Report: HP trying for 'end-run' around Windows
Is the biggest PC vendor in the world looking to give customers an option besides Windows?
An article appearing in BusinessWeek this week cites anonymous sources who say Hewlett-Packard is at least looking into it. "Sources say employees in HP's PC division are exploring the possibility of building a mass-market operating system," the article states.
HP Touchsmart is an example of the company's efforts to provide a user experience on top of Windows.
(Credit: Hewlett-Packard)The operating system would reportedly be Linux-based, but would be tweaked to be more accessible to mainstream users. Those same sources say it's part of an HP plan to become less dependent on Windows, and to compete better with Apple for the same type of person who would consider a Mac, which has its own operating system on its computers touted as more user-friendly than Vista.
HP isn't confirming the report, but had previously been open about the formation of a new group within its Labs that developed the touch-screen technology and special software used in its TouchSmart PC. The software lets users get around certain features of Vista to do certain multimedia tasks more easily.
Phil McKinney, CTO of HP's Personal Systems Group, didn't deny the company is looking into it, but said it didn't make much sense to build its own operating system. "Is HP funding a huge R&D team to go off and create an operating system? (That) makes no sense," he told BusinessWeek.
Maybe not for HP, who's the world's leading purveyor of Microsoft software, through the approximately 50 million PCs the company ships around the globe each year. The article also points out Intel's recent support for Netbooks, mini-notebooks that use its Atom processor and run Linux, and Dell's decision to offer Linux as a Windows alternative on some of its PCs.
They're not the only ones. Asus makes a motherboard called P5E3 Deluxe/WiFi-AP. It allows a PC to boot directly to Windows or any other operating system installed on the hard disk. Basically this alternative operating system, provided by DeviceVM to Asus, is another way to do an end-run around Windows.
Whether Windows' dominance is in any actual danger of disappearing, Microsoft has already begun to fight back. Last week it rolled out the beginnings of a high-profile and expensive ad campaign starring its co-founder Bill Gates and comedian Jerry Seinfeld. The response has been, well, mixed.
Erica Ogg is a CNET News reporter who covers Apple, HP, Dell, and other PC makers, as well as the consumer electronics industry. She's also one of the hosts of CNET News' Daily Podcast. In her non-work life, she's a history geek, a loyal Dodgers fan, and a mac-and-cheese connoisseur. E-mail Erica. 
For OSX.... it's almost as good as Vista, but not quite. The biggest black mark against it is the lack of game support on OSX. If they could get the game support for current games AND older games up to where it should be or find a way to emulate Windows Vista support for older games.... I might just buy a Apple machine.
"Pretty much command line only"?
That is the absolute most stupid and incorrect thing ever written on CNET. Congrats!
Even 10 years ago that was not true.
Besides, any real computer user knows that the command line gives more control than any GUI can.
Unless you are stupid to believe doctored numbers, and ignore the fact that MS is desperately trying to make themselves relevant in the minds of consumers.
Or perhaps you were being ironic since they are losing marketshare at a record rate across the board?
But understand one thing- when the support calls come flooding in because other hardware/software is not working nicely with others on their modified systems due to the tweaking and sidestepping they did then they only have themselves to blame. They will face all the issues all by their lonesome.
Remember your not talking about the Linux community making the changes, you are taking sole responsbility for your own actions independent of what the general Linux community is doing, which means you will have sole responsibility for the problems.
Imagine the incredbly favorable press coverage they will receive from fine folks like us when we start coming to CNET News complaining very loudly!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP-UX
Furthermore, Windows itself is partially based on the DEC VAX operating system. DEC was later acquired by Compaq which in turn was acquired by HP.
HP knows exactly what they are getting into.
So, umm, what are you on about again?
I am using an HP right now that had to have it's registry modified in order to accept XP SP3. HP was no help in that at all. I told them over the phone I'll never purchase an HP product again.
*sigh* Yet another fork in the Linux support model. Linux could really beneift if they all rallied around a single version. Right now it's a support nightmare.
I'm all for HP to work around Windows issues and decreased functionality.
Dan: What "fork"? If it uses the Linux kernel (and common Linux apps), then it uses the exact same codebase for its core - the only diff being that HP will contribute code to Linux now. Please stop misusing a term if you don't know what it means.
If din it funny that after years of HP doing their own support for Windows, Linux, HP-UX, and etc... suddenly "oooo - support niiiightmaaareee... oooOOOoooooo!" -Whatever.
If anything, HP having their own in-house distro would be drop-easy to support: No more waiting on vendors to cough up responses to bug reports, no more having to wait for training materials and training for vendor products, and no more having the customer do the round-and-round of: OEM says "oh, you'll have to call Microsoft for that", followed by MSFT saying "Oh, you'll have to call the vendor for that."
If you make your money selling hardware, open sourcing your drivers gives you an army of coders to improve your product, without you paying anything.
http://news.cnet.com/Dell-founder-thinks-different-about-Apple/2100-1016_3-5749940.html
Please! I'd buy an HP PC in a heartbeat with VMS on it!
@rapier1: wrong. They'll likely build one out of what's there, adding only what they need in-house. The parts are already out there and very well-supported for development - especially with what HP sells.
Go back and read what I wrote if you would. I said HP is *not* building their own OS. Your reponse was essentially a restatement of what I was saying.
Cool - let's see some REAL choices in the marketplace, where a user can choose any OS with any product an OEM sells, and not have to deal with: "no, Sir, we don't sell this model with XP/Linux/noOS pre-installed - we recommend Vista, and that's all it comes with!", or worse: "Yes, we do support that OS, but only on a few oddball models - and not the one you're wanting to buy. Yes, we know it'll work on that model too, but..."
If the OEMs would just offer to sell machinery with no OS installed as an option, that would be sufficient (though that option would destroy MSFT's arguments about how allegedly popular Vista is...)
I have a name for this OS, CommieOS. Because only in a communist system could you actually enforce this.
...though, in truth, I did actually have to read your post twice... before I got it. So, be prepared for a storm of people that dont realize your post was tongue-in-cheek.
I especially love the SHILL-bit... "Its quite obvious folks who buy systems preloaded with Linux are formatting them loading them with either a cheap OEM copy of XP Pro or a pirated copy"... part... thats, when I finally caught-on to the joke.
GOOD ONE. 8-)
LOL
Punched paper tape? Get real, that was an important part of computing history, like the 300k floppy, no need to dis its legacy. Oh perhaps MS is going to make their next OS using x86 real mode and 300k floppies, since they did before.
RT-11? You can thank their maker, DEC, for introducing the world to the concept of a computer as something friendlier than an expensive machine in a large room with a large staff running it.
Geez, what next, diss the model-t?
why one more?
getting OS off the ground is easy.
the difficult tasks is getting the hardware folks to develop the driver and get the software folks to write application for it.
how long has Apple competing with Microsoft?
how long has Linux been around?
all the people who complain about Microsoft.
who stopping you from buying Mac or Linux?
it's good to have Mac and Linux around or may be another new player.
Microsoft ain't going no where!!!
until the hardware and software folks began to support your operating system, your os is nothing more than just a footnote in history.
just look at the metric and english system.
whoever involved in science or engineering agrees that the metric system is a better system?
and yet, you still find a few nations on earth still using the more complex system like the english system.
why not just scrap that and teach the new generation the metric system?
one quick answer is cost.
and you have to change all the labels, tools, retrain workers, traffic sign, etc.
once again, cost.
if we really really want to change, we can but who's paying for the cost?
Microsot pumps a lot of money and gives a lot of incentives to 3rd party who supported their new technology.
take DirectX for instance which is the technology used for multimedia like movie, music, games, etc.
hardware developers need to support DX and software developers need to support it.
and Microsoft needs to have their engineers stand-by to answer all the questions.
all of these translate to COST.
who's paying for it?
if HP wants to develop the new flavor of Linux or a completely new OS, it can easily be done.
but to make it successful, HP needs to have a lot of hardware and software people to back them up.
All HP needs to do is say. "Lookie Here, It just works" that and bunddle it on cheaper systems rather like MS did with Office until they gained dominance and started charging real money.
Dunno how to tell you this, but it's a lot easier to write code for an OS whose APIs are all not only published, but the source code is right there for public inspection.
Having worked for a code vendor (apps, not drivers), I can tell you that the right choice of tools (e.g. using cross-platform library sets instead of single-OS proprietary ones) makes writing for multiple OSes fairly easy to do. For instance, OpenGL-Qt*-C++ reduced the diffs between Windows and Mac(PPC) to file I/O, and a few small bits and bobs (e.g. sweeping for endians). the exact same codebase for the majority of modules compiled just fine in XTools and VS 2003 (and could easily do so in Eclipse), no sweat.
*Qt was used to eliminate the GUI library diffs between Windows and OSX.
So, in short - unless the vendor's code architect is a moron or a zealot (or cannot write code outside of a pet IDE), cross-platform code writing is not a problem.
Then you have the hardware. Linux probably supports more hardware than Windows. DVRs, DVD players, cell phones, PlayStation, XBOX, servers, desktops and whatever. Linux will run on just about everything. Also, a computer can run multiple operating systems. It's not a Windows or Linux situation. If you're really into gaming it's a Linux and Windows situation where you can get the best of both worlds.
Also, you don't just buy the crappiest Windows machine do you? Well if don't expect Windows to run on just any crap hardware then why would you expect Linux to? You're not the kind of person that buys a PlayStation and gets mad because your Wii games don't play are you?
I will never understand why people think it is ok to buy a mac to run OS X or a PC to run Windows or an XBOX to play Halo or a Nintendo to play Mario, but if Linux doesn't run on everything then it must suck. Where exactly does that mentality come from? If you're planning on running Linux get the proper Linux hardware.
To Imalittleteapot..... Linux does have game. Some games actually run better in WINE than they do in Windows Vista. Others however.... won't work at all for some reason, and THAT is what kills Linux.
You go around crusading for Vista and expect us all to listen to you. However, we see here you don't even know how to do the simple task of dual booting two operating systems on a PC.
Windows is a toy, we get that. Lets move on.
What they did with Vista was the best thing that they could have done. As to Symantec and McAfee having problems.... most of them are of their own creation by wanting to 'scan the kernel, scan the kernel'.... THEY DON'T NEED TO BE ******* WITH THE KERNEL. Period, done with, over: they don't need to be ******* with it.
Especiallly with the new protections that Microsoft has on the kernel, that aren't 'foolproof'.... but are pretty good, nonetheless.
Just from the point of view of the average guy walking into a store full of PCs and seeing Windows, Windows, Windows, and oh that HP with that other OS on it? It might not look good. So, that's the way I'd go. If they did it right eventually all the OEMs could forget the Microsoft tax and either A. make a bigger profit on each sale or B. drop the prices on the systems further to compete in the market.
Going it alone though could be a nightmare without help. All that patching and updating and support that Microsoft does for Windows. Well HP would have to do that on their own if they didn't have any partners.
Honestly if they did their own distro I really think the package manager would be the most important part. They should probably just use the Debian system. However, what I'd really like to see is something more app bundle like. Just drag an app into the applications folder to install and drag right back to uninstall.
Then, I would have a better way to bash on Microsoft if theirs is slower, or bash on Apple if theirs is slower.
I can't compare directly because I don't have OSX installed on it, but my Vista 64 laptop is the fastest I've ever used. I won't put Vista on the other PC because there is no good reason to pay for a retail copy of it when XP works just fine, and I actually spend most of my time in OSX, unless I wanted to play a game.
Would OSX run as well on Dell and HP hardware as Windows does? Doubt it. So what will happen then? There are basically two options, possibly a third. One is that people will by OSX and really like the OS, but realize that the stability is JUST AS BAD AS (or worse than) EVIL WINDOWS... so they switch back to Windows because Microsoft has at least been trying to make their stuff work with disparate harware for over a decade. Option 2 is that they'll love OSX but hate the hardware, so they'll go out a buy a Mac that is 3 or 4 times more expensive for the same specs as what they already had. It'll work good and they'll become "part of the collective" (resistance IS futile... isn't it?) As an unlikely but possible thrid outcome is that Apple becomes the new Microsoft and another company becomes the Borg and people are helpless against their charm and marketing and brute-force will.
"The future is not set... the future is what we choose..." Who knows? Maybe next year at this time, I'll have a few dozen seats of OSX under my guidance... right now, lets just enjoy the ride while it lasts.
One... last... thing... I wonder - TRUTHFULLY - how many people that have SOOOOOO much bad to say about Vista have actually used it for a day or a week or a month? if so, did you install it on a PC that was running Win2K or an old XP machine. XP got the same bad rap when it came out because people couldn't install that "bloated" OS on thier old Win95/98 PC. NOW, people are fighting tooth and nail to KEEP XP. Look for the good, deal with the bad or go the hell away. If you don't like Windows... more power to you. There are PLENTY of those that do. If you don't like Mac... sweet. There are also PLENTY people that CHOOSE them. Let freedom of choice reign, not popular opinion.
"Sounds like HP wants to be destroyed. Don't ever, ever get on Microsoft's wrong side, its the worst thing you could do. Look at what happened to IBM with Windows 95."
@Imalittleteapot
"My advice if I was HP and thinking about this. Don't do it alone. If they get serious with it they should really cooperate with Dell, Compaq, Intel, AMD, Nvidia, Acer, Canonical, Novell, Redhat, or whoever."
Anyone remember the EISA bus in PCs? Probably not, because it's so old. But it's just like this, when the "Gang of Nine" of AST, Compaq, Epson, HP, NEC, Olivetti, Tandy, WYSE, and Zenith all got together to stand up to IBM, the 800-pound gorilla in computers of the time. The result was that IBM's MicroChannel Architecture (MCA) bus died. Those nine companies standardized computer busses together and IBM lost any power they had in dictating the PC architecture.
It CAN happen again, and it CAN happen to Microsoft. They are very vulnerable right now with the lack of consumer confidence and acceptance of Vista. Enough weight behind a particular Linux distro, plus OpenOffice, FireFox and/or Google Chrome (once it's on Linux) and tons of companies could be switching their office workers and IT departments (and anyone else who only needs basic Office-compatible software and a web browser) away from Microsoft.
The day can't come soon enough.
Every project needs good leadership and someone to make the final call. However, if they only listen to themselves it'll just be another Linux distro. I got five of those on my desk right now. That's not helping much.
Everyone knows that to build a high quality OS from sunset to sunshine it is almost impossible (See Vista).
Who knows? maybe Microsoft will fix the mess that vista brought in the first place in one to two years.
HP position about building a new OS is to risky, by the time the new OS is ready, the numbers with MAC OS will be pretty big. However, PC will prevail as the number one choice for market, the whole problem for HP, is that they want more money, and compete directly with Apple, because microsoft software is not labeled as "Cool Software". They cannot compete, with the king of coolness, ( check their tv commercials, it all about celebrities, red-haired fella, or Serena, etc. )
Is really MAC OS easier to use? I'm under the impression that people buy Apple computers because their coolness, and prettiness, is a whole superficial package. However, I have to admit that MAC OS owners are much happier than Vista are.
Good Luck..
Any gamer who uses OSX is going to have a problem with it, when they find out how few games work on OSX.
* no hunting for drivers required.
* installing an app simply means unzipping it and putting it in the "Applications" folder (or anywhere you want, really). Very few vendors use a "setup.exe"-like installer, and have no real valid reason to.
* uninstalling an app is as simple as deleting the thing.
* No registry to comb through, or get corrupted.
* Anti-Virus? Nope - maybe an email scanner and an IQ of at least room-temperature, but no need for A/V.
I could go on, but yes OSX is much, much easier to use.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corel_Linux
http://www.forbes.com/2000/10/03/1003corel.html
Sorta killed it outright.
I don't see MSFT buying huge chunks of HP stock (antitrust regulators would smell blood in the water), nor do I see HP letting them do it.
- by ferretboy88 September 13, 2008 10:18 AM PDT
- It wasn't long ago that windows ME came out and it was a flop. Windows 7 I'm sure will address the Vista problems for some. I use Vista everyday and have zero trouble. . It wasn't long ago that Apple was running 9 and it crashed like a drunk Hollywood idiot. These companies can over come anything. They make many billions of dollars.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- by Lerianis September 13, 2008 4:12 PM PDT
- That's the exact point I try to make: most people have no problems with Vista itself. They have problems with it crashing because products like iTunes 8 install system-level drivers that they SHOULD NOT BE INSTALLING. If they would stop doing that, Vista would appear to be much better to most people.
- Like this
-
- by The_Decider September 15, 2008 10:12 AM PDT
- People have problems with DRM, incompatibilities, bloat, slow performance. Just because you turned a blind eye to these facts doesn't mean everyone has.
- Like this
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (94 Comments)MS can't overcome it because they are in denial.