Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Blocking Asus's Android-Windows "Duet"?

timothy posted about 5 months ago | from the when-free-will-isn't-quite-good-enough dept.

Android 194

theodp writes "Android is free and open," reiterated Google Android Chief Andy Rubin in 2010 as Microsoft launched Windows Phone 7. Rubin added, 'Competition is good for the consumer and if somebody has an idea for a feature or a piece of functionality in their platform and Android doesn't do it, great. I think it's good to have the benefit of choice, but in the end I don't think the world needs another platform.' But now, CNET and Digitimes report that Google is holding up the Asus Transformer Book Duet TD300 (specs), a laptop-tablet hybrid that can instantly switch between Android and Windows 8.1. A source familiar with the Asus Duet told CNET that Google is the one that has not favored the idea, while Microsoft has not, to date, been actively opposed to the idea. 'If true,' reports Apple Insider, 'it may not be the first time Google has helped to quash such a product.' South Korean electronics giant Samsung quietly canceled plans for its hybrid Ativ Q tablet last year, and Digitimes notes that Asus may not be the only company to bow to Google's wishes."

cancel ×

194 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Google more restrictive than Microsoft (5, Insightful)

mrspoonsi (2955715) | about 5 months ago | (#46439731)

Is that not Evil or something like that?

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439767)

Of course not. Google is perfect and does no wrong. This is FUD from Microsoft's PR shills.

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (1)

Cassini2 (956052) | about 5 months ago | (#46439803)

If Microsoft's PR shills are saying: "Microsoft's product sucks so bad in the marketplace that Google isn't letting companies release enough product to run alternative operating systems", then Microsoft needs new shills, better product and a new PR department.

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439819)

Are you an Asperger's sufferer? Seems the guy below you was right about the Google faithful being unable to recognize sarcasm.

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (1)

mspohr (589790) | about 5 months ago | (#46440631)

Right your are, sir... I had asparagus last night and today I am suffering.

Re: Google more restrictive than Microsoft (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439809)

You really should have added the /s tag.

Google cool-aid drinkers might take you seriously.

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439973)

If Microsoft allowed duel boots on ARM based processors their is a good chance that, Google would lose, and Microsoft would win because of liberty and competitive priced computers

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440167)

If Microsoft allowed duel boots

The Microsoft campus laced with footwear engaged in combat? This is not their sole purpose, you heel. Tread lightly, lest you get a sock in the mouth.

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (4, Funny)

mspohr (589790) | about 5 months ago | (#46440651)

First, I never allow my boots to duel. Last time I tried that it was a mess and I'm still limping.
Second, ARM duels are hand contact only.
As far as I know Google and Microsoft have never dueled, probably because there were no chairs available for the loser to throw so we don't really know who would win.
"Liberty and competitive priced computers" ??? What?

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (5, Insightful)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 5 months ago | (#46439861)

Well if you read any of the articles, there is no real information or than the contention that pressure from Google has delayed the release of this tablet. It is not explained further. I don't know how reliable this considering the following statement:

Currently, only Intel's X86 chip can support dual operating systems, giving consumers an option to run either Android or Windows, but on a separate basis. From Intel's standpoint, tablets that have both Windows and Android dual OS is positive for its business model, and vendors can also increase brand value through dual-system products.

ARM runs on multiple operating systems and in fact, Windows RT and Android can run on the same tablet if MS chooses this path not ARM. Apple could make OS X for ARM; however, the performance may be lacking.

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (2)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 5 months ago | (#46439871)

I meant "other than the contention that pressure from Google"

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440785)

They don't mean dual-booting, they mean running both OSes simultaneously. This is more rare but yes, still supported by other CPU architectures.

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (1)

Microlith (54737) | about 5 months ago | (#46440921)

Microsoft would have to back down on the hard lock-down they impose via SecureBoot, first.

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (3, Informative)

StripedCow (776465) | about 5 months ago | (#46439967)

For those who missed this, here's a great article:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets... [arstechnica.com]

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (4, Insightful)

silviuc (676999) | about 5 months ago | (#46440111)

The one that wrote the article either has no clue what he was writing about or he's getting paid to be dumb. Basically, you want to use Google's services? You gotta do it the way *they* want you to do it. It's their services and their terms.

Android is not free and open-source? Take a look at the shit tonne of Chinese made tablets of brands that we almost never heard of which come with Android but not with Google services. You have to use 3-rd party applications to get stuff onto those such as Mobogenie.

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (3, Insightful)

ThePhilips (752041) | about 5 months ago | (#46440303)

Basically, you want to use Google's services? You gotta do it the way *they* want you to do it. It's their services and their terms.

Which is, if you think about it, is rather evil.

Person can't pay for the services - person can only access the services by buying the Google's approved product.

It is as if we have ended up with game consoles, not portable computers.

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (1)

AlphaWolf_HK (692722) | about 5 months ago | (#46440645)

That isn't true at all, actually. You as an individual can download and install Google's Play Services yourself if you'd like. What you can't do however is sell a device commercially that includes Google's Play Services unless you follow their terms.

More information here:

http://wiki.rootzwiki.com/Goog... [rootzwiki.com]

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (2)

recoiledsnake (879048) | about 5 months ago | (#46440903)

That will make you a pirate.

Re: Google more restrictive than Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440311)

Whoooooosh

Read the title of the article. Again. Slowly. And then again.

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (5, Insightful)

Karlt1 (231423) | about 5 months ago | (#46440535)

The one that wrote the article either has no clue what he was writing about or he's getting paid to be dumb. Basically, you want to use Google's services? You gotta do it the way *they* want you to do it. It's their services and their terms.

" if Google did not act, we faced a Draconian future, a future where one man, one company, one device, one carrier would be our only choice. So if you believe in openness, if you believe in choice, if you believe in innovation from everyone, then welcome to Android. Now letâ(TM)s get started.â

Andy Rubin......

Wickedness by one small step at at time (3, Informative)

goombah99 (560566) | about 5 months ago | (#46440075)

Google
goggle
guggle (flow in an irregular current with a bubbling noise)
gurgle
burgle
burgee (A triangular sailing flag, a show of force by colors)
burger
burker (to murder or supress without leaving evidence)
bucker
bicker
wicker
wicked

Re:Wickedness by one small step at at time (1)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about 5 months ago | (#46440117)

+1 I'll use these in WWF

Re:Wickedness by one small step at at time (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440135)

You could eliminate some kinks with goggle->gaggle->gargle->gurgle

Re:Wickedness by one small step at at time (2)

goombah99 (560566) | about 5 months ago | (#46440157)

googly goggly giggly jiggly jingly tingly tinkly dinkly dinkey dinked winked wicked

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (1)

invictusvoyd (3546069) | about 5 months ago | (#46440103)

Is that not Evil or something like that?

Preventing a device that switches instantly from a bad OS to a terrible OS and vice versa is

... sniff .. not evil

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440279)

It's "don't be evil" and not "don't do evil." That allows "ends justify the means" thinking. Having previously been hacked because their employees ran Windows, doing whatever they can to kill of Windows may feel like a service to the community, and something not evil, no matter how underhanded the tactics.

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (1)

fikx (704101) | about 5 months ago | (#46440697)

More restrictive? Let someone put MS Office on Android and see what happens...
Of course Google won't like it: This is about the app market. MS would LOVE products like this since it gives Windows users an instant app library. But this is about the market place for Google. To compare apples to apples, see what MS does when their lock-in titles are ported to another platform (breaking the lock-in)...
Not that Google is handling this right, but apples to apples and all that...

Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (0)

Rob Y. (110975) | about 5 months ago | (#46440893)

As far as I know you're allowed to include competing services on a Google-blessed Android device. I think Verizon at one point was selling Motorola devices with Bing as their primary search engine - they just didn't sell. Sure, Google doesn't want to allow 'real Android' to be a platform for excluding Google services (as with the Nokia X devices), but they don't (or can't) try to prevent you from including other services in addition to Google's.

On the other hand, I think even after their anti-trust sanctions, Microsoft still doesn't allow OEM's to include, say Firefox or Chrome to be installed (let alone as the default browser) - or Google preset as the default search engine. Sure, they've been forced to allow users to jump through hoops of their design to get Google as the default search, but still. And don't tell me only idiots consider those hoops too much trouble. I've seen enough users at work typing in google.com to get to google search rather than using the Bing search bar. They're either too lazy or intimidated to change the default, but they're all too glad to have me change it for them...

Still open legally (2)

loufoque (1400831) | about 5 months ago | (#46439743)

It's still open in the sense that legally you can do whatever you want with it.
It's up to you if you want to make Google happy or not.

Re:Still open legally (5, Informative)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | about 5 months ago | (#46439783)

It's still open in the sense that legally you can do whatever you want with it.
It's up to you if you want to make Google happy or not.

Google can deny you from adding Google's apps and services on it, though, and the moment you ship an Android-device without those you're removing a lot of the reason for why an Average Jane or Joe would want an Android-device in the first place.

Re:Still open legally (1)

lilo_booter (649045) | about 5 months ago | (#46439875)

And on the other end of the scale, you can't ship closed source products with GPL. This kind of "restricted freedom" isn't purely a google thing, and nor is it all bad.

Re:Still open legally (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439949)

An OS isn't partially free or mostly free, it's either free or it isn't. If I'm going to start using proprietary closed source technology I might as well just get a quality device that has the features I really want, which is to say an iPhone, rather than buy a crummy piece of Android junk just because somewhere under the layers of proprietary bullshit there might be a Linux kernel.

Re:Still open legally (1)

Immerman (2627577) | about 5 months ago | (#46439991)

What? Sure you can. In fact IIRC the GPL specifically states that it should not be interpreted to prohibit bundling with proprietary products, and many Linux distros do just that, such as Red Hat with their proprietary utilities. What the GPL prohibits is *linking* with proprietary products, except through a couple of very specific mechanisms such as used by drivers with proprietary blobs (and even those are, IIRC, permitted as much by community concession to practicality as to secure legal footing)

Re:Still open legally (1)

lilo_booter (649045) | about 5 months ago | (#46440047)

Yes, it was the latter I was referring to.

Re:Still open legally (1)

drjzzz (150299) | about 5 months ago | (#46440379)

or like Apple puts their proprietary OSX atop the open source Darwin, which they forked from BSD? Self-interested, sure, but hardly "evil".

Re:Still open legally (1)

Bing Tsher E (943915) | about 5 months ago | (#46440695)

Darwin is forked from NeXTStep. They then imported a userland from FreeBSD.

Re:Still open legally (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46441101)

Em..... Both Darwin and NeXTStep are owned by Apple. No need to fork. In fact is wasn't a fork.
Darwin is the next evolutionary step of NeXTStep. (pun intended)

Re:Still open legally (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440077)

Google can deny you from adding Google's apps and services on it, though, and the moment you ship an Android-device without those you're removing a lot of the reason for why an Average Jane or Joe would want an Android-device in the first place.

Samsung and Amazon have both done fine without Googe's apps. I'm sure there are others as well.

Re:Still open legally (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440287)

Awesome man! Linux has finally gone mainstream liberating us all from the evil of closed computing! With Linux we are all free to .... buy DRM'd movies? Sorry, but this isn't the future I had in mind when I first got into Linux back in the 90s...

Re: Still open legally (1)

aap (108982) | about 5 months ago | (#46441005)

Which Samsung device doesn't have Google Apps?

Re:Still open legally (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about 5 months ago | (#46439955)

That is true, unless you want play services so you can have customers that actually want to buy your stuff. Being blessed is required to include play ( legally ) in your product.

Without that, you are 'yet another c heap-ass junk tablet maker' and are stuck selling out of Walmart and target..

The dual boot is stupid for a consumer device. (2, Insightful)

slackware 3.6 (2524328) | about 5 months ago | (#46439747)

Only one OS will be used, propably based on which OS is currently booted. People are to lazy to reboot to change OS thats just two minutes longer to get on Facebook.

Re:The dual boot is stupid for a consumer device. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439777)

The age of "one device, one OS" is what's "stupid."
 
And I sure as hell hope English is a second language to you.

Re:The dual boot is stupid for a consumer device. (3, Insightful)

StripedCow (776465) | about 5 months ago | (#46439983)

You forgot about the pr0n angle.
You have no idea what people will use that second OS (with its completely separate filesystem) for.

Re:The dual boot is stupid for a consumer device. (2)

dinfinity (2300094) | about 5 months ago | (#46440013)

"a laptop-tablet hybrid that can instantly switch between Android and Windows 8.1"

Not dual boot (4, Informative)

Immerman (2627577) | about 5 months ago | (#46440043)

I agree dual boot for a tablet might not get a lot of use, though I could definitely see being able to reboot my tablet into windows occasionally for real work being a nice perk, instead of carrying around a laptop as well.

But this is not dual boot. Watch the video, both OSes appear to be running side by side, it only takes about 4 seconds to switch between them. More like a KVM switch between two computers built into the same tablet form factor.

And *that* I think has serious potential - android is better for the lightweight appliance stuff, and windows is right there, along with the clip-on keyboard, for when you want to get work done.

And I though I was old (3, Insightful)

Overzeetop (214511) | about 5 months ago | (#46440191)

Laptops aren't just laptops these day - there are more and more hybrid devices which switch from laptop to tablet (a Sony Flip, for example). Sadly, operating systems for laptops (like Windows) are wholly inappropriate - or just very, very poorly optimized for tablet usage (yes, Windows again). Android is light years ahead of the Metro interface for tablet use. So it's better to be able to switch back and forth to get the best interface you can.

Sure you could reboot every time you wanted to switch, but you may as well go back to DOS and single threaded work. Why should we NOT want to be able to transition between the OS and application that fits the job the best?

Tablet + keyboard + trackpad (2)

tepples (727027) | about 5 months ago | (#46440521)

Android is light years ahead of the Metro interface for tablet use.

Plug a keyboard and trackpad into a tablet and is it still a tablet? I was under the impression that the traditional Windows desktop was light years ahead of Android for laptop use.

Re:Tablet + keyboard + trackpad (1)

Bing Tsher E (943915) | about 5 months ago | (#46440723)

My tablet, when I add a bluetooth keyboard and mouse to it, becomes a full Windows desktop machine if I wish. I even have Minecraft installed on it now. Installing the JVM and the Minecraft program was as easy as it was on every other Windows machine I've had. I also added emu8086 [cnet.com] which is one of my favorite toys. Any Win32 binary will do (if it runs on Windows 7 or later)

Crouton (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440289)

Crouton is a chroot that let one switch instantly from Linux to Chromebook OS and back, both running simultaneously and sharing some of the same disk partition.

Yet google blocks this from being useful by not allowing Crouton outside of a developer mode boot that leaves the computer very fragile to accidentally erasing it's disk and impairs updates and prevents other things from working.

Re:The dual boot is stupid for a consumer device. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440839)

Office. The only OS that will be used is Windows. Except for Flappy Bird. In fact... they could just start Flappy Bird upon Android load so you'd have Windows/Flappy Bird hybrid.

but...but...but.... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439757)

It'z teh Linuxxxxxx!@@@!!!!!!@!!!##!!!!
 
Suck it, open source liars. Your movement has been hijacked and your hope for the future is the latest corporate tool in the ideology of technology whoring.
 
You've been fooled!!! LOLZZZzz!!
 
Like a house of cards, your dreams will crumble to the ground.

Fork them (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439779)

Seriously, if nobody likes what google does, fork the platform, it is open source.

Then watch Darwin take effect.

Worked with Open Office.

Re: Fork them (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439825)

Asus is a member of the OHA. Members are explicitly forbidden to create Android forks. So much for the BS "open" argument.

Self-proclaimed geeks and nerds supporting and defending Google - sad and mind-boggling.

Re: Fork them (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439887)

Asus is a member of the OHA. Members are explicitly forbidden to create Android forks.
 
And that's how they bend you over and fuck you.
 
  Self-proclaimed geeks and nerds supporting and defending Google - sad and mind-boggling.
 
It'll never happen. This is no different than the leftists who screamed bloody murder about the PATRIOT Act because they said Bush could use it as a tool for GOP villainy who've themselves are now tight lipped in the face of ObamaNation corruption and worse.
 
Fanbois are fanbois and this is the problem with fanbois.

Re: Fork them (1)

Microlith (54737) | about 5 months ago | (#46440947)

This is no different than the leftists who screamed bloody murder about the PATRIOT Act because they said Bush could use it as a tool for GOP villainy who've themselves are now tight lipped in the face of ObamaNation corruption and worse.

Always amusing to see ACs spouting off with broad brushes and other batshit insanity. CAUSE EVERYTHING IS ABOUT POLITICS RIGHT!

Re:Fork them (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | about 5 months ago | (#46439889)

except if Samsung or Asus fork Android, they are welcome to do so... but they do not get to use Google's Play apps (ie the entire ecosystem that pretty much makes up what people consider Android to be)

It would be better to simply create a new OS.. like Tizen and go from there with a clean slate and nothing holding you back. In fact, I wonder why Samsung is putting so much effort into Tizen given all the freedom they have from Google.

Re:Fork them (1)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about 5 months ago | (#46440169)

There's a difference between forking android for a particular device and not having Play Store on that device, vs forking for a particular device then getting thrown out of OHA so NONE of your devices have gApps. The latter is what is going on here.

This is big nasty corporate bullying that blocks new tech and stymies innovation. Do no evil?

Of course MS isn't objecting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439793)

...they're getting their asses kicked in the mobile space. Anything that lower the barrier between them and the customer will be good for them. If that means that their OS has to be shipped with a more accepted alternative so the customer feels secure in their purchase, so be it.

War, war never changes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439813)

and the phone wars are just heating up

The delay is almost certainly on technical grounds (4, Insightful)

Wierdy1024 (902573) | about 5 months ago | (#46439821)

For example, if android is run under a hypervisor that allows 'quick switching' between the OS's, but restricts what android can do or degrades performance, I can see why Google doesn't want to impact the Android brand by releasing something substandard.

Re:The delay is almost certainly on technical grou (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439873)

Substandard... you mean like 90% of Android devices in existence.

Re: The delay is almost certainly on technical gro (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439877)

The cool-aid is strong in this one.

Re:The delay is almost certainly on technical grou (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439899)

Fanboy or shill, you decide.

"technical grounds"? Really?

Re:The delay is almost certainly on technical grou (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439937)

Surely you jest. Android ships on $50 Chinese tablets that can't load a web page without falling on its face. iOS owns the high end (and most of the profits), Android owns the low end (and most of the unit sales).

Re:The delay is almost certainly on technical grou (2)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about 5 months ago | (#46439979)

And how many of those $50 tablets were approved by Google and run the Google apps suite? I thought the answer was "almost none of them".

The article gives no useful info - assuming any such dispute exists at all, it could be for any reason: seems like the blog is just assuming it must be the dual boot capability because that's what gets traffic. But if for some reason that was the issue, Asus or anyone else could ship devices running the regular open source Android, sans Gmail/Maps/Play Store, without having to deal with Google.

Re:The delay is almost certainly on technical grou (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440323)

And how many of those $50 tablets were approved by Google and run the Google apps suite? I thought the answer was "almost none of them".

Actually, most of them run Google Play, so they are approved by google, and you can install anything on them, including parts of the overrated "Google apps suite".

Apple Owns... do they? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440229)

My phone is a Galaxy Note 3. Quad core, 2+ GHz, HD display. It is extremely responsive, I like the supplied OS/app feature set (with the exception of the My Magazine bloatware from Verizon), and to make it "mine" I only had to DL five or six apps from the Play store, all free. It's light and slim, with a large display that I love. We also have iPhones in the family, so I'm quite familiar with them -- and I have a current model, maxed out iPad. So I have a basis for comparison. The notification system on the Note is far superior, for one thing, and both the email and text messaging facilities are superb. The phone portion works extremely well too. Android has come a long way from the crippled crap that infested my old Droid, and the Note hardware makes the Droid look like junk.

I really don't think Apple "owns" the high end at this point; they're dominant by virtue of a long time in the market with a good product, but there are other players and they've got some great products. I could see Android getting some real traction in this area now, and I would not have said that previously.

--fyngyrz
anon due to mod points

Re:The delay is almost certainly on technical grou (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 5 months ago | (#46440113)

Oh please.

Can you honestly say it is not because Windows mobile will finally be put on a tablet with a great market presence? The surface pro is full Windows 8 and too expensive for consumers. The other surface is not popular and is returned when joe six pack can not run his software on it if it is purchased.

Type 1 hypervisors run fine with performance. In type 2 hypervisors with mechanical disks on top of a host OS which is what virtualbox and VMware Workstation use is a different story. IOPS on a ssd far out exceed a traditional disk and even a raid 5 array! I have benchmarks on my system to prove it on a sans disk that is not even the top end model. I get 300 megs a second copying files.

So a tablet with this not running 2 oses on an ssd with a type 1 is doable. After all servers run like this all the time.

we already know what's on google license for gapps (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439823)

google license for their play store and gapps read that you cant sell a device that run an os different from android if you want to distribute google play store with it.
so asus would have been able to distribute their duet with androdi but without google play store and apps - evidently they tought it wasnt worth enough

Given Microsoft's past history (3, Insightful)

Johnny Loves Linux (1147635) | about 5 months ago | (#46439865)

of boot loaders [theregister.co.uk] and Microsoft's more recent history [engadget.com] and their standard practices [wikipedia.org] I think someone would have to be extremely ignorant of Microsoft's history and their standard practices or a shill for Microsoft to state that this is somehow unfair to Microsoft.

Folks, I don't think Microsoft is just misunderstood. I don't think we have to worry about poor little Microsoft surviving its treatment by the "big bully" Google. I think Microsoft is getting exactly the sort of response that it has earned for its behavior.

Re:Given Microsoft's past history (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439975)

of boot loaders [theregister.co.uk] and Microsoft's more recent history [engadget.com] and their standard practices [wikipedia.org] I think someone would have to be extremely ignorant of Microsoft's history and their standard practices or a shill for Microsoft to state that this is somehow unfair to Microsoft.

Folks, I don't think Microsoft is just misunderstood. I don't think we have to worry about poor little Microsoft surviving its treatment by the "big bully" Google. I think Microsoft is getting exactly the sort of response that it has earned for its behavior.

Sooo, because Microsoft has a history of jackassery, Google gets a pass?

How's the Google-aid taste?

Re:Given Microsoft's past history (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440563)

Like gated freedom?

Re:Given Microsoft's past history (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 5 months ago | (#46440959)

NO its just a fucking joke trying to compare Microsoft's malfeasance with Google's. Microsoft pulled some TRULY evil shit back in the day, and continues to this day with some pretty stupid restrictions on its OS.

Re:Given Microsoft's past history (0)

symbolset (646467) | about 5 months ago | (#46439993)

Apparently if you are foolish enough to run Microsoft's Skype on your Nexus 5, they have found a way to kill your battery. This is the same old Microsoft we have always known.

Re:Given Microsoft's past history (1)

Joe U (443617) | about 5 months ago | (#46440053)

A few other apps cause that MAJOR FLAW in the Nexus camera driver to appear.

This is an Android driver bug, plain and simple.

Re:Given Microsoft's past history (2)

Seraphim_72 (622457) | about 5 months ago | (#46440263)

The name of the company is A-S-U-S, the company quashing this is Google, Microsoft have fuck all to do with it. Nice rant though, shake that penguin, make it dance!

Rambling (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440679)

What are you rambling on with your insightful hatred of MSFT? Clarify your thoughts before posting. That way you won't look ignorant.

Fuck Google. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439909)

It feels weird saying that when there is Microsoft in the story as well. How they have fallen.

I would gladly buy a hybrid like this. Even more so if both OSes run at the same time and Android acts as an overlay OS to the underlying Windows install.
That way I could slap Windows on an SSD, optimize the login, and really only ever turn it on if I need to do heavy multitasking, gaming, or heavy programming that requires a beefy machine. I partially do this now, using tablet as a remote screen to PC at times, or even using it as mouse outside of gaming.

Why the hell would Google be against this? This gets them more units out there, considerably more in fact.
Are Google seriously so incapable of making ANY sensible decisions? It stinks of the idiocy that killed iGoogle because "there is no way we can monetize it" (when there is a pretty god damn empty sidebar and a top-bar that could easily have some ad-strip like Gmail has. NO PLACE TO ADVERTISE AT ALL MAN!)

Re:Fuck Google. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440059)

Bro, Google payed $3.2 Billion for a company selling luxury smoke detectors that never made a profit...Google, like Facebook, is getting desperate and throwing around cash hoping they buy something that doesn't suck. Shades of AOL buying Time-Warner back during the last internet bubble.

Re:Fuck Google. (1)

Gavagai80 (1275204) | about 5 months ago | (#46440901)

That's not getting desperate, that's having so much money you can't think of anything more useful to do with it.

but android is open like your mom's legs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439933)

Anyone can do it

Android has a larger market share on tablets (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46439941)

This is like giving the huge Android userbase an opportunity to try Windows. i.e. free marketing for Microsoft to Android users. I am not surprised Google is trying to block this...

Can Apple be Far Behind? (1)

BoRegardless (721219) | about 5 months ago | (#46440037)

This has obviously been considered now Apple has its ARM A7-A8 series CPU.

It should certainly be possible to put that in a MacBook Air to allow it to run iOS 7 and onward, so we can have both low power tablet and high power OSX in one small package.

Re:Can Apple be Far Behind? (1)

Karlt1 (231423) | about 5 months ago | (#46440567)

It should certainly be possible to put that in a MacBook Air to allow it to run iOS 7 and onward, so we can have both low power tablet and high power OSX in one small package.

There is no need to have an A7 in the Macbook Air to run iOS apps.

There is already a fully functional version of iOS 7 that runs on x86 based Macs and there has been since the app store was introduced. In fact I doubt that there is a single app in existence for iOS that hasn't at one point been run natively on an x86 based Mac.

When a developer runs an iOS app on the iPhone simulator for the Mac, they are not running on an emulator, the app is compiled as an x86 binary and linked against an x86 build of the iOS libraries.

iOS+Windows if google fucks this up (0)

detain (687995) | about 5 months ago | (#46440091)

If they're already looking at being able to switch between 2 platforms and google is saying no, the next logical step will be to have both iOS and Windows running along side each other.

Re:iOS+Windows if google fucks this up (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440143)

I can actually see FirefoxOS catching on at this rate. Apple isn't likely to want dual-boot, they don't even like it when you run OSX off their sanctioned overly expensive hardware. FirefoxOS runs quite well on good hardware, allegedly, so and they'd most certainly pounce on the chance. I doubt Apple would care given how successful they already are. They rarely do care about such things unless it is to stop them.

Re:iOS+Windows if google fucks this up (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | about 5 months ago | (#46440211)

That works right up to the point where Apple controls every transistor on every machine that runs iOS. Even Jony and Tim won't fuck up Apple's cash cow that badly, and they done some really stupid-as-shit things since ol' Stevie boy went toes up.

Re:iOS+Windows if google fucks this up (1)

detain (687995) | about 5 months ago | (#46440335)

Then it will be Windows + FirefoxOS or Ubuntus new Phone OS i hope. Wonder if its running them virtualized or if they each have their own hardware?

Re:iOS+Windows if google fucks this up (1)

Rob Y. (110975) | about 5 months ago | (#46441011)

Unlikely. But your post points out the real situation. It's Microsoft that wants dual-booting phones. They can't get anybody to buy their phones, so they hope to use dual boot to encourage people to at least try their OS. Apple or Google have nothing to gain there, so Apple would never cooperate. Google has less control in this case.

But this article is about convertible laptop/tablets, and in that market, I imagine it's Asus that wants dual-booting. Anybody who would buy one of these is buying it for the Windows laptop capability. And Asus wants them to pay a premium for it to be convertible into a tablet. Other than the possibility that Asus has made it easy to share files between the Android tablet and the Windows laptop worlds, there'd be no advantage to this over a cheap laptop plus a Nexus tablet. Microsoft would probably prefer Asus to build an all Windows convertible, since again, the buyer's buying the Windows laptop. If MS can give their unpopular tablet OS a boost, that'd be preferable to them over a Windows/Android hybrid. Google might prefer an all Android convertible, though. But even they probably realize Android laptops at this point are a stretch.

In any case, we're talking about the high-end (i.e. expensive) laptop market. That's not a happy place to be these days. Cheap laptops or even Chromebooks serve the real laptop market better. Power hungry games and productivity apps do better on a desktop (and for the most part, a cheap one will do fine there too). The rest of the market is for phones and 7" tablets, and I don't see Asus pushing for dual booting there...

Microsoft is not the more evil one (1, Troll)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 5 months ago | (#46440097)

They are just like Apple and now Google and every other company in existence.

They are all equal and will be assholes as soon as they have marketshare. It comes to show you that only competition frees. Even in opensource it is not good to have 1 player set standards which is evident in Xorg and the traction to stop Wayland just as an example.

So those who bash I WONT TOUCH IT BECAUSE IT IS FROM MICROSOFT!! Need to realize Android is not a savior either as Google is now being cocky since they have major marketshare.

If the situation were in reverse and Windows Mobile had 80% of the market you could bet Google would be in favor of dual boot and of course MS would fight it etc.

Google, too powerful? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440151)

Wow, google becomes the "decider" of all things tech! Antitrust pushback from our government, anyone?

Re: Google, too powerful? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440349)

You are a few years late to the party. But good morning good sir. Nice that you finally woke up.

Free as in not (0)

pak9rabid (1011935) | about 5 months ago | (#46440453)

Android is free and open

So where's the Raspberry Pi distribution (that actually works) if it's so free and open?

Re:Free as in not (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440527)

Here it is, BTW:
http://androidpi.wikia.com/wiki/Android_Pi_Wiki

And also, well, you can try to explain to folks at Cyanogenmod that Android is not free and open, it seems they got it completely wrong...

Re:Free as in not (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440763)

If Cyanogenmod is so free and open, why does Replicant exist and needs so much work to run it on new hardware?

Nobody forces you (1)

drolli (522659) | about 5 months ago | (#46440457)

to use google closed source code if you want to run android apps on your device. Nokia/MS can do it, blackberry too, and obviously many cheap Chinese nameless devices. There are other app stores than google play.

That being said, I understand Google why i they don't like to brand a "dual boot"/"switching device which probably would suck even more power and have a more indeterministic behavior than even the most crapware-loaded samsung device.

If MS or asus likes this so much, nobody hinders them to to the right things, which are either
* give Windows the capability to execute Android Apps from the start
* make an android app which runs windows programs.

Re:Nobody forces you (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 5 months ago | (#46440977)

Not only that but now the machine will have THREE personalities. Win 8 desktop, Modern UI and Android.

True???? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440673)

If true, then I think that would push GOOGLE fully into the old MSFT role of the big villain. (Which they are)

didn't read the article...Slashdot is a bunch of w (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46440709)

There got that out of the way. Google is not stopping them from releasing the device what Google is doing is reminding them that for Google Apps the agreement forbids this. Slashdot fuck off

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>