The only reason they could do this is to curb customer support calls.
I don't like what Asus did either, since this is supposed to be an open source product, but I'm willing to bet that Asus already believes that:
a. They're the #3 tablet behind the iPad and Kindle Fire in terms of sales and they may be fine with that as long as they're the primary Android-based alternative.
b. They're the only successful pure Android tablet maker whose design aesthetics rivals the iPad.
I've never really understood this logic; is there really a large percentage of people who flash a custom ROM and then call customer support for help?
This is just conjecture, but I feel like those two groups (people who flash custom ROMs versus people who call customer support) are fairly opposite...
I agree, but in searching around on some Samsung forums last night I did come across someone who had accidentally gotten into "reflash mode" (or whatever they call it) and had no idea how to fix it (i.e., hold down the power button for 10 seconds).
Run this story up the chain of command and what comes down from management may very well be "lock the bootloader so we don't end up like Sony", even though that may not be the root cause.
You're probably right but that could be addressed by shipping it locked down but giving the end user a way to unlock it should they desire (Google did this on the Chromebooks). The only other reason I can think of would be if content vendors, say Hulu or Netflix or Spotify, required it for inclusion of their software.
the production chromebooks by samsung and acer have a developer switch to allow running custom builds of chromeos, but not the bios-write toggle that the google cr48 had. the cr48 allowed flashing a custom bios that lets it run windows or any other operating system.
it's just like android; google-built devices allow the user to completely change them but once other manufacturers got involved, they decided to change the rules and restrict what the user can do.
Comments
The only reason they could do this is to curb customer support calls.
I don't like what Asus did either, since this is supposed to be an open source product, but I'm willing to bet that Asus already believes that:
a. They're the #3 tablet behind the iPad and Kindle Fire in terms of sales and they may be fine with that as long as they're the primary Android-based alternative.
b. They're the only successful pure Android tablet maker whose design aesthetics rivals the iPad.
I've never really understood this logic; is there really a large percentage of people who flash a custom ROM and then call customer support for help?
This is just conjecture, but I feel like those two groups (people who flash custom ROMs versus people who call customer support) are fairly opposite...
I agree, but in searching around on some Samsung forums last night I did come across someone who had accidentally gotten into "reflash mode" (or whatever they call it) and had no idea how to fix it (i.e., hold down the power button for 10 seconds).
Run this story up the chain of command and what comes down from management may very well be "lock the bootloader so we don't end up like Sony", even though that may not be the root cause.
Still, I'd thought better of ASUS.
You're probably right but that could be addressed by shipping it locked down but giving the end user a way to unlock it should they desire (Google did this on the Chromebooks). The only other reason I can think of would be if content vendors, say Hulu or Netflix or Spotify, required it for inclusion of their software.
Google did this on the Chromebooks
the production chromebooks by samsung and acer have a developer switch to allow running custom builds of chromeos, but not the bios-write toggle that the google cr48 had. the cr48 allowed flashing a custom bios that lets it run windows or any other operating system.
it's just like android; google-built devices allow the user to completely change them but once other manufacturers got involved, they decided to change the rules and restrict what the user can do.