So you're saying Microsoft could be more profitable than getting $80 billion a year from Windows licensing, by selling their own tablets? I highly doubt that. If Microsoft would be left alone to develop their own tablet, it's highly unlikely they will even get close to Apple's iPad sales.
The article isn't about HP bailing from Windows altogether, it's about HP bailing from Windows RT (i.e. ARM tablet) licenses.
So yes, in this case MSFT would be more profitable - do you think they can make more money creating a superior experience, without crapware, where they can absorb the entire margin of the device.
Or can they make more money shipping software to OEMs who have historically stuffed it full of crapware, failed to release timely updates, and only give MSFT a tiny cut of the proceeds?
