I think this already in place, contractually, here in the US. A manufacturer does not receive the lowest possible price for Windows unless they agree to install Windows on every PC they produce.
When faced with the choice between paying a higher price for Windows on 99.99% of their machines or saving a very few of their customers a few dollars, they really don't have a choice.
oh i see what you're saying. MS would not give them a "group"
or "bulk" discount on the OS if they sold "naked PC's"? Don't think they will get away with it, sounds like a form of discrimination.
I thought the antitrust settlement prevented them from doing this. Such tactics are what killed OS/2 and delayed Linux. BTW, it didn't just work on lower price, since an OEM would be forced to sell a Windows license for every system that went out the door. IIRC, IBM had to ship an OS/2 install disk for customers that wanted it, so customers paid for OS/2 and Windows, making OS/2 the more expensive option.
But Microsoft has its ways. All they have to do is keep sending the BSA around all the time to harass these vendors, maybe file a few legal actions against some.