Rumors of new Windows-Android hybrids pop up ahead of CES 2014

ASUS already has its Transformer Book Trio, which runs Windows 8 and Android, each running on separate hardware parts.

Even though a few PC makers have released products in the past that run both Windows 8 and Android operating systems, recent rumors claim many more of them will be showing a number of these devices next week at CES 2014.

The reports first began in December when Time's website claimed OEMs would announce new Windows-Android hybrids under a "PC Plus" banner at CES. Today, The Verge reports, again via unnamed sources, that chipmaker Intel is currently working with a number of PC hardware companies on these kinds of products, under the internal name Dual OS. The story claims these PCs would run Google's operating system inside of Microsoft's software via virtualization.

The CES announcements may have the backing of Intel and its OEMs, but The Verge reports that sources inside Microsoft and Google won't be on board for this "PC Plus-Dual OS" plan. In fact, the story quotes Patrick Moorhead, principal analyst at Moor Insights and Strategy, as saying, "Microsoft does not want this to happen."

The idea of having Android and Windows on one machine is already a reality. Asus launched the Transformer Book Trio in 2013, which has both operating systems.  Samsung announced the Ativ Q notebook in 2013 that ran Windows and Android apps on the same Intel processor. However, that laptop has yet to be released. Then there's BlueStacks, the PC and Mac software program that lets users run Android apps on most PCs.

Again, all of these reports are rumors at this stage and CES 2014 may come and go with no new Windows-Android hybrid announcements.

Source: Time and The Verge

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

CES 2014 preview: The products and trends to look out for

Next Story

Xbox One owners can get an early preview of FX's new TV show Chozen


View more comments

Mobius Enigma said,
This could be interesting if it is a true dual boot, and possibly backfire for Android. Casual users will be able to see the full Windows boot faster and run things faster on the exact same hardware.

As for running Android, BlueStacks and other VM solutions work well, and you don't have to leave Windows. The Dell Venue Pro 8 running Android on top of Windows 8.1 is one of the best Android tablets.

I would love to try this with my DV8P. VM Player? Android x86? How did you get the playstore on it? =)

It is not a dual boot. It's an Android VM in Windows that behaves similar to Parallels on OS X. So, like Bluestacks.

Scabrat said,

I would love to try this with my DV8P. VM Player? Android x86? How did you get the playstore on it? =)

BlueStacks is the most notable - side tip, you can replace the Launcher to get the full Android desktop experience if you want. (It uses its App launcher as default that integrates with Windows.)

I can't find a link I used to have to several VM integrated solutions, but you can also use variations of Android x86 in VirtualBox, VMWare, etc. (Do a search, there are alternative non-VM hosted solutions like BlueStacks; however, BlueStacks is the easiest and most well rounded currently.)

You can get the Google PlayStore on them all if you know what you are doing. With BlueStacks the default install adds the Google Play and Amazon App stores, and even with Sync with your GMail account to load Apps you have on other devices/phones.

(There are even ways to get iOS Apps running on Windows 8.1 tablets, but with Apple licensing is not quite as easy or legal.)

Actually, BlueStacks will run on Windows 7 (not just 8 or 8.1 - I have it installed on 8.1 ProWMC), and it's not the only way that Android can be run on Windows. BlueStacks (and in particular, the Windows 8+-optimized version) is simply more evidence that even Windows is not a prison - macoman, do you hate VM software in general (including vmWare and Oracle VirtualBox and Hyper-V) or simply this particular use for it?

I do not hate VM but I just don't see it right to have Android where Windows 8.1 perform much better. Android is slow and underperformed windows in every task.

Brony said,
Bluestack = useless piece of *****
It eats a lot of resource and it is slower, sometimes painful slower.
Is it an Android emulator or what!

It's an Android VM - one of many. The issue with all Android VMs is that they are not based on x86 - while Android can be ported to x86, it hasn't been (entirely due to cost and portability reasons). ARM and its clones (including Snapdragon and Tegra) are far smaller and use much less power than x86 - which makes them prime candidates for smartphones and tablets - it's why longerr battery life and low price are the watchword when it comes to Android (or RT, or even Windows Phone, for that matter - which runs on the same CPUs). And have you tried the updated (recently at that) version of BlueStacks (which is based on Ice Cream Sandwich - not the older version, which was based on Honeycomb)? The ICS version will run software that the Honeycomb version won't - and, on software that both would run, the ICS version is faster. (The same is true of other Android VM options - comparing Honeycomb to ICS - so a great deal of it is entirely due to just the OS update.) However, BlueStacks is also the fastest VM out there in terms of Android VMs for Windows - it even leaves Genymotion waxed. And as far as accusing Microsoft having forgotten about choice, it isn't any such thing; ModernUI is all about choice. As a UI/UX, it's absolutely unbiased - toward anything. However, all too many Windows users want no part of choice - for them, there much be pointing-device centeredness and a Start menu.

Brony said,
Bluestack = useless piece of *****
It eats a lot of resource and it is slower, sometimes painful slower.

As other have noted, Android even running natively is not as fast as Windows. So running via emulation, it isn't going to get faster.

With BlueStacks, I agree with you that the earlier versions were trash; however, the recent releases are highly usable and don't eat resources in the background like previous versions did.

Prior to Christmas, I was testing through a bunch of Android games for our internal notes and my nephews. Essentially everything ran well, even some of the more demanding 3D games.

The BlueStacks Host it keeps alive now is light and is only for Android App notifications/updates. -Where previous versions would eat a chunk of RAM and a bit of CPU just having it on the system.

Noticed that, have you? Until Android x86 catches up to the ARM version, this is - so far - the closest to native Android performance alone WITH app selection available. However, not only do all too many Windows users care less, some are actively hostile toward merely the idea of this rather novel use for emulation/virtualization technology - they remind me of religious fanatics. Please - it's an operating system. Linux distributions have the same capability - have you even thought about the idea that one reason that Windows has been able to fend those "pesky" Linux distributions off is that Microsoft has not let Linux distributions have too much of an advantage in terms of exclusive features? Quite aside from ModernUI, Windows 8 marked the inclusion of NATIVE disk-image mounting and one-upped that with virtual-hard-drive booting on bare-metal - which no Linux distribution can do (yet). Yet it's continually bashed over the lack of a Start menu and pointing-device centeredness.

Well another google bloatware to uninstall if this does happen ....I think I should hide before the google supports come out to get me

I submitted this over a week ago... I think it might make Android apps look bad since they're not designed for it, but then again people say Metro belongs on a tablet and not a PC. Maybe it will make sense on Windows 8 tablets or touchscreen laptops, or maybe people who find traditional desktop apps complicated will like this. I wouldn't use it personally, I prefer the traditional desktop.

Ignoring the usual anti-Android vitriol from the regulars for a moment, this looks like it could be great for choice. Remember that concept, choice? Something Microsoft has forgotten about in recent time.

If I can buy this device without paying the Windows tax and then decide for myself if i want to pay to activate Windows post-purchase, install my own copy, or simply delete it and free up space that will be even better. CHOICE.

wait but wouldn't it be better to just buy an android tablet or a windows tablet if you are just going to uninstall the other OS ?

The Android apps will run from within Windows, so you will still be getting Windows with these products. The intent is that the Android marketplace will supplement the MS app store.

im going to play the devils advocate here " while windows as a whole could get malware " and android is already known to get malware/virus. would the malware on the android apps be able to jump to the os an infect it. so why is there a need to have android in windows? not trying to get peeps all mad . just here asking a question

I'm going to say yes, an exploit in the android stack could escape the sandbox and be used to deploy a payload which affects Windows, and it may not be detected when tested on android devices since it won't directly affect them and might rely on quirks particular to this environment. There would be additional hoops to jump through to make it work (exploiting the app, exploiting the sandbox, delivering the payload without triggering Windows' security measures, privilege escalation in Windows for certain tasks), so it could be a possible attack vector. But then again, so could any additional software you allow to execute on your system.

I do not understand the point of the entire operation: if you like Android you buy a device with that OS; if you like Windows you buy a device... running Windows. I mean I had computers dual booting XP and Longhorn for example but for a regular user, not a developer or a Beta tester what is the advantage? Is it for the store and the apps?

Outside of this site, many already know it's actually a very practical and useful idea, aside from being an inexpensive way to create more value in a machine which manufacturers like.

My old HP laptop had this type of setup, it could launch an app suite in a few seconds vs waiting minutes for windows to boot up. It used very low power and ran video, internet and a handful of other stuff. It worked quite well.

I'd like to have the Android option simply because there are several apps that are only available on Android...much like MS enjoys with most windows programs right?

If it doesn't cost any extra, what thinking person wouldn't want the extra option?

I don't really understand this Windows on an SSD bootup within seconds. I guess can understand wanting run android apps but I think for vast majority of people they really don't care. Besides you would probable get a better experience with Android only devices or a windows only device.

Commenting is disabled on this article.