Google Blocking Asus's Android-Windows "Duet"? 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."
Google more restrictive than Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
The dual boot is stupid for a consumer device. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The dual boot is stupid for a consumer device. (Score:3, Insightful)
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: Google more restrictive than Microsoft (Score:2, Insightful)
You really should have added the /s tag.
Google cool-aid drinkers might take you seriously.
The delay is almost certainly on technical grounds (Score:5, Insightful)
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:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Given Microsoft's past history (Score:4, Insightful)
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:The delay is almost certainly on technical grou (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The dual boot is stupid for a consumer device. (Score:4, Insightful)
You forgot about the pr0n angle.
You have no idea what people will use that second OS (with its completely separate filesystem) for.
Re:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
And I though I was old (Score:4, Insightful)
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?
Apple Owns... do they? (Score:2, Insightful)
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:Google more restrictive than Microsoft (Score:4, Insightful)
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 (Score:5, Insightful)
" 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......