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 522868
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: ARM
by Nelson on Tue 19th Jun 2012 09:46 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: ARM"
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

Windows 8 CAN'T be really used as any kind of effective leverage, because it presents no competitive advantage to Windows RT.

You can't just reply "Yeah, but what if" to something which is demonstrably impossible. The architectures are different, meaning everything from applications to drivers are incompatible.

Windows RT doesn't have the clout that Windows has. So Microsoft can't really use their success on the Desktop to force success in the ARM world.

Microsoft has every right to dictate the terms of using their software (SecureBoot forced on ARM), and you're free as a consumer to not use it. Its not a monopolistic abuse, its how they chose to do business.

When Apple locks their bootloaders its not a monopolistic abuse, its the walled garden they choose to let you play in for $499. Don't like it, don't play.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: ARM
by Soulbender on Tue 19th Jun 2012 09:56 in reply to "RE[7]: ARM"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Microsoft has every right to dictate the terms of using their software (SecureBoot forced on ARM)


That's not dictating my use of their software (which I have no problem with), it is dictating the terms of how I can use *my* hardware, hardware that is quite likely not manufactured or sold by Microsoft.

Note that I don't have a problem with this on Surface. It's MS product (both hardware and software) and they can do what they want with that. The problem is that this restriction is imposed on generic non-MS hardware.

When Apple locks their bootloaders its not a monopolistic abuse


That's en entirely different case because it is both Apple's hardware and software.

Edit: Microsoft really has no right telling me how to use their software either. As long as it is not violating copyrights it is NONE of their business. I believe this is commonly known as post-sale restrictions and something that is actually not legal.

Edited 2012-06-19 10:00 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: ARM
by Nelson on Tue 19th Jun 2012 10:01 in reply to "RE[8]: ARM"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29


That's not dictating my use of their software (which I have no problem with), it is dictating the terms of how I can use *my* hardware, hardware that is quite likely not manufactured or sold by Microsoft.

Note that I don't have a problem with this on Surface. It's MS product (both hardware and software) and they can do what they want with that. The problem is that this restriction is imposed on generic non-MS hardware.


The decision is implicitly taken out of your hands, because it is not your hardware. The hardware is manufactured by the OEM and they make the decision to go with Windows 8 (Which requires SecureBoot).

They make the agreement, and as a consumer you have the conscious choice to buy based off of that agreement. They could just have likely thrown Android on there and you could have your Ubuntu field day if it pleases you, but they made the deliberate choice to go with Windows 8.

They are a licensee of Windows 8, they adhere to the requirements. It is again, Microsoft dictating the terms of the environment their hardware runs in.

Microsoft "telling you what to do" is an indirect side effect of you honoring the deal made when the software was licensed.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: ARM
by tomcat on Tue 19th Jun 2012 19:09 in reply to "RE[8]: ARM"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

That's not dictating my use of their software (which I have no problem with), it is dictating the terms of how I can use *my* hardware, hardware that is quite likely not manufactured or sold by Microsoft.


First, you've lost the argument, so you're trying to change the subject from anti-competitiveness to being able to run your own software on a consumer device; something that practically no consumer manufacturer supports (except for the ones like Sony who are tanking and think it gives them some kind of leverage--which it doesn't).

Second, the device *is* manufactured by Microsoft in the same way that Apple uses Foxconn to manufacture iPads, iPhones, iPods, and other iCrap. You don't buy a device from Foxconn. They're just labor. You don't seem to understand this basic concept, for some weird reason, which is amusing but puzzling.

That's en entirely different case because it is both Apple's hardware and software.


See above. You don't WTF you're talking about.

Edited 2012-06-19 19:11 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1