Discussion on:

Microsoft may still win the tablet war

Android and i OS tablets are much simpler than Windows 8 Tablets. This alone will be enough to make sure that Windows doesn't become King of Tablets. Anyone that is not very computer literate is going to select one of the first two options. I have both W7 and an Android Tablet, and the Android Tablet is a lot more friendly. Windows might offer the superior tablet, but that doesn't mean that people will not go for Android and i OS as their preferred tablet. Windows is (TDC), Too Damn Complicated to become King of the Hill. I really like my Windows 7 Desktop and Laptop computers, but that being said, I am only one person and the crowd will decide on the tablets that are simpler, and for that matter 1/2 the price of a Windows 8 device. Not everybody is a techie that reads computer magazines. W7 just updated my computers this morning. 16 updates, and one of my computers after the updates, got the BSOD, but it recovered and finally was working OK. With my Nexus 10 Android, the minute I turn it on, all of the programs installed on it are updated if required, and the Jelly Bean 4.2.1 also received necessary updates. It is so simple that anyone can get it done since it is automatic. I like all of my computers and wouldn't want to part with any of them, but if someone has to select just once device, I honestly think that they will select an Android or i OS device due to the lower cost and ease of use.

BSOD? Now you sure it wasn't a hardware issue? Blame it right away on windows.
My netbook [yes a netbook] goes to the windows 8 desktop within 20 seconds. - faster than your Nexus.
16 updates? OK. Now how do you know how many updates are going through when you say "all of the programs installed on it are updated if required".

I also had another BSOD after the latest MS security patches (so much for Win. 7 being secure - I'd estimate 80 - 90% of the patches are security fixes - and there has been a ton of them). Had to go through the repair cycle twice and then used another product to "fix" the problem.

I can see some of the "Redmond" boys are out trolling the blogs!

doesn't that make it more secure by definition?

It just says there is a bad base to begin and who knows how many more security holes are there!

are known for using very porous material when patching.

nt

nt

>> I'd estimate 80 - 90% of the patches are security fixes -

About the same for my Linux server.

nt

fixes for the various apps that run rather than the fixes for the kernel, which are few. The patches for Windows are mostly for the OS. Yes, there are also patches for IE and MS Office, but they don't count as [art of the OS. Also note, when Firefox or Google Chrome makes a patch for their Linux support,. that same patch typically needs to be applied to the Windows version. With Linux support, that patch is made available with the Software Update function in distros like Ubuntu, Mint, etc. With Windows you need to take care of those patches yourself. The Linux kernel is hundreds of time moer secure than the Windows kernel.

So don't throw FUD about Linux patches vs Windows patches.

Android is not simpler than Windows, if you gave Windows on a tablet a chance you would know, its much faster and easier to use than any Android. And it is a lot more enjoyable than crapple's old boring GUI

This petty excuse is of it not being simple is weak, people need to think about what they write a bit more.

Each tablet has their place, their own context. I think Win 8 is a huge success on both the desktop and tablet. The OS just gets out of the way of the application user interface. MS has bypassed Apple's antiquated skeuomorphic design philosophy -- it's only relevant to boomers and gen Xers' nowadays. I've read tat Apple's design team is painfully aware and since Jobs is gone they may get to finally do away with the old design philosophy he so tightly controlled. As a content creator I appreciate being able to install my favorite IDEs on Surface Pro and the keyboard is a huge boon for me. I hate typing on the screen, I dislike most mobile devices but not the Surface. It's what I hoped the original iPad would have been, a tablet that's also laptop. The Surface isn't a tablet killer, no. It's a laptop killer! I've read alotof negative comments on Win 8 and I just have to conclude that a percentage of people always have to have something to complain about, especially if they view change as a negativism. I don't think they understand it wasn't just a change from what the other big 2 are doing, it was an evolutionary step in user interface design. I tip my hat to MS as they had the cojones to skip a few steps in the evolutionary ladder.

I come from a company that is heavily tied to legacy Windows and AS400 apps. Big news - they run on Windows 8 tablets. The new Windows 8 tablets are going to do something for us that Apple and Android do not get. We are not going to have to redevelop our entire world to be able to use a smart looking device. The hybrid devices are going to really be a big thing if people stop and think before they transform their entire business IT world to revolve around Apple. Save some money folks and use what already works for your environment. USB - check. S Pen - check. Sexy device - check. Printing - got it - Integration on my domain- check. Win 7 software compatibility - check. This is probably the only time I can remember Microsoft saving us money - kudos!!!! Check out the Samsung ATIV and the Dell Lattitude coming soon.

that Windows now supports AS400 architecture (or S/W designed to run on the ASS/400). Did Microsoft pull another fast one on IBM?

My 80+ year old mother bought herself an iPad as a Christmas Present to herself late last year. After visiting her Nephew she decided to but a Tablet which would be easy to use do all she wanted and just work.

She looked at all of the available tablets and bought a iPad which she loves.

OK she's defiantly not in any way related to any form of industry and doesn't require any Industry Applications but what i did find interesting is how the author here was drawing on Industry Needs and then started talking about Cloud Based Apps which in any form of business that has even the smallest security need are the biggest No No into adopting any form of Multi-platform Cloud Software.

If they do not control their Data they have nothing and the fact that most of these Cloud Providers own whatever data they store means that Business will not touch their offerings with a Barge Pole even if there was no impediment to them adopting it from other areas.

Business runs on Data and they just don't give it away freely no matter what.

Then the other side of the market which is Domestic Users who want a Play Toy to do whatever just need an Appliance which they can use. The iPad and Droid Tablets fit that pretty well depending on the person using it and Windows RT is still too difficult for most people so personally I can not see the Windows Pro Tablet gaining much traction in anything other than M$ Only Business where that business has signed an agreement for cheaper product with M$ to only use M$ product.

Col

Can you say iPad for [computer] dummies. IPads are for the computer novices. they dumb it down.

nt

But comparing a Win Surface RT to a iPad for a non-computer user and I think you'll find that the iPad wins every time.

When you start to consider different products you need to keep them in the same range so while a iPad is a Domestic Product aimed directly at Domestic Users it's only Microsoft comparable device is a Surface RT.

For you and me 8 may not be an issue but here we are not talking about us, we are talking about Home Users and they go with what is easier for them to do the things that they want to do. And really why would you or I buy a RT when we know that the Pro is coming and will be what we really need?

The RT is never going to be a Business product simply because it is designed not to fit that role, the yet unreleased Surface Pro will fill that bill perfectly and be what Business wants and needs though they may not want to pay for it.

So when you stick to Domestic Products with Domestic Users, you'll find that the Surface RT is going to loose out just about every time. It's not in the race even with the hack to allow it to run the full Microsoft Software range and not being limited to the crippled Microsoft App Store Software.

Personally I think that the Pro will be a great unit and will suit most business no matter who ends up making it and here I think you'll find that the Big Makers and not Microsoft will be the big winners here as they will be able to introduce lower speced Pro Tablets under the Microsoft Price Point which will be the draw card for most business even if they are slower and less powerful, they will be what Business ends up buying.

Personally I can not see the RT being anything more than a Loss Maker wetting the appetites for those who need a Pro.

Col

That statement is really backward logic. By your definition, we should only buy poorly designed, overly complicated devices so that we can prove our intelligence? To whom? The goal of any well designed consumer device is to be simple to use yet flexible - the iPad meets those requirements which is why it is used by my 81 year father, and my 19 year old daughter. The way i see it, Microsoft has 2 big problems - getting their app store to be comparable to Apple's and Google's, and getting the die-hard Apple fans to even look at something else. Their other option was to play in the cheap device market, but that is pretty much gone the way of Anroid.

How many times is this fabricated 80 year old grandma story going to be regurgitate? Tim Cook, is that you?

and we have a cheap Android that she plays her 2 or 3 games to pass time. She finds the Android easy to use and she is nowhere being computer literate. Stop at the local BB and we looked at the MS "Metro" - she found it confusing as all get out. Until I got the Android, the closest she would go to a computer was a couple of hand-held games - she won't even try my laptop nor my desktop - ha no patience for waiting them to boot up among other things.

Hardly and she's my mother not Grandmother. Though I could do with some of his money as I'm most defiantly poor in comparison.

I'll admit that she's different and says she doesn't like computers but will use a Computerized Photocopier to it's full capability as to her it's not a Computer it's a Photocopier. It has the same controls as the old Black & White Analog unit that she used years ago and other than a couple of more buttons for Colour and so on to her at least it's the same thing.

Windows on the other hand can under no stretch of the Imagination be called the same as Windows 3 whatever is radically different to 95 which was again different to 98 and again different to everything that came after it.

8 is again radically different to 7 and since this person is incapable of using XP for little things like the same button called Start turns it off and on she claims that it makes no sense.

Sorry but as you must be a Youngster who's mother can not be a day over 18 years old you simply will never understand.

Col the old fart laughing at your ingorance

History.....that's the problem that Microsoft will need to overcome for many users. Bottom line is historically Microsoft products have had lots of bugs, crashed often, etc.

Granted more recent products have not been having as many issues, but the perception is still out there and that is what Microsoft will have to overcome.

Additionally, they will need to compete with the low cost Amazon tablets, as well as the higher end iPads and make the distinction between Windows RT and Windows clearer in their advertisements.

They will need to do all of this while avoiding lawsuits from Apple and Google, something that I don't see being possible, as the windows tablets resemble both way too much.

I believe the exact opposite. Micrsosfts history and legacy are what drives the microsoft buyers. Those on pc and not apple love windows for what it has always been. It has been simple, powerful, customizable, and fairly inexspensive. things like the always there desktop, the ease of use with the start button, familar static desktop icons and the abilty to upgrade and get better without loosing the core of what made windows so easy and simplistic to use. Now with Windows 8 all of that is gone. Yes it seems to appeal to apple users as it is much more apple like then windows which is why windows users dislike it so much. Everything that was legacy and simple is now gone and made much harder. Why would they hide crap and make you go find it when you used to click the start button and get what you wanted..Oh we call them charms and they are hidden in corners of the screen or over here behind these tiles. microsoft will die for turning its back on its history, familiarity and its desire to impress apple users while alienating the windows long time users.

Only reason people are stuck on Microsoft is because of its monopoly and licensing agreements. If it wasn't for IBM's stupidity, Microsoft, if it still existed, would be another also-ran company.

IBM had the business market due to the mainframes. When it came out with the PC, it had a lock in the business world - it had the sales force, the foot in the business world door, the service, etc. Apple had none of that. If IBM had developed in house (or Kildall had struck a deal), Microsoft would be nowhere the company it is today.

but their OS never took hold. Also, IBM is not good at software development (Lotus notes anyone? Lotus 1-2-3 was trounced by Office).
Sorry, your argument just fell apart.

OS/2 lost because IBM had to have things done their way, be that good or bad. Gates didn't want to take it in the direction IBM wanted to go, so they parted ways.(And part of that direction was that OS/2 be rock solid and reliable. IOW, Enterprise class. Windows, at that point in time, was not. Some would still argue this point but that's for another thread and has been beaten to death.) IBM has accepted (I say accepted and not learned) this with Linux. I think they accept the Linux situation partly because it is making money for them.

Quick history lesson, IBM paid Microsoft (Gates and friends) to develop DOS (Desktop Operating System). The thing that made Microsoft was IBM allowed MS to retain the rights to the software. OS/2 was the software they developed after the split between MS and IBM. It was too late at that point, DOS was already taking hold in the business world.

People forget that businesses drive the software and hardware markets, or at least did until recently.. The business world buys way more devices than the consumer market, expect for things like personal phones, and maybe tablets. The shift is because people are now buying them and then demanding the company support the use of these devices in doing their job. Of course the company is fine with this as it cost them less money.

IBM wanted an OS for a microcomputer (what they called PCs then), but didn't have one. They approached a few people and they didn't want to deal. IBM approached Bill Gates, he went out and bought the rights to the OS someone else had written and made a few changes then licensed it to IBM to use. Bill Gates did NOT write PC-DOS or MS-DOS but bought it and made a few minor changes. Gates then had others make improvements to have the later versions come out.

OS/2 was a much later development done as a joint effort until Gates walked away from it, taking most of the code as well and using that to create Windows NT, the basis for the current versions of Windows.

IBM wanted to write the next release of OS/2 in C and Gates was trying to convince them to write it in Assembler (while Windows was being written in C?). IBM and Gates parted ways for a number of reasons.

I can't totally disagree with some of the Linux argument, but IBM was already on the UNIX bandwagon to an extent with AIX. During the early years of the PC, IBM thought they were nothing more than "hobbyist toys" and the main frame would rule forever (it still does to an extent). By the the the clones were taking over the market, IBM started having an awakening. going to Unix and then Linux was a way of blunting the Microsoft's eventual dominance of the S/W market. Linux has made big strides in the server market.

was because Microsoft stuck it to IBM (remember Gates stating OS/2 was the greatest thing since "sliced bread" - all while Microsoft was secretly developing Windows). Also, IBM had to tread carefully as it was still bound by a consent decree it had signed with the US Justice dept. OS/2 was far ahead of Windows, but Microsoft undercut them (and got away with licensing agreements that would have had the Justice dept. back in court suing IBM). BTW, Windows 2000 turned out to be very OS/2-like.

Also, many banks still use OS/2 - not Windows for certain secure operations.

As far as Lotus Notes, it was developed separately and later bought by IBM after Microsoft Office had been cobbled together from components developed by other companies - not Microsoft.

You haven't a clue as to how S/W is developed by IBM. Their main-frame organization had some of the best programmers in the world at one time. They also had one of the best R&D organizations in the world (and still do). IBM did true innovation, not "buying" others out of their innovative work, tweaking it and putting a Microsoft logo on it.

IBM's biggest problem was its management never fully backed the PC business. It still had it in its head that "big iron" was where it was at. It also was hurt by proprietary PC H/W. Another reason why Microsoft got the foothold - competing companies such as Compaq, HP, etc. could install MS-DOS (and later Windows) on their cloned PCs. Later, Gerstner took over IBM and switched the business to one of services - although they still are in the S/W business and, actually, are a bigger S/W producer than Microsoft.

It is obvious that NS fan-boys know very little about computer and PC history.

Bill picked up his marbles and walked out. However, he took copies of everything that IBM had paid him to develop and used that as 90% of the basis for Windows NT, which is the core of all the Windows systems for more than a decade. Thus the core of OS/2 is still around as Win 8, just a different GUI.

Microsoft is king because
- IBM clones were cheap
- Bootlegging their operating system (and products) was easy
Every home-built, computer-show PC with a bootlegged copy of DOS or Win 3.x was part of Microsoft's success story. Anyone remember the TRS-80? The Amiga? Apple was hanging on by it's fingernails and Linux was a home-brew OS that data center and academic people played with. After computer technology was mature Microsoft could enforce product licensing better - game, set match. They certainly now aren't going to lose at the tablet game, they're to big for that. If they do get out of tablets I'd be concerned about tablets.

IBM and Microsoft developed OS/2 jointly. If you check some of the early literature, you will find Gates endorsing OS/2. BTW, After the split, IBM marketed PC-DOS (basically MS-DOS with REXX and Stacker).

companies to use many millions of dollars of their research for a nominal royalty fee of $1.00 per device. Thus saving them huge start up costs. Thus, IBM created the PC industry.

You must have forgot the $200 - $300 OS upgrades of a few years back. Apple software upgrades have almost always been significantly less expensive than Microsoft's and Linux is free. It's competition that brought Microsoft's pricing down. Nothing about Microsoft is inexpensive, unless you want to compare them to Oracle.

It think it actually started as a languages company and then moved into operating systems and applications after that.

Apple, Google/Android and others already have really great products, for all segments of the market (low end cheap to luxury expensive). Microsoft just doesn't have the cool factor and that is needed in the consumer market. They may do ok in the corporate market.

Sorry I/we see no need for a tablets in our organisation, we are here to work NOT play.
We will stay with our Decktops and Notebooks with WIN7 as WIN8 is the most unproductive O/S, I have ever been asked to use/buy. We are already looking at alternative O/S's to0 Microsoft so if forced we have a place to go. Check out this link to see what alternative, "http://www.zorin-os.com/premium.html", we are currently trailing it and its looking great.
Sorry Microsoft but its a big miss here

Maybe some fringe business settings may have a use for tablets; but, the traditional fixed office setting, desktops/laptops will be the major form factor running Windows-7 and XP. As for "going for the cloud," security is paramount in my company. We'll be sticking with tangible backup mechanisms. What are you going to do and who are you going to call when the "cloud goes down?"

The author thinks Microsoft will 'win', but for all the wrong reasons. All you have to do is look at the current offerings to see that the 'cloud' is still not the deciding factor--especially in the way he describes it, as an unlimited, web-based hard drive. That concept has been in use for more than ten years and it's no more successful now as it was then.

No, Microsoft's tablets will rise through one very simple concept: it's integration with the full Windows environment. The simple fact that any app that can run in WinRT will also run in Windows 8 means that information *mobility* is far more convenient and if Microsoft adds an automated synchronization capability between common apps on divergent machines then suddenly mobile computing for the masses is that much easier. The iPad already has this ability and the fact that an iWorks file on an iPad is automatically synchronized to iWorks on OS X for editing and fine-tuning and just as automatically re-synchronized back tot he tablet makes using the tablet a no-thought process. Android's biggest drawback is that it has NO ability to synchronize automatically to any desktop OS--not even Linux. A very quick and simple example of this is when reading a book on an iPad, you can pick up where you left off automatically with any other iOS device on the same user account, including iPhone and iPod Touch; no synchronization trigger necessary.

This is where WinRT will succeed. Over 80% of today's computer users already have Windows at their desks. It is only logical that the Windows-based tablet is the best choice for integration with the habits of the Windows user.

You nailed it. One reason I'm watching the Ubuntu on Android effort so closely.

They are projecting sometime in the 2014/15 time frame. By then, the world will have passed them by. Plus Unity (and Gnome 3) are as bad as the WIn. 8 "Metro". While there are the Unity fanboys just like the Win. 8 fanboys, most who liked Ubuntu through 10.10, dislike Unity. A lot of Ubuntu users have switched ti Mint, ZorinOS, SolutOS or similar.