There's a story in BusinessWeek that Hewlett Packard has been exploring the possibility of using something other than Windows for some of its computers. The article has some denials from HP spokespersons, but their denials are -- at least partially -- a misdirection.

Apple's computers are grabbing increasing market share; at least some of Apple's new sales are coming at the expense of companies like HP and Dell. It has to be frustrating to Windows OEMs like HP that they don't really control the complete user experience the way Apple does. (Then again, I can remember a hideous "user shell" that HP used to replace Program Manager in Windows 3.1, so perhaps they need reminding that with control comes responsibility.)

The idea that HP might create its own operating system from scratch is crazy, so they had no problem denying that rumor. Why would HP put in significant engineering effort to create a new OS? Part of the article, confirmed by HP, was about their efforts to "innovate on top of Vista", in HP's words. That could simply be some tack-on applications, or BIOS-level functionality to control functions like DVD playback, but I have a hard time believing that would solve a lot of consumer problems.

The big question is whether HP is pondering the use of Linux on its consumer PCs. This is territory already explored by the successful Asus Eee PC. That tiny notebook offers both Linux and Windows -- but it's Windows XP. Microsoft has made it clear that XP is OS-non-grata its future plans, so the Linux option may be HP's best alternative.

There are plenty of Linux distributions that HP could use, so the engineering effort could boil down to making sure that high-quality Linux drivers are available. HP could push most of that work down to their chipset suppliers such as Intel and NVidia. Sure, they'd want to brand their Linux user interface with some sort of custom HP look, but that is not rocket science.

HP has tried to be a good partner with Microsoft in the past, and sometimes has been kicked right in the battery pack for their trouble. One example came to light in the Vista-Capable lawsuit. Microsoft told HP execs that Vista would require high-end video hardware, and HP accelerated a redesign of their product lines to support the new chipsets Vista needed. Then, Microsoft backpedaled and said that less-capable video chipsets, the ones in HP's soon-to-be-defunct products, could be labeled "Vista Capable."

Microsoft has some options to keep HP consumer products Linux-free. One way is to work with HP to simplify Windows through some surgical operations. That might cause incompatibilities, though, so it seems more likely to happen in Windows 7, if ever. If beating Vista with a stick doesn't work, Microsoft can simply use the carrot of a price break or marketing money, similar to the way Intel tamed OEMs with the Intel Inside program. In essence, Microsoft can price Vista or XP in a way that "pays" HP to not use Linux. That may ultimately be an offer HP can't refuse.