Microsoft fights Android and Chrome OS with dirt-cheap Windows 8.1 PCs and tablets

Microsoft fights Android and Chrome OS with dirt-cheap Windows 8.1 PCs and tablets

Summary: How low can the price of a Windows PC go? At this week's IFA show in Berlin, PC makers are rolling out new PCs with outrageously aggressive pricing. Here's how they're cutting costs.

SHARE:

How do you compete when your fiercest rival is willing to give away its product? That’s the dilemma Microsoft faces in trying to compete with Google, which offers the Android operating system and Chrome OS to OEMs for nothing.

Redmond’s response, earlier this year, was to introduce a variant of the Windows client software: Windows 8.1 with Bing. This OS option is available to OEMs at a price that’s a carefully guarded secret but is probably close to zero. Yes, there’s a catch—two of them, in fact. Windows 8.1 for Bing is available only on low-cost devices, and OEMs are unable to change the default search engine during the setup process. (The PC buyer can change search defaults with no restrictions after starting up for the first time.)

In all other respects, this is just Windows 8.1, available in 32-bit and 64-bit versions, with variants in Chinese and single (non-English) languages.

At the IFA tradeshow in Berlin this week, OEMs have begun taking advantage of the lower Windows licensing cost to unleash a flood of small tablets at prices that were previously unheard of for Windows devices. Toshiba’s 7-inch Encore Mini tablet, for example, will sell for $120 in the U.S. (129 Euros in Europe). Acer’s Iconia Tab 8 W, an 8-inch tablet with a quad-core CPU, is priced aggressively as well, at $150. And plenty more are on the way, all running Windows 8.1 for Bing.

The new, cheaper Windows isn’t just for tablets. Microsoft and its OEM partners are taking aim at Chromebooks, with Windows 8.1 with Bing showing up on low-cost laptops this week as well.

Toshiba’s new Satellite CL10-B, for example, is an 11-inch clamshell-style laptop with 32 GB of eMMC flash storage and 100 GB of OneDrive cloud storage, prepaid for two years. The price tag of 269 Euros undercuts the new 13-inch Chromebook 2, which Toshiba is exhibiting a mere 10 feet away at its IFA stand. That device, with a bigger screen, checks in at a price of 349 Euros for 16 GB of built-in storage and 100 GB of Google Drive cloud storage, also prepaid for two years.

And it’s just one of many similar neo-netbooks that will be showing up this fall, including the resurrection of the Ur-netbook, the ASUS EeeBook Z205, at $199. HP’s Pavilion 10Z, introduced earlier this summer, is one of the few Windows 8.1 with Bing devices that includes a touchscreen.

One way that Microsoft and its partners are able to tamp down costs is by shrinking the amount of built-in storage available with these new devices. The specs for Windows 8.1 with Bing allow manufacturers to ship tablets with as little as 16 GB of flash (or SSD) storage. The clamshell devices typically include 32 GB of flash RAM.

The reason PC makers can get away with such skimpy storage is a new feature called WIMBoot, which allows the OEM to install Windows so that it runs directly from the compressed image file previously used only for Windows 8.x recovery functions.

This diagram, taken from a Microsoft technical article for OEMs, explains how the disk layout differs for a WIMBoot installation.

wimboot-architecture
With a WIMBoot installation, the system boots from the same Windows image (WIM) file used for system recovery purposes, freeing huge amounts of disk space. Image via Microsoft TechNet.

The difference in free storage is profound. On that Toshiba Satellite notebook with 32 GB of flash storage, I checked the system disk using File Explorer: there was a total of 24.5 billion bytes of free space (reported as 22.9 GB in File Explorer), which means the full Windows installation takes up only 7.5 billion bytes, or 7 GB as reported in File Explorer. (For an explanation of the confusing way Windows reports disk space usage, see this article.)

That’s a huge improvement over a conventional Windows installation, which can gobble up half of a 32 GB drive. In my tests of other systems using WIMBoot compression, I've seen no degradation of performance. In addition, every device I looked at offers expansion through removable storage.

Several of the low-cost devices I’ve seen at IFA so far also include a one-year subscription to Office 365 Personal. Presumably Microsoft is betting that a significant proportion of those device owners will get hooked on Office and renew their subscription when the year is up.

The move is vaguely reminiscent of the inexpensive Starter editions Microsoft released in the Windows Vista and Windows 7 era. Those editions were hobbled, feature-wise, and at one point Microsoft even planned to restrict those editions to running only three apps simultaneously, although they eventually reversed course on that decision. In contrast, Windows 8.1 with Bing contains the full Windows feature set.

And it's worth remembering that although those early netbooks were unbearably slow, that's not likely to be a problem with this generation. Modern CPUs are more than capable of handling the demands of media consumption and basic productivity tasks without breaking a sweat. None of these low-priced devices will be suitable for video or photo editing but that's not their intended role.

For OEMs already dealing with razor-thin profit margins, these new device classes are a mixed blessing at best. The slimmer prices will also drive down revenues for Microsoft, which is used to collecting a full license fee for every Windows device. But for consumers the low prices might be enough to distract attention away from Android devices and Chromebooks.

This story has been updated since its original publication to include discussions of WIMBoot performance and historical comparisons with earlier Windows versions.

Topics: Windows, Android, Microsoft, Tablets, PCs, Tech Industry

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

167 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Almost no reason not to pick up a mini-tablet at these prices...

    At these prices, there's almost no reason not to pick up a mini-tablet.

    But it does make me wonder... if a mini-tablet can be sold for $120... then why do the maxi-phones cost $400-$700?
    cybersaurusrex
    • Price gauging?

      Because they can?

      Possible illegal monopoly activity? (leveraging a monopoly in one area to extend the monopoly into other areas?)

      Maybe even product dumping?

      Just buying a market?

      Trying the same thing done to netbooks ?- and if successful expect the products to suddenly disappear.
      jessepollard
      • GAUGING

        What the hell is GAUGING???
        Mujibahr
        • He's grasping at straws, Mujibahr

          It's pretty obvious he's run out of real arguments, so he throws out whatever he can, no matter what.
          William.Farrel
          • "O" Yah But

            He could at least afford a Spell Checker - they are free aren't they?
            Mujibahr
          • GAUGING

            This is what Microsoft was doing during the browser wars. Sell at a loss where you have to, make your prodit on the top end of the market.
            paulaaaaaaaaa17
          • That is the way things work. You can make a better deal on a new BMW ...

            ... than you can on a new Honda.
            M Wagner
        • He's grasping at straws, Mujibahr

          It's pretty obvious he's run out of real arguments, so he throws out whatever he can, no matter what.
          William.Farrel
        • guaging

          I think he means gouging.
          ator1940
      • Monopoly?

        Microsoft wishes it had a monopoly in mobile... but it does not... so it's doubtful they'd be charged with abusing their position/monopoly.
        cybersaurusrex
        • They have a monopoly in a different area...

          And might be considered using that to expand their monopoly in another...

          I believe that is considered illegal activity...
          jessepollard
          • no more illegal

            Than Google using its Android monopoly to try and expand into the laptop market with Chromebooks.

            Or forcing an increase in Mac sales because if you want to develop for iOS you need a Mac.
            aesonaus
          • I love that android monopoly claim

            as there are multiple forks and thousands of device models, while you support Apple and/or Microsoft. It's shocking to me that people against such things as monopolies have a problem with Google where alternate search is a click away, for free. So you are happy with the homogeneity of devices and lack of freedom provided by Apple, and enjoyed the days of (non free) Windows only PCs at stores?
            drwong
          • Actually it is exactly the same thing

            What makes me laugh is the MS / Apple haters making excuses.

            There is no difference to 85% of the mobile market being run on a platform where to get the Google tick you HAVE to set defaults to the Google services, and in a way that can't easily be removed by users either BTW. This is not the same as setting the default on Windows where users are prompted on what browser/search to use upon loading - this is setting a default and not providing an easy choice.

            My preferred platform is Windows, but I see no problem in how Apple has gone about things. I also see no real issue with how Google has done things either. What I do see an issue with is saying that it's fine for Google to do it, but not Apple or MS. And MS did get sued and did have to pay the EU and did have to present a browser choice as part of the build, so why shouldn't Android be in the same position given it's market control? Just saying - treat everyone equally and fairly and let the market decide from there.
            aesonaus
          • Using Google is a choice. And it isn't mandatory.

            My wife uses an Android device - but no Google (except maybe the search, but I believe mostly she is using Amazon).

            And complaining about Google being a monopoly (which it isn't), is just foolish.
            jessepollard
          • It's basically the same thing as calling

            Microsoft a monopoly. They both have very high market share in one area and they're both trying to leverage that to get into another market area. Microsoft is trying to move into mobile and Google is trying to move into the laptop/more traditional PC market.
            thewags05
          • No. MS still claims a 90+%

            AND has been labeled a monopoly. That sticks until it is declared otherwise.
            jessepollard
          • And on top of that

            I was referencing the previous comment regarding being a monopoly in one area and using that to push into another. Which is exactly what Google does, and Apple, so either they are all doing illegal activities, or none of them are - you can't have it that MS is, but the others aren't unless you want to prove the point of living in your own little dreamland version of non-reality.

            And in this particular case, there is no new market to be pushed into. It is the portable PC market that has always been there, just the prices are cheaper than ever.
            aesonaus
          • How does Google have a monopoly?

            It isn't a monopoly. Nor can it leverage a non-monopoly into another market ... that it also can't do.
            jessepollard
          • Google's 'monopoly'

            If it has one, it's in search and related advertising. It is using *that* market to subsidize Android -- probably at massive losses -- so that no other platform can become widespread and adopt a different default search.

            Google recognized the mobile threat to their advertising 'monopoly' and moved to negate it not by gauging, as some above have contended, but by dumping. This can also be potentially illegal. Android is a "dumped" product -- that is, despite costing huge sums to produce, it is given away for free. As such, it erects a barrier to entry into the mobile market that is so high no new competitors have emerged since it was created, and all existing competitors are rapidly fading (at this point, that's pretty much only Apple).
            x I'm tc