Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 11th Dec 2013 13:40 UTC
Windows

The Verge is reporting that Microsoft is considering making Windows RT and Windows Phone free for OEMs, to combat Android.

We understand that any decision to axe the license fees for Windows Phone and Windows RT would be backed by a push for revenue from Microsoft’s apps and services. Microsoft has been experimenting with ads in Windows 8 apps, and any associated revenue from those apps and the company’s built-in Bing search results would help offset the lack of license fees. Microsoft would also push consumers to subscribe to services like SkyDrive, Office, and Skype for additional revenue.

So, let me get this straight. In April this year, a Microsoft-sponsored antitrust complaint about Android had this to say:

Google's predatory distribution of Android at below-cost makes it difficult for other providers of operating systems to recoup investments in competing with Google's dominant mobile platform.

And we have the whole Scroogled campaign (I felt dirty just for visiting that site).

And now they're considering doing the exact same things they claim Google is doing unfairly? Does this company have any internal consistency whatsoever?

Thread beginning with comment 578480
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by Sisora
by andrewclunn on Wed 11th Dec 2013 14:07 UTC in reply to "Comment by Sisora"
andrewclunn
Member since:
2012-11-05

Seems to me some people will pay a premium to avoid the Google ads. I mean if what you say were true, then iPhone wouldn't be as financially successful as it is right now.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Sisora
by JAlexoid on Wed 11th Dec 2013 14:43 in reply to "RE: Comment by Sisora"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Except that iPhone does not result in avoiding Google or ads. Google's services are probably the most popular services on iPhone.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: Comment by Sisora
by darknexus on Wed 11th Dec 2013 17:08 in reply to "RE: Comment by Sisora"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Seems to me some people will pay a premium to avoid the Google ads. I mean if what you say were true, then iPhone wouldn't be as financially successful as it is right now.

That's not why. iPhone has the whole iTunes ecosystem behind it and, in the states at least, iTunes is the largest online distributor of content. Music, Movies, TV episodes, you name it and iTunes probably has it. Even in the books department, where Apple lagged behind when iBooks first came out, they're catching up. Google has Google Play but, let's face it, their content library is nowhere near iTunes. Many iPhone users already had significant investment in the iTunes ecosystem before hand (via iPods usually) and those who didn't most likely do now after using iOS for a while. I'd say avoiding ads, while a part of it for some, is a significantly less reason on the whole than their investment in the ecosystem and the sheer convenience (as long as you use Apple devices at least) of iTunes content.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Comment by Sisora
by Morgan on Wed 11th Dec 2013 18:15 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Sisora"
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Something I've noticed among friends with iOS devices and friends with Android devices: iOS users seem to be bothered less about the cost of a media purchase via iTunes, and are generally happy about the plethora of titles to choose from. Android users generally seem to be against buying a movie or TV episode from Play, and don't care about the availability of specific titles since they tend to get media under the table, so to speak.

I'm not saying that's true across the board, obviously, but in my tiny niche of society it seems to be the norm.

Edited 2013-12-11 18:15 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6