Hacker News Reader

Comment by mtgx | Hacker News Reader

The thing is Windows 8 is radically changing a lot of stuff and that won't sit well with most businesses in the PC world. Maybe Windows 8 won't give Valve or Notch a death blow by removing the "desktop mode", but I think it's pretty obvious that Microsoft wants the future of Windows to be "Metro-only", and these guys can see that.

So it's not Windows 8 per se that they are mad about. It's the whole direction Windows is taking. If they and others can get Windows 8 to fail, and get Microsoft to revert back to the old style Windows, then they win. If not, and Windows 8 is successful, they lose, because you can bet Windows 9 will be even more locked into Metro and with fewer options or less access for the desktop mode.

View on HN

I'm not sure Microsoft is explicitly wanting this change. It's a reaction to the shifting computing environment; the iPad showed that the PC isn't the only platform that people want to use, and that some people only want to use tablet computers. I feel Microsoft would have been more than happy to keep developing Windows the way they always have, but they've seen the writing on the wall. Windows isn't what the users want.

Microsoft didn't start the locked down tablet market. They're just the newest player. If you want to assign blame, blame the users.

Microsoft is the only company demanding the ARM devices other companies make to be locked down. What Apple does to its hardware is their problem, but it's not Microsoft's business to demand hardware manufacturers to deliberately kill competition on software (which would, ultimately, benefit both manufacturers and end-users).

No that's plain wrong. Microsoft is demanding that only for Windows RT tablets. The same manufacturer is free to make tablets that run Android or Ubuntu or whatever.

Apparently, that's not true. Atom Clover Trail devices will not support anything but Windows 8, and I don't think it's just a driver issue. It's a bootloader issue, too:

http://semiaccurate.com/2012/09/27/intels-clover-trail-is-a-...

That's a decision between Intel and Microsoft on how to make an x86 computer that is optimized for Windows 8. It has nothing to do with a Microsoft policy. You can install Windows 8 on any x86 hardware you want alongside any other x86 compatible OS of your choice.

Let's be clear: the rules for Windows 8 certification is that manufacturers must allow the user to disable secure boot and allow them to install another OS. This is the exact opposite of what people here are arguing. There is a lot of FUD being spread, and it's just not true.

> the rules for Windows 8 certification is that manufacturers must allow the user to disable secure boot and allow them to install another OS

This is not true for ARM-based devices. Any ARM-based device that comes with Windows pre-installed will have its bootloader locked and only be able to run Windows.

True, but since this particular sub-thread is about an x86 processor, I don't think I'm wrong.

As far as I remember, it started with a comment on locked down tablets. Since the x86 tablets with W8 won't necessarily be locked down, I assumed you were talking about ARM-based ones.

mtgx moved the conversation to Intel Atom processors.

I'm not sure that's an apples to apples (so to speak) comparison. How is it any different with Apple not only locking down the software but also locking out any competing hardware versus Microsoft letting multiple partners make hardware with locked down software? It patently is Microsoft's business to demand hardware makers follow the rules of their software agreement. If hardware makers don't like it, they can make Android tablets. Microsoft isn't the only player in the game, and in fact they are the least successful player in the game. This isn't the 90s, and Microsoft doesn't control the world anymore. There's choice.

Let's not forget that Apple's locked down hardware and software combination is what started this whole craze.

Microsoft doesn't make its own hardware like Apple does. What Microsoft is trying to do is to make it difficult for hardware manufacturers to build devices that can run both Windows or other operating system. When you buy an ARM device with Windows preinstalled, it'll not be able to run any other OS. When you buy an ARM device that can run Android (or Ubuntu, or WebOS, or ChromeOS) you won't be able to install Windows on it. Unlike any x86 PC, you have to make a choice before you buy the device. You just won't be able to buy an ARM-based tablet, notebook or desktop computer with Windows (paying for it) and run something else. Microsoft hopes that, confronted with this choice, users will opt to lock themselves into a "safe" option.

This is Microsoft leveraging its Windows monopoly to pressure hardware manufacturers into fragmenting the market in ways that restrict competition.

The problem with ARM is, there's no standardized platform like there is on x86. You need SoC specific drivers for every chip, and in some cases these are only available to hardware partners. This is an ARM problem.

Microsoft cannot leverage its Windows monopoly in the ARM tablet market. Mainly because it doesn't have a Windows monopoly in the ARM tablet market. And Microsoft does make their own hardware. The only difference is, they also license their OS out to third party partners. You want to use their software, you agree to their license. Don't like it? Run Android (most of the world does).

> Microsoft cannot leverage its Windows monopoly in the ARM tablet market

Really? So, Windows software won;'t need a recompile to run on ARM?

> The only difference is, they also license their OS out to third party partners.

As long as they limit competition and prevent the devices from running anything but Windows.

> You want to use their software, you agree to their license.

Except that it doesn't work like that when you try to leverage the power one monopoly affords you to prevent competition in another market.

You're being intentionally dense in order to spread FUD about Windows 8. What you're saying is demonstrably untrue. Whether you want to accept that or not, it'd be helpful if you refrained from joining a conversation if you don't have anything constructive to say.

> What you're saying is demonstrably untrue.

Citation needed.

The mix of plain desktop and touch environment is what draws me to Win8. I didn't get a Asus Transformer, as the only emacs I could get there was in a terminal, and in a sandbox. With a Win8 tablet, I get tablet-y stuff, and a full desktop env with a full unsandboxed emacs. Exactly what I want.

So I hope they keep this best-of-both-worlds for the forseeable future.

Only if you get the x86 version. Arm version only runs Explorer, IE and Office in desktop mode

No, they don't want "Metro-only" . This is bullshit. Stop spreading it.

That's a very weak counterargument. Why would Microsoft prefer to carry on developing both interfaces when the majority of users will clearly prefer Metro?

Its how MS marketing works: Metro is new thing they must sell and they are promoting it best they can (and that's not always the best way it could be done). Classic mode will remain on desktop in the future, and Metro is for tablets and desktops. New versions of Photoshop, Premiere, Audocad, Maya, 3d Studio, SAP, VisualStudio, SQLMS,... will be desktop versions, installed directly, not from MS Store. So really dont know why Minecraft can't be sold on Minecraft web, files downloaded and installed manually, like its done last 20 years, and it will be done probably in next 10 years?

I really think you should read this: http://paulgraham.com/disagree.html

Reply on news.ycombinator.com