Should Microsoft become an OEM (PC manufacturer)?

[zridling]

I'm throwing this idea out there because with the proven success of its Xbox, it only seems obvious that it could finally follow Apple's lead and, (1) make even more money; (2) further improve security; while (3) controlling complex compatibility issues in future OS versions.

PS: I understand that Microsoft has long manufactured keyboards and mice, among other things. But this is about PC systems.

[jgpaiva]

No, please no!! Not another apple in the bussiness. Things are good as they are now, for me

[f0dder]

No, please no!! Not another apple in the bussiness. Things are good as they are now, for me

-jgpaiva (October 12, 2008, 08:35 PM)

+1.

[Shades]

We all have seen how well this idea/concept went with IBM.

Any company that 'designs by commission' (like M$ and IBM) more often than not fail or fail miserably. Being ruled by a dictator (like Apple) is either success or failure.

South-America is Playstation, I can tell you. More or less the only XBoxes you will find here, are owned by US embassy or US military personnel. Getting anything for the Nintendo Wii is already hard enough and even more expensive than in the US and/or Asia (XBox is also not that popular in the Eurozone as M$ would have expected).

My comment is not intended to label the XBox as a bad gaming rig, it is just not popular at all here in South America. Honestly, I have never touched one in my whole life, so I cannot tell anything about it.

The fact that the XBox division is separate from the main M$ company would be a reason for it's success. The main company would likely be responsible for the design of this machine...and the commission would think that the name of this machine should be 'Windows Computer'.

They however didn't envision that this name would be abbreviated to 'WC'...and the natural association of crap with that abbreviation   

[40hz]

What most corporations I work with are looking for is a low-maintenance, small energy footprint, general purpose office work appliance.

If Microsoft produced a small, inexpensive (sub $300) box that could run MS Office, a web browser, and connect to a Windows domain, you would need to beat off corporate IT buyers with a stick. It wouldn't even need to look pretty. If you could just plug it in and run it, that would be ideal. If you could bolt it behind a desk or securely screw it into a wall, that would be even better.

I'm amazed they're not building the Microsoft OfficeSpace™ Appliance (MOA) already.
(I can see the ads now: "Microsoft gives you MOA for your business!")

[f0dder]

40hz: http://www.chippc.co...hin-clients/jack-pc/ ?

Yeah, it's not a fully-fledged PC, so you need a terminal server. But darn they're cute... and can do power-over-ethernet.

[40hz]

40hz: http://www.chippc.co...hin-clients/jack-pc/ ?

Yeah, it's not a fully-fledged PC, so you need a terminal server. But darn they're cute... and can do power-over-ethernet.

-f0dder (October 13, 2008, 12:06 PM)

I fell in love with that thing the first time I laid eyes on it. But they make it so damn difficult to buy that they're shooting themselves in the foot as far as I'm concerned. What I had in mind was something that shipped on a blister-pack and hung off a hook in an office supply store like Staples.

Also, thin-client is a good solution, but you need an IT person who knows what they're doing to set up and configure a terminal server to work efficiently. Then there's the maintenance and the tuning once you get beyond five to ten users.

What I was thinking of was something more like a Linksys router. Something you unbox, plug in, run a configuration CD for, and start using. Something like a non-portable (otherwise they'll get stolen) EeePC with the OS, office suite and browser already installed. You could rig it so it could only be updated (or have software installed) through a specified SMS or WUS. That would protect you from  rogue apps, pirated software, and other the "user-installed" headaches IT departments lose sleep and time over.

And if anything, you wouldn't want it to be too good as far as hardware was concerned. All it would need to support was "business class" graphics and possess enough power to run productivity applications. So all it would be good for is doing the boring stuff most people get paid to do. Matching the hardware to the task would render it useless for game playing, video editing, music ripping, and all the other stuff people do at work that their employer tells them not to.

And now that I'm thinking about it, it would be even smarter if Microsoft provided an option to just rent the box. That business model worked for cable and satellite TV. It worked because most people don't want to own a box - they just want to watch a movie or sporting event. Well, most companies don't want to own their PCs either. They just want their employees to be able to get their work done.

Of course, there's nothing stopping anybody from doing this with Linux...

(Sorry, I just had to say that - or my DC 'nix-pals' would never have forgiven me! )

[Stoic Joker]

No, please no!! Not another apple in the bussiness. Things are good as they are now, for me

-jgpaiva (October 12, 2008, 08:35 PM)

+1.

-f0dder (October 12, 2008, 10:35 PM)

+2.

[zridling]

But it seems that Microsoft took a baby step in this direction with its "Vista Ready" PC campaign. Yes, yes, it turned out not to be true. If nothing else, as 40hz mentioned, build a certified box that has all of Microsoft's software pre-installed. On second thought, that would be a damn expensive machine unless you gave customers a technet license.

[40hz]: Of course, there's nothing stopping anybody from doing this with Linux.

Dell is already doing it on a small scale with Ubuntu; no?

[f0dder]

zridling: ALL of Microsoft's software, or just what a regular end-user would ever need?

[app103]

No, please no!! Not another apple in the bussiness. Things are good as they are now, for me

-jgpaiva (October 12, 2008, 08:35 PM)

+1.

-f0dder (October 12, 2008, 10:35 PM)

+2.

-Stoic Joker (October 13, 2008, 01:33 PM)

+3

The idea that Apple already requires you to run their OS on their hardware is a bad deal for consumers. There is no real choice there, and you can't build your own and install Apple's OS on it without violating their EULA. You are stuck with whatever they want to offer you, at whatever price they decide, and often inflated prices at that.

Do we really want another hardware dictatorship telling us we have to buy their overpriced hardware in order to run Windows?

Microsoft becoming an OEM will take that choice away from Windows users and take Windows away from the ones that like to build their own machines.

One of the great joys of being a PC user has always been choice. You can drool over hardware and plan your dream machine, build it and then install the PC OS of your choice...Windows, Linux, BSD, etc (just about anything except Apple) then all the software you want.

You could choose from many prebuilt machines, of many brands, and many specs and purchase something suitable for your purposes and budget.

If you didn't like the last HP you bought, you could go with Dell next time, or one of many other companies. Or a college kid that builds PC's in his basement for extra cash to help himself get by.

If Microsoft became another Apple, where would you go if you didn't like the last Microsoft machine you bought, or their customer support, or some other issue, yet still wanted to run Windows?

[Ehtyar]

I'm almost tempted to say it would be a good thing, driving consumers away from Microsoft altogether. Though, if I were to be less cynical, I'd be the +4. The reasoning has already been described in a better manner that I could accomplish.

Ehtyar.

[Grorgy]

It wouldn't worry me one way or the other so long as they don't make it necessary to purchase their hardware with their software.  I guess I'm saying - so long as they don't become an apple, but some much friendlier fruit.

[f0dder]

It wouldn't worry me one way or the other so long as they don't make it necessary to purchase their hardware with their software.  I guess I'm saying - so long as they don't become an apple, but some much friendlier fruit.

-Grorgy (October 13, 2008, 03:42 PM)

Fat chance of that happening, should they go down the PC-system road. Look at how locked-down their XBOXes have been... (sure, gaming consoles are a different breed of machine, but I'm still saying... with complete control of the hardware, you can really lock down the system if you want to.)

[Edvard]

I'm throwing this idea out there because with the proven success of its Xbox, it only seems obvious that it could finally follow Apple's lead and, (1) make even more money; (2) further improve security; while (3) controlling complex compatibility issues in future OS versions.

I've often wondered the same thing...
Why leave it up to computer manufacturers who skimped severely on the hardware but still sold stuff as "Vista compatible" and risk the potential backlash? Why not button up a box loaded with whatever Vista REALLY needed (and they should know...) and give it an official Microsoft blessing?

This would in no way prevent companies like HP or Dell or your cousin from cobbling together a machine from whatever's convenient, just that Microsoft could make available machines that were 100% proven to a certain benchmark.
Heck, they wouldn't even have to do that, just require by contract that PC manufacturers meet or exceed those benchmarks before being allowed to sell them as "100% Vista-capable" or some such.

Of course, there's nothing stopping anybody from doing this with Linux...

(Sorry, I just had to say that - or my DC 'nix-pals' would never have forgiven me!)

-40hz

hehe - don't worry, we forgive you.
Just don't forget to mention Freenx + NoMachine when you talk 'nix thin clients, kthx. (Plain ol' remote X works too, but I wouldn't recommend it for every situation...)

I guess I'm saying - so long as they don't become an apple, but some much friendlier fruit.

-Grorgy

Kumquat? Mango? Kiwi?

[40hz]

I don't think it necessarily follows that if Microsoft become an OEM PC manufacturer that they would automatically become another Apple and only have a closed-box solution.

I say that for three reasons:

1. They'd lose their existing PC customers that might be considering upgrades

2. They'd cede the worldwide existing PC base (millions & millions) to a competing OS and/or application suite.

3. U.S. Antitrust court actions would bury them. Microsoft gets away with a lot of what they do because they're so entrenched in the business world. In many ways, it would be more harmful to take them down than it would be to let them continue their less egregious behaviors. If reasons 1 & 2 above came to pass, they would lose their "hostages."

An remember: once the hostages are released, it's 'politically acceptable' to send the SWAT teams in.

[Deozaan]

I'm also going to chime in about the Xbox: It's really only successful here in the USA/North America. It's not doing well in Japan at all. Though I suppose Europe and Australia might be a different story.

[Grorgy]

I guess I'm saying - so long as they don't become an apple, but some much friendlier fruit.

-Grorgy

Kumquat? Mango? Kiwi?

-Edvard (October 13, 2008, 04:43 PM)

Hmmm hadn't really got that far, perhaps a mango, sort of squishy and soft   

[Darwin]

If MS and the public's perception of them remain true to form, will be more like Durian...

[zridling]

[f0dder]: ALL of Microsoft's software, or just what a regular end-user would ever need?

Good question. I don't know. How about MS Office Super Pro Premium Ultra Ultimate 64-bit?

The danger of lock-in as f0dder noted is slim, since that would shackle OS sales to hardware sales, thus reducing revenue drastically. I'm talking about MS building what 40hz said would be a 'Microsoft' appliance, which is all that any Apple computer really is. (How often do you take apart your microwave or refrigerator?)

[f0dder]

[f0dder]: ALL of Microsoft's software, or just what a regular end-user would ever need?

Good question. I don't know. How about MS Office Super Pro Premium Ultra Ultimate 64-bit?

The danger of lock-in as f0dder noted is slim, since that would shackle OS sales to hardware sales, thus reducing revenue drastically. I'm talking about MS building what 40hz said would be a 'Microsoft' appliance, which is all that any Apple computer really is. (How often do you take apart your microwave or refrigerator?)

-zridling (October 14, 2008, 02:36 AM)

AFAIK Microsoft doesn't really make money from the OS itself, so shackling OS<>Hardware probably wouldn't reduce the revenue... just a thing to keep in mind.

[Lashiec]

What I was thinking of was something more like a Linksys router. Something you unbox, plug in, run a configuration CD for, and start using. Something like a non-portable (otherwise they'll get stolen) EeePC with the OS, office suite and browser already installed. You could rig it so it could only be updated (or have software installed) through a specified SMS or WUS. That would protect you from  rogue apps, pirated software, and other the "user-installed" headaches IT departments lose sleep and time over.

-40hz (October 13, 2008, 12:39 PM)

An Eee Box then . Or a Dell Studio Hybrid.

And yeah, let Microsoft stay where it is. The XBOX venture, while successful, it's costing them millions, the first console because of low sales, the second one because of the RROD. A line of PCs would be a headache.

[40hz]

The XBOX venture, while successful, it's costing them millions, the first console because of low sales, the second one because of the RROD. A line of PCs would be a headache.

-Lashiec (October 14, 2008, 12:38 PM)

Yeah, but a business/general productivity system would be far easier to develop and manufacture than a game console. Game programs use more horsepower and demand vastly better graphics than the usual "productivity" (i.e. wordprocessing/spreadsheet/database/presentation graphics/e-mail/web browser) type machine. We're talking PalmPilot mindset - not PSP here.

Then there's also the Atom processor - which is dirt cheap already. Microsoft could do a reduced version of Office that got rid of all the fluff most people never use, and fine tune their software so it sings on the Atom. If somebody needed the extra features, they could be downloaded as plug-ins just like everybody else seems to be doing.

I don't see how they could lose from either a technical or a marketing viewpoint. (Politically and legally might be a different story however.)

[4wd]

I guess I'm saying - so long as they don't become an apple, but some much friendlier fruit.

-Grorgy

Kumquat? Mango? Kiwi?

-Edvard (October 13, 2008, 04:43 PM)

Hmmm hadn't really got that far, perhaps a mango, sort of squishy and soft   

-Grorgy (October 13, 2008, 09:14 PM)

Nah, they'd become Macadamias - something good surrounded by a really thick, tough shell 

Disclaimer: I'm not saying Microsoft is good, far from it, but macadamias are........mmmmmmm!

[mahesh2k]

let apple be apple, and microsoft be microsoft, yeah whatever that means after reading whole thread 

If MS wants to get into hardware+os, like Apple then maybe they'll import linux into their box (just kidding)...