Comments on: Microsoft extends licensing to mouse, keyboard

Decision marks the first time the software giant has signed up licensees for its hardware.

[Jon N.]

There's a quote from Star Wars...

"The more you tighten your grip Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
Princess Leia, Star Wars IV, A New Hope

[Jerry Dawson]

You got that completely wrong

What it means is that others will be able to license these hardware features and include them in their products. If there is one sole part of M$ that has consistently delivered good products at highly competitive prices, it's M$'s hardware division. By licensing these features, in theory they are encouraging competition, not stifling it. My only caveat would be that perhaps these features are not what the consumer is looking for... but we will have to wait and see whether that is true or not.

[Thomas, David]

Actually, I can't Stop Laughing

Before you get your panties in a twist, hear me out.

Is Microsoft planning to brand, and build, their own computer, just
like Apple? Are the software, and hardware going to be designed
to work together, from the ground up?!

If so, welcome to the 21st century, in the age of computing!

[Lindy01]

It would

be cheaper that is for sure.

[Jerry Dawson]

At what you've just written... I assume.

Chaps, we are talking about keyboards, mice, gamepads, joysticks, and wheels (and some patents concerning same)... as this is what Microsoft make in terms of hardware. As you will gather from other comments here, they are a benchmark for the sector.

Software and hardware 'designed from the ground up' takes us not to the future, but the 80's, when that's all that was available. The last remaining throwback to the era of the Atari, Commodore, Acorn, Sinclair et al is the Apple.

I can think of a lot of very good reasons connected with price/features/usage why it is essential to be able to choose the hardware from which a computer is built. To name but one, AMD made far better chips than Intel for several years, and they were also a lot cheaper.

Knowing this kind of thing is the reason people ask me to build them computers. To get the best value for money - which Apple most certainly isn't.

[rbanffy]

Excellent products

What is noticeable is that their hardware enjoys much better a reputation that their software. I regard their keyboards (the natural keyboard in special) and their mice as their best products. If I were to give a top 3 best Microsoft products, I would say:

1 - Natural Keyboard series
2 - Mice, all of them
3 - SQL Server 2000

I have never used their joysticks, tough, so, maybe they would deserve a 3rd place.

[Thomas, David]

Actually ...

Their Force-Feedback game controls, especially the Joystick were a
great experience for me.

[fogfire]

Huh? 21st Century Apple?

Microsoft has gotten rich on choice. Windows on PDAs, Windows on phones, Windows on tablets, Windows on micro notebooks,Windows on large screen notebooks, Windows on servers, Windows on desktops, Windows on home built.

Mac on White or Silver in 2-2 sizes.. OSX is great, tying it to Mac hardware has limited innovation and choice in hardware for Mac users.

I Wonder when Apple will join the 21st century and realize tying you OS to your Hardware is 1970's IBM thinking that keeps you from growing.

Correct

When I heard that Vista & office were going to be delayed (not that I had firm plans to buy either), I got mad. So I went & looked for an Apple alternative. I'm a power Multitasker, when I'm running the full version of MQ, Rational Software Modeler, iTunes and I have a FULL virus scan runnin, everything grinds to a stop/crawl. I found 1 Apple choice - some sort of PowerMac, with limited configuration options. When I configured it, it came out at over $4,000 - almost twice what a PC would cost, to do the same job. On top of that, I'd have less choice in software. I've been a DOS guy since BEFORE it was M$-DOS. I don't want to have to do left-brain/right-brain, using my machine at work, with Wintels - it's bad enough thinking about integrating Biztalk & z/OS. So right now, Apple is out, RedHat is borderline, SUSE on a PC - maybe (I know it's just another *nix, but it'd be on a PC).

Why can't I get OS X on an AMD FX-60 based machine ? The only consolation is seeing things like PCI Express & other common technologies, creeping in.

I have a dream - the day when I can have a true Dual-Boot - Winblows or OS X (or XI, XII etc), both on a common vanilla machine, DOS partitions etc.
I can at least dream about it.

[rcrusoe]

Re: Keeps you from growing - not really

A big reason Macs work as well as they do is because Apple controls the hardware. If they sold OS X as an os that could be installed on any pc, then they would immediately inherit a lot of Microsoft's problems (dueling, missing, buggy 3rd part drivers, etc.)

Apple's customers are happy because everything "just works".

Apple's stock holders are happy because AAPL stock has gone from about 6$ to $60+ in the past 5 years. (Microsoft's has gone from $38 to $27 during the same period.)

Growing, just to be bigger, isn't all that great. The growth needs to be in the right areas.

[Earl Benser]

Maybe.....

..."OSX is great, tying it to Mac hardware has limited innovation and
choice in hardware for Mac users. "

....Maybe, .but it keeps Apple from repeating the legions of
mistakes MS has made trying to get an decent Windows OS. And MS
is still looking for a decent Windows OS....