I am sorry,but to me this entire article and comments below it are just a massive pile of whine.
Large companies like Dell get Windows at such discounted prices that the difference between a machine with or without OS would be 10-15 dollars. It's not like having windows installed on a laptop is increasing its cost by $100.
And why does a company mentioned in this article have a problem with Windows already pre-installed? Installation of Linux on such a machine is exactly the same as if there was no OS on it in the first place. Heck, they could even leave Windows and install Linux as a second OS,but make it boot by default - and then have it as an extra selling point - Linux computers,but with Windows as an option.
Windows 8 is not sealing anything yet. And EFI problems are easy to overcome if you want to - and if your business depends on it, I believe that it would be in your best interest to want to??
To sum it all up - I believe that this entire story is made up and no shop even existed in the first place. If they could sell linux computers 3 or 5 years ago they could still do it today, and it seems like the entire article is constructed to just blame MS for problems that don't exist.
Maybe,but then the manufacturers also get money for including additional software(like Norton or McAfee) so in the end the difference between the laptop with Windows and without it might be nill. And Microsoft actually makes Windows cheaper if a manufacturer includes Office Trial edition, as a kind of advertisement.
To some extent I agree... With the volume discounts from MS, and the fees payed for the shovel-ware, the Windows laptop/desktop probably does cost less than no-OS. Even then, they could probably get a knockoff/blank laptop/desktop direct from mfg from china... for desktops, they can order case/psu/mb/cpu/ram and self-assemble, in the mid-high range machines ($650+) you can even beat the likes of Dell in terms of machine/$$.
As much as it probably hurts their workflow, I'm willing to bet there are alternative avenues available.
Since when do they do that?? It must be new, since as far as I know Microsoft gets payment for their software. If a manufacturer decides to install Windows on their laptops, then Microsoft gets paid per licence. If they don't decide to install Windows,then MS doesn't get a single penny. Unless there is some new law that I missed that says that all new PCs HAVE to come with Windows, I think your question is moot.
Microsoft actually was coniditioning the market [1]
If any vendor had the gal to offer a computer with no operating system at a discount, microsoft will pull their "special discount" and Dell or whoever will be paying full price for their licenses.
Apparently there was fallout for that choice. Fortunately Microsoft isn't fighting it anymore. Perhaps because working under the table works better than over it.
Then you can buy a laptop from a manufacturer that does not put windows on their products - it's like saying: I don't like Michelin and I don't want to pay a penny towards them, so it's unfair that car manufacturers put these tires on their cars. Even though the deal is probably exactly the same as with Windows and laptop manufacturers - car makers probably buy tires of a specific brand a large discount, so a car with tires and without them would cost roughly the same. Yet I don't see people complaining that when buying a car they don't get to choose the brand of the tires,of the wipers or of the stereo. A car is sold as a complete package. How come that people treat laptops differently?
Lets stick with that tire example. Because god knows we don't have enough euphemisms about operating systems and cars.
So Michelin has 80% of the tire market, and is releasing esoteric tires backed by huge marketing campaigns. They raise the price of normal Michelin tires for everyone, and offer their new esoteric tires to manufacturers at big discounts as long as they don't sell cars with other tires.
Cha-Ching every manufacturer says, people are clamoring over themselves to get this new tire. In order to support this new tire they had to build part of the car to these strange specs anyway, no other tire would fit, so the condition that they not use another manufacturers tire is an easy one to meet. Bouns: if they meet it they get a big bulk discount!
Jump ahead 2 years: buy a car. One without a Michelin tire? I'm afraid that's not possible. Yes of course there are other tires that meet the standard now, but we all know you're safer on a Michelin tire, and we all know it's easier to just use the Michelin tire. Why are you making such a fuss? Oh you already have some tires that fit? Ok well just buy the car with the Michelin tires, take them off, and return them to the manufacturer for a - oh wait they won't actually do that. They require you to return the car. Why? I have no idea. I guess cars are sold as a complete package, so taking off the tires is just pointless, you don't like the tires? Send the car back.
Manufacturers are starting to get burned though. Michelin has marketed well. There's a large portion of the population that do not trust tires other than from Michelin, those discount tires are costing allot more now adays. The threat of pulling their discount isn't even relevant any more. people just can't imagine driving on the road without a Michelin tire. Manufacturers try to sell cars without them but are greeted with poor sales, distrust, and even negative public reaction.
So you just watched this whole thing happen. Sort of like watching a car accident. You browse the tire section of Costco. 20$ for a set of Goodrich tires. 25$ for a set of Firestone. 235$ for a replacement set of Michelin tires. Oh and by the way no mechanic will touch your car if you don't buy Michelin.
I got to say, if I was standing there, the last thing I would think is "I don't see what all the fuss is about."
Large companies like Dell get Windows at such discounted prices that the difference between a machine with or without OS would be 10-15 dollars. It's not like having windows installed on a laptop is increasing its cost by $100. And why does a company mentioned in this article have a problem with Windows already pre-installed? Installation of Linux on such a machine is exactly the same as if there was no OS on it in the first place. Heck, they could even leave Windows and install Linux as a second OS,but make it boot by default - and then have it as an extra selling point - Linux computers,but with Windows as an option. Windows 8 is not sealing anything yet. And EFI problems are easy to overcome if you want to - and if your business depends on it, I believe that it would be in your best interest to want to?? To sum it all up - I believe that this entire story is made up and no shop even existed in the first place. If they could sell linux computers 3 or 5 years ago they could still do it today, and it seems like the entire article is constructed to just blame MS for problems that don't exist.