Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 19th Jun 2012 00:10 UTC
Windows So, the Microsoft announcement - taking place as I write this, 01:45 in my timezone - turns out to be a bigger deal than expected. Microsoft just announced it's going full-on hardware - the company announced a new tablet called 'Surface', and boy, is this thing something to behold. Microsoft's hardware partners? They're not happy right now. Update: Here's Microsoft's official Surface site. I believe someone coined the phrase 'sexy as a succubus' in the comments about Vizio? Stealin' it! Update II: They aren't just taking the iPad head-on - this is a straight-up MacBook Air competitor.
Thread beginning with comment 522798
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: ARM
by Soulbender on Tue 19th Jun 2012 04:56 UTC in reply to "RE: ARM"
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

That doesn't make their demands any less anti-competitive and it's obviously an attempt to use their existing desktop "monopoly" as leverage to pro-actively prevent competition in a market where they are currently a minor player.

Reply Parent Score: 10

RE[3]: ARM
by Nelson on Tue 19th Jun 2012 05:26 in reply to "RE[2]: ARM"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

That doesn't make their demands any less anti-competitive and it's obviously an attempt to use their existing desktop "monopoly" as leverage to pro-actively prevent competition in a market where they are currently a minor player.


No, because there is true and legitimate choice in the ARM market. Again, Microsoft has zero marketshare. Existing Windows applications do not run on Windows RT. It is a separate product.

Microsoft may have once held a monopolistic position on the computing landscape, but to say that it still does today is disingenuous. Computing has shifted to far more devices, beyond traditional PCs and true alternatives have sprung up.

If Microsoft makes any inroads in the tablet market it will be on the merits of Wndows RT itself.

And I quite enjoy the double speak a lot of people use with regards to Windows 8. Some say it won't sell, no one will like Metro, it'll cause Microsoft to lose revenue (give me a break) while at the same time decrying the unfair monopoly that Microsoft has and how its going to ensure Microsoft dominates, and how general purpose computing is over.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: ARM
by dsmogor on Tue 19th Jun 2012 08:05 in reply to "RE[3]: ARM"
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

> And I quite enjoy the double speak a lot of people use > with regards to Windows 8. Some say it won't sell, no > one will like Metro, it'll cause Microsoft to lose revenue (give me a break) while at the same time decrying the unfair monopoly that Microsoft has and how its going to ensure Microsoft dominates, and how general purpose computing is over

There's not contradiction in this logic, while Win8 may flop in traditional MS turf (esp. enterprise) it makes an interesting tablet offering, a serious treat to Android in ARM tablet space. And that's where it's restrictions may shape hardware standards (ARM PC) to exclude Linux and any other oses for that matter.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: ARM
by JAlexoid on Tue 19th Jun 2012 13:02 in reply to "RE[3]: ARM"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

You do realise that anti-trust laws actually cover cross market actions.

Also, computing landscape is not a market. Come back when there is no massive disincentive for PC manufacturers of releasing computers without an OS.

Though it does not necessarily mean that Microsoft will act in an anti-competitive manner.

Edited 2012-06-19 13:03 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: ARM
by UltraZelda64 on Tue 19th Jun 2012 21:12 in reply to "RE[3]: ARM"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

No, because there is true and legitimate choice in the ARM market. Again, Microsoft has zero marketshare. Existing Windows applications do not run on Windows RT. It is a separate product.

There won't be, once Microsoft forces their way in. Choice will go down the shitter once Windows 8 starts being released on tablets, because ALL of these tablets will be released with it (which will in turn popularize ARM even more) will downright *refuse* to run anything that Microsoft doesn't either create themselves... or bless with their key for a hundred bucks.

Once Windows 8 has turned Android, and probably iOS, into much more minor players, it will proceed to popularize the ARM platform for traditional laptops and desktops. The only problem? By this time, unless the government has already gotten into the situation due to anti-trust issues, ARM as an architecture will already be royally fucked. It will have already succeeded in making ARM a Microsoft-only playground, as long as you get Windows 8 with the machine.

Microsoft may have once held a monopolistic position on the computing landscape, but to say that it still does today is disingenuous. Computing has shifted to far more devices, beyond traditional PCs and true alternatives have sprung up.

They still have a hell of a lot of power and tend to use it in extremely abusive ways.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: ARM
by tomcat on Tue 19th Jun 2012 05:33 in reply to "RE[2]: ARM"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

That doesn't make their demands any less anti-competitive and it's obviously an attempt to use their existing desktop "monopoly" as leverage to pro-actively prevent competition in a market where they are currently a minor player.


Sorry, but I call bullshit. Microsoft's desktop monopoly doesn't buy it squat in the ARM market. This tablet won't run any of the desktop software. They're basically starting from scratch here. So, these so-calledm"anticompetitive" effects exist only in your imagination.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: ARM
by Soulbender on Tue 19th Jun 2012 05:55 in reply to "RE[3]: ARM"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Microsoft's desktop monopoly doesn't buy it squat in the ARM market


Doesn't mean they won't try to use it.

They're basically starting from scratch here. So, these so-calledm"anticompetitive" effects exist only in your imagination.


Yeah, because companies never try to get an advantage over their competition. What reason other than stifling the competition could there possible be for demanding that everyone else be practically locked out?
Security? Yeah, if there ever was something to call bullshit on it's that.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: ARM
by UltraZelda64 on Tue 19th Jun 2012 21:17 in reply to "RE[3]: ARM"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Sorry, but I call bullshit. Microsoft's desktop monopoly doesn't buy it squat in the ARM market. This tablet won't run any of the desktop software. They're basically starting from scratch here. So, these so-calledm"anticompetitive" effects exist only in your imagination.

Ever hear of this thing called a "trademark"? People are going to see Windows 8 as the newer, better version of Windows 7 and automatically, Microsoft has a large number of people buying it for that reason. Not to mention people who will buy anything as soon as it comes out and then get bored when the novelty wears off. And obviously, a large number of machines will be coming up with Windows, because so many companies are in Microsoft's pockets. It all adds up in Microsoft's favor in the form of raw numbers.

Edited 2012-06-19 21:19 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2