4 ms·

Microsoft to Limit Capabilities of Cheap Laptops

25 points by dhs 18y ago

smanek 18y ago
To recap: Microsoft says that if a producer wants cheap window's licenses, they have to limit the specs on their umpcs (screen < 10.2 inches && hd < 80GB && ! touchscreen). This is a good thing. If a consumer wants, e.g., a umpc with a touchscreen, they will be forced to get a linux one. Getting more people to try linux (and giving the linux hardware an intrinsic edge), is probably one of the worst things microsoft can do to itself and one of the best it can do for linux.
- halo 18y ago
  I think that's an optimistic way of looking at it. Another way is that the people who create these devices will just limit their specs to be below Microsoft's requirements. I think this is amongst the first time MS has directly had to respond to Linux as a threat on the desktop though.
  - qwph 18y ago
    If I had a ULPC, and I really needed to run Windows software on it, I'd be tempted to try running Wine. http://www.winehq.org/ http://www.winehq.org/
    - wanorris 18y ago
      Personally, I'd just remote desktop into a stray Windows machine unless I absolutely had to have it onboard. I don't know that I'd want the added load from Wine on a lightweight Linux laptop. Those forthcoming 9" Linux Eees for $500 with 20GB SSDs look really enticing. Emacs + Firefox + a terminal is really all you need.
- rbanffy 18y ago
  Sadly, the onky consequence that springs to mind is that there will be no devices above the spec. As much as the hardware makers may want to sell devices, they will want to maximize the number of units sold and the simplest way to do it is bundling windows. Again, it's Microsoft againt progress.
- olefoo 18y ago
  I hope you're right; but this does look like an attempt by an entrenched monopolist to limit competition by killing an emerging market. Too bad we don't enforce the laws that we have on that topic.
- etal 18y ago
  So, two possible motivations come to mind: 1. This is part of the push for Vista over XP -- computers than can run Vista must run Vista, otherwise, XP is offered to avoid forfeiting the market to Linux. 2. This is a precursor to a campaign to cast Linux as a cheap operating system for low-quality computers. Hardware manufacturers can't resist offering these Ubiquitous Linux PCs, but if there's this extra incentive to keep the specs tight enough that these things can't quite be used as general-purpose computers, that can theoretically trap Linux for consumers in a sort of technological ghetto. Or, since the left hand and right hand appear to be barely on speaking terms inside Microsoft these days, one hand might really be earnestly pushing for #1, while the other hand cackled and bought in based on #2, and thus they agree.
pg 18y ago
Wow, just like the old Evil Microsoft. They forgot something, though: Apple is no longer a negligible force. I wonder if this move will ultimately backfire.
- pmjordan 18y ago
  Hmm. Somehow, I can't see Apple ever producing an "ultra cheap" computer. I hope you're right though. Who knows, maybe they'll make something 2-3 times the size of the iPhone... and a third of the price?
- SwellJoe 18y ago
  I'm always greatly amused (and a little confused) when anyone mentions Apple as a force of good in the face of Microsoft. What, exactly, did Apple ever do to make you believe that they are a benevolent force in the technology industry?
  - pg 18y ago
    All I meant here was that they're a competitor. So if Microsoft gratuitously breaks some range of devices, users will have an alternative. But Apple is a more benevolent force than Microsoft in that they owe their market share to the quality of their products rather than to taking over the PC standard from IBM.
    - SwellJoe 18y ago
      That's reasonable. While Apple may not be a force for good, competition certainly is.
    - wanorris 18y ago
      Apple hasn't shown the slightest interest in the market. Their idea of a lightweight computer starts at $1800. Meanwhile, Linux is eating their lunch in this segment.
      - mechanical_fish 18y ago
utnick 18y ago
These Ultra Cheap PCs already have these limited capabilities... thats why they are 'ultra cheap'. Sounds like a non story...
- SwellJoe 18y ago
  Only a non-story if you believe ultra cheap PCs will continue to have limited capabilities. This is Microsoft's way of insuring that the low-cost machines remain limited enough to where the price of Windows doesn't make the system significantly more expensive for the consumer than Linux. Luckily, the cat is already out of the bag to some degree...the Eee PC has been quite successful in its Linux incarnation.
  - etal 18y ago
    It's interesting that the limited specs don't mention RAM or processor speed, and don't rule out solid-state drives. A small screen and 40-80 GB storage could be a pretty sweet machine, with or without a touchscreen -- the price for these laptops could just as easily drop to $99, where the cost of Windows is a serious problem, or rocket up to $800, adding wild custom hardware and tweaking the OS significantly to accommodate it. This looks like a move that could have a ton of unintended consequences.
    - DougBTX 18y ago
      From the article: Besides limits on the screens and hard drives, to be eligible, the systems can have no more than 1G byte of RAM and a single-core processor running at no more than 1GHz.
metatronscube 18y ago
Yeah we all know that!! Its called 'Windows'
xirium 18y ago
The lack of touchscreen interoperability will be a major limitation which will encourage open source adoption. Unfortunately, current client trends are counter to Microsoft's strategy. Firstly, people are buying laptops rather than desktops. Both are getting cheaper. Secondly, Microsoft follows the classic monopolistic tactic of racheting prices. Successive versions of Microsoft software a typical more expensive despite initial costs already being re-couped. These trends create a situation where the cost of an operating system and pre-installed applications take an increasingly large share of the retail price. This creates a third trend of laptop manufacturers who opt-out of the "Windows tax" and only supply units with tailored open source software. In two years, we'll probably have a device which is a mix of laptop, mobile telephone and Nintendo DS. It would be a clamshell design with two 11 inch screens with the bottom one being touch sensitive. You cannot rely on Microsoft to support such a device. Nor would it be viable to include Windows. So, such a device would mostly be used with open source operating systems. This design has already been tried. Unfortunately, it was quite a few years ago and it was a commercial failure. However, since then, the technology has improved, the cost has fallen and the volume of people who only want to run open source software has grown significantly. This would make a similar attempt much more likely to succeed. It is understandable that such a trend would adversely affect Microsoft. Therefore an attempt to steeply discount Windows on limited hardware has two benefits. It creates an artificial divide between premium hardware and almost disposable devices where Windows is viable on both. Secondly, it reduces the inclination for low cost manufacturers to abandon Windows.
ashu 18y ago
This company will never mend its ways. I hope (and I know it may just be a hope what with its billions of cash reserves) it dies a really painful death for trying to be against progress almost all the time. Control freaks.
eznet 18y ago
Once they secure their position, I wonder if MS will start imposing comparable constraints to the future OLPCs (which they should have never been allowed to put their grubby hands on)? Also, I wonder who in the world their PR dude is and if he sleeps most all days... In any case, they really should be working on improving their public appearance through their policies rather than trying to impose restrictions on their potential customers. Dumb.
tptacek 18y ago
This isn't "evil", it's basic market segmentation. Microsoft doesn't want to limit the capabilities of any device, but if it sets the price of XP to a level that works for ultra-cheap vendors, it surrenders a vast amount of money to companies like Dell. Like any business, Microsoft wants Dell to pay what XP is worth to Dell, and Asus to pay what XP is worth for the Eee. It can't simply charge one amount to Dell and another to Asus. So instead it uses arbitrary specifications to create a category of XP license that is unattractive to Dell and cost-effective for Asus. You can argue about the ethics of this up and down, but when you start looking for it, you see that we're awash in market segmentation. Often, the most egregious examples of it actually have consumer benefits: take airfare, where the total ripoff fares I pay for last-minute business travel effective subsidize tickets for tourists who would not otherwise be able to fly.
- JeffJenkins 18y ago
  Information Rules is an excellent book going into details of how markets work in information economies where the marginal cost of a product is near-zero. It covers segmentation, lock-in, network effects, etc. ( http://www.amazon.com/dp/087584863X/ http://www.amazon.com/dp/087584863X/ )
Kaizyn 18y ago
This might offer consumers a cheaper alternative to buying Windows Vista Business or Vista Ultimate and 'downgrading' to XP for new licenses of XP. That way, you get a cheap, Linux-ready laptop along with your OS license.
Create 18y ago
It is simply the abuse of monopoly [and THAT is illegal]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartel

25 points by dhs 18y ago

To recap: Microsoft says that if a producer wants cheap window's licenses, they have to limit the specs on their umpcs (screen < 10.2 inches && hd < 80GB && ! touchscreen). This is a good thing. If a consumer wants, e.g., a umpc with a touchscreen, they will be forced to get a linux one. Getting more people to try linux (and giving the linux hardware an intrinsic edge), is probably one of the worst things microsoft can do to itself and one of the best it can do for linux.

halo 18y ago
I think that's an optimistic way of looking at it. Another way is that the people who create these devices will just limit their specs to be below Microsoft's requirements. I think this is amongst the first time MS has directly had to respond to Linux as a threat on the desktop though.
- qwph 18y ago
  If I had a ULPC, and I really needed to run Windows software on it, I'd be tempted to try running Wine. http://www.winehq.org/ http://www.winehq.org/
  - wanorris 18y ago
    Personally, I'd just remote desktop into a stray Windows machine unless I absolutely had to have it onboard. I don't know that I'd want the added load from Wine on a lightweight Linux laptop. Those forthcoming 9" Linux Eees for $500 with 20GB SSDs look really enticing. Emacs + Firefox + a terminal is really all you need.
rbanffy 18y ago
Sadly, the onky consequence that springs to mind is that there will be no devices above the spec. As much as the hardware makers may want to sell devices, they will want to maximize the number of units sold and the simplest way to do it is bundling windows. Again, it's Microsoft againt progress.
olefoo 18y ago
I hope you're right; but this does look like an attempt by an entrenched monopolist to limit competition by killing an emerging market. Too bad we don't enforce the laws that we have on that topic.
etal 18y ago
So, two possible motivations come to mind: 1. This is part of the push for Vista over XP -- computers than can run Vista must run Vista, otherwise, XP is offered to avoid forfeiting the market to Linux. 2. This is a precursor to a campaign to cast Linux as a cheap operating system for low-quality computers. Hardware manufacturers can't resist offering these Ubiquitous Linux PCs, but if there's this extra incentive to keep the specs tight enough that these things can't quite be used as general-purpose computers, that can theoretically trap Linux for consumers in a sort of technological ghetto. Or, since the left hand and right hand appear to be barely on speaking terms inside Microsoft these days, one hand might really be earnestly pushing for #1, while the other hand cackled and bought in based on #2, and thus they agree.

pg 18y ago

Wow, just like the old Evil Microsoft. They forgot something, though: Apple is no longer a negligible force. I wonder if this move will ultimately backfire.

pmjordan 18y ago
Hmm. Somehow, I can't see Apple ever producing an "ultra cheap" computer. I hope you're right though. Who knows, maybe they'll make something 2-3 times the size of the iPhone... and a third of the price?
SwellJoe 18y ago
I'm always greatly amused (and a little confused) when anyone mentions Apple as a force of good in the face of Microsoft. What, exactly, did Apple ever do to make you believe that they are a benevolent force in the technology industry?
- pg 18y ago
  All I meant here was that they're a competitor. So if Microsoft gratuitously breaks some range of devices, users will have an alternative. But Apple is a more benevolent force than Microsoft in that they owe their market share to the quality of their products rather than to taking over the PC standard from IBM.
  - SwellJoe 18y ago
    That's reasonable. While Apple may not be a force for good, competition certainly is.
  - wanorris 18y ago
    Apple hasn't shown the slightest interest in the market. Their idea of a lightweight computer starts at $1800. Meanwhile, Linux is eating their lunch in this segment.
    - mechanical_fish 18y ago

utnick 18y ago

These Ultra Cheap PCs already have these limited capabilities... thats why they are 'ultra cheap'. Sounds like a non story...

SwellJoe 18y ago
Only a non-story if you believe ultra cheap PCs will continue to have limited capabilities. This is Microsoft's way of insuring that the low-cost machines remain limited enough to where the price of Windows doesn't make the system significantly more expensive for the consumer than Linux. Luckily, the cat is already out of the bag to some degree...the Eee PC has been quite successful in its Linux incarnation.
- etal 18y ago
  It's interesting that the limited specs don't mention RAM or processor speed, and don't rule out solid-state drives. A small screen and 40-80 GB storage could be a pretty sweet machine, with or without a touchscreen -- the price for these laptops could just as easily drop to $99, where the cost of Windows is a serious problem, or rocket up to $800, adding wild custom hardware and tweaking the OS significantly to accommodate it. This looks like a move that could have a ton of unintended consequences.
  - DougBTX 18y ago
    From the article: Besides limits on the screens and hard drives, to be eligible, the systems can have no more than 1G byte of RAM and a single-core processor running at no more than 1GHz.

metatronscube 18y ago

Yeah we all know that!! Its called 'Windows'

xirium 18y ago

The lack of touchscreen interoperability will be a major limitation which will encourage open source adoption. Unfortunately, current client trends are counter to Microsoft's strategy. Firstly, people are buying laptops rather than desktops. Both are getting cheaper. Secondly, Microsoft follows the classic monopolistic tactic of racheting prices. Successive versions of Microsoft software a typical more expensive despite initial costs already being re-couped. These trends create a situation where the cost of an operating system and pre-installed applications take an increasingly large share of the retail price. This creates a third trend of laptop manufacturers who opt-out of the "Windows tax" and only supply units with tailored open source software. In two years, we'll probably have a device which is a mix of laptop, mobile telephone and Nintendo DS. It would be a clamshell design with two 11 inch screens with the bottom one being touch sensitive. You cannot rely on Microsoft to support such a device. Nor would it be viable to include Windows. So, such a device would mostly be used with open source operating systems. This design has already been tried. Unfortunately, it was quite a few years ago and it was a commercial failure. However, since then, the technology has improved, the cost has fallen and the volume of people who only want to run open source software has grown significantly. This would make a similar attempt much more likely to succeed. It is understandable that such a trend would adversely affect Microsoft. Therefore an attempt to steeply discount Windows on limited hardware has two benefits. It creates an artificial divide between premium hardware and almost disposable devices where Windows is viable on both. Secondly, it reduces the inclination for low cost manufacturers to abandon Windows.

ashu 18y ago

This company will never mend its ways. I hope (and I know it may just be a hope what with its billions of cash reserves) it dies a really painful death for trying to be against progress almost all the time. Control freaks.

eznet 18y ago

Once they secure their position, I wonder if MS will start imposing comparable constraints to the future OLPCs (which they should have never been allowed to put their grubby hands on)? Also, I wonder who in the world their PR dude is and if he sleeps most all days... In any case, they really should be working on improving their public appearance through their policies rather than trying to impose restrictions on their potential customers. Dumb.

tptacek 18y ago

This isn't "evil", it's basic market segmentation. Microsoft doesn't want to limit the capabilities of any device, but if it sets the price of XP to a level that works for ultra-cheap vendors, it surrenders a vast amount of money to companies like Dell. Like any business, Microsoft wants Dell to pay what XP is worth to Dell, and Asus to pay what XP is worth for the Eee. It can't simply charge one amount to Dell and another to Asus. So instead it uses arbitrary specifications to create a category of XP license that is unattractive to Dell and cost-effective for Asus. You can argue about the ethics of this up and down, but when you start looking for it, you see that we're awash in market segmentation. Often, the most egregious examples of it actually have consumer benefits: take airfare, where the total ripoff fares I pay for last-minute business travel effective subsidize tickets for tourists who would not otherwise be able to fly.

JeffJenkins 18y ago
Information Rules is an excellent book going into details of how markets work in information economies where the marginal cost of a product is near-zero. It covers segmentation, lock-in, network effects, etc. ( http://www.amazon.com/dp/087584863X/ http://www.amazon.com/dp/087584863X/ )

Kaizyn 18y ago

This might offer consumers a cheaper alternative to buying Windows Vista Business or Vista Ultimate and 'downgrading' to XP for new licenses of XP. That way, you get a cheap, Linux-ready laptop along with your OS license.

Create 18y ago

It is simply the abuse of monopoly [and THAT is illegal]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartel