Courts.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/microsoft-windows-netbook-hardware...
http://apcmag.com/microsoft-revises-netbook-hardware-spec-for-windo...
How does Microsoft get to specify a hardware limit?
Hmmmmm?
They do it by saying ... "beyond that limit, you cannot have Windos cheap".
Therefore, Microsoft sets the price of Windows to OEMs depending on what machines the OEMs want Windows for. It doesn't actually matter to Microsoft's costs one whit if an OEM wants to put Windows on small machine with one, two or three GB of RAM ... but Microsoft varies the price to the OEM tremendously based on exactly that.
Therefore, there is no OEM price for Windows based on what it cost Microsoft to produce. It is based only on how Microsoft wants to manipulate the market. Microsoft manipulates the OEMs using its price to OEMs. That much is easily shown.
This is not illegal AFAIK, but it does tell you what goes on, and based on the market reality (where no vendor displays Windows machines and Ubuntu machines on the same hardware side-by-side in the same store) ... draw your own conclusions.







Member since:
2007-02-17
OEMs are indeed customers for Microsoft licensing. OEMs receive a huge "discount" from Microsoft for the price that they pay to Microsoft for each license, provided that they offer Windows exclusively. Retail outlets are subjected to similar deals.
A good example is in the story of netbooks. Initially, these were sold only with Linux (Xandros was a very poor choice of Linux distribution, but it was nevertheless Linux). XP was being withdrawn at the time, and Vista wouldn't run on the machines. Other manufacturers started to build similar machines (but somehow they all had very poor Linux distributions, mostly from Linux vendors who had signed a deal with Microsoft, and all of which were either "locked down" or had only very sparsely populated repositories. Hmmm. Where was an unconstrained, open Debian or Ubuntu model? Why did many have closed-source-driver-only wireless chips?).
Within a few months, once the netbooks had begun to sell in significant numbers, Microsoft brought XP Home out of mothballs. They allowed OEMs to put XP on newer model netbooks (which suddenly had hard drives added to their design in order to accomodate XP) at a bargain basement price provided Linux was not offered on the same model.
In my area, and as far as I know it happened all over the world in a similar fashion, one week you could buy Linux netbooks in retail stores, and the very next weekend you couldn't. Not a one for sale. Hmmmm. Remarkable that all that stock just disappeared overnight, no?
After a while, Microsoft even began to set hardware limits on netbooks. How does Microsoft get to do this?? Microsoft don't make the hardware! They get to do this by saying that they will not give OEMs that "discount" price if their netbooks exceed the stipulated specifications.
Retail stores and OEMs are NOT free to sell whatever they like to consumers. Not if they also want to sell Windows at a competitive price.
This is why you get a few vendors who sell Linux only, and the majority of vendors who sell Windows only.
http://www.zareason.com/shop/home.php
http://www.system76.com/
Zareason and System 76 don't get any "discounted price" for selling Windows licenses, because they sell Ubuntu. Zareason and System76 couldn't sell a Windows machine as an alternative, because its price would be horrendous.
This way, you just don't get any machines with an Ubuntu OS pre-installed in the same brick-and-mortar store sold side-by-side with Windows machines with the exact same hardware.
Consumers don't get to do any such a side-by-side hands on comparison. Consumers don't get any choices offered to them.
Edited 2009-11-04 04:23 UTC