News - Google and Microsoft don't want dual-OS devices on the market

[HEXUS]

The software giants pressured ASUS to drop its Transformer Book Duet TD300 plans.

Read more.

[aidanjt]

Wow, screw you both.

[peterb]

Why am I not surprised?

I wonder if Asus have an anti-competition law suit there? Or maybe they'll decide to release it in Europe where MS might have less sway. But I won't be holding my breath on either option.

[LSG501]

the irony in this if it's true is that Google's chrome browser on windows is becoming more and more like it's chrome os (yes I know it's not android but you get the idea) and Microsoft are supposedly trying to get windows phone onto dual boot android phones.

Google/Microsoft are obviously fine with 'dual booting' when one of the products has less marketshare but with android and windows both being 'market leaders' in respective markets they don't want to risk losing users....

I can kind of understand google not wanting windows on the same convertible device, windows 8 is in my opinion better than android on large screen touchscreen devices (and I've got a nexus 7 and that's not perfect) and I can understand MS not wanting google as they basically compete in every other aspect of the 'value added services' (online storage, email, office packages etc) on their os's.

But lets be realistic here, the only people going to lose out are the consumer, most people will buy windows if they want windows and android/iOs if they want that....

[jim]

I don't really get the purpose of these devices anyway... is it really convenient to reboot your laptop to get to an android app?

I would get both simultaneously, i.e. a Windows laptop with an android touchscreen on the outside, and obviously single-OS devices are the norm, but the idea of turning it off and switching from on to the other?

Mind you, I've never liked using dual-boot desktops and they're not that uncommon.

[shaithis]

the irony in this if it's true is that Google's chrome browser on windows is becoming more and more like it's chrome os (yes I know it's not android but you get the idea) and Microsoft are supposedly trying to get windows phone onto dual boot android phones.

For me the biggest irony is MS wanting to get itself on Android devices....after the whole EFI/secureboot debacle.

[Torashin]

I wonder if that applies to AMD and Bluestacks as well?

[LSG501]

I wonder if that applies to AMD and Bluestacks as well?

doubtful as that's basically a program running android via virtualisation

[Badbonji]

Hoping Ubuntu takes off as an alternative, considering it could remove the need for multiple OS altogether.

[TheAnimus]

For me the biggest irony is MS wanting to get itself on Android devices....after the whole EFI/secureboot debacle.

I don't think you understand what SecureBoot is about... at all.

[crossy]

Wow, screw you both.

Yep, that's my feeling pretty much and then I remembered:

which is probably more correct for my feelings re Google and Microsoft in this case.
Thanks Adam Hills! (Very funny - Happyism is a great DVD).

(Apologies if this is just over the line for the Hexus "no swearing" rule)

[wasabi]

To me one running virtual inside the other is the only sane way to do this sort of thing. I've dabbled with dual boot PCs in the past and really never used what quickly became the second OS.

Best outcome for consumer would be if they all agreed a common hardware platform and allowed people to choose what OS they like. Which isn't going to happen. Not with everyone desperately chasing the Apple-esque high-margin walled-garden platform investor pipedream.

[crossy]

I don't really get the purpose of these devices anyway... is it really convenient to reboot your laptop to get to an android app? I would get both simultaneously, i.e. a Windows laptop with an android touchscreen on the outside, and obviously single-OS devices are the norm, but the idea of turning it off and switching from on to the other? Mind you, I've never liked using dual-boot desktops and they're not that uncommon.

I was talking to someone about this at the weekend. In his case it's NOT a single app that he needs to switch to - instead it's sessions. His always-on dual-boot (can't remember what it is - might even be some kind of home brew setup) is normally in Android - this lets him do a bit of Angry Birds, check G+/Twitter/etc along with a bit of web browsing. Sometimes however, he's got to do a bit of Office stuff - for which he needs "real Office" - so a quick reboot and he's there. And then the usual interminable delay while the system applies a whole host of system updates that have snuck out...

Dual boot? Yes I used to do that in the past, but to be honest the whole faff with the Windows boot loader not wanting to play nice with the Linux ones was a big turn off. Given we've got eSATA and USB3.0 these days, the next time I revisit it I'm going to do it the easy way - put my Linux distro on an external crate and change the BIOS boot order.

I can kind of understand google not wanting windows on the same convertible device, windows 8 is in my opinion better than android on large screen touchscreen devices (and I've got a nexus 7 and that's not perfect) and I can understand MS not wanting google as they basically compete in every other aspect of the 'value added services' (online storage, email, office packages etc) on their os's.

I'm going to disagree here - there's a difference between "not wanting" and doing what GoogleSoft are doing. Actually I could see their side more if they were trying to prevent manufacturers doing products solely using the others OS/services. So if Microsoft leaned on Samsung and HP to stop doing Chromebooks (dumb product anyway imho) then I could see their point. But this ... where you're effectively giving the consumer an "And" choice? No, doesn't seem sensible. Heck, if Windows 8 is better than Android (or vice-versa) then these dual-mode devices are EXACTLY the place to be able to show it - after all, it's the same hardware!

And no, I (personally again) don't agree that Windows8 is necessarily better than Android on bigger screen devices. Big plus of Android for the novice user is that it's a single mode desktop - either you're at the desktop level or you're in an app. On the other hand with Windows 8 you've got in-app, MUI desktop AND classic desktop - confusing. Caveat being that if you're talking about a large screen system that has to support multiple users - say a family PC - then I'd choose Windows and just grit my teeth.

[Odeas]

I like the idea of a win/android device like these, I can see why Microsoft and Google don't though as it'd really show off the weak spots of each OS, and if a user has a problem with one of the OS's they'd probably just switch to the other for good.

Regarding dual booting, I've just got seperate drives for Windows/Linux. I mostly stick to windows but when I do need Linux I just hit F8 at boot and choose the drive. If it was more a day to day thing I needed both I'd probably just go for a KVM switch.

[shaithis]

I don't think you understand what SecureBoot is about... at all.

It's a kernel verification system....so yes thanks, I do understand.

[TheAnimus]

It's a kernel verification system....so yes thanks, I do understand.

It isn't, it's a boot-loader validation system.

It is the only viable way of getting a chain of trust going, that your computer and OS haven't been modified.

All MS did, was to lay down some standards, namely, it has to be on by default for anyone to get a windows sticker. That's it. Nothing more.

I fully agree with that.