Discussion on:
View:
Show:
The Surface is the name of the tablet; Windows RT and Windows 8 Pro are the names of the OSes on those specific tablets. So when speaking of a Surface RT, obviously you're speaking of the Atom-processor tablet with Windows RT on it (a mouthful when you're trying to stay within a word count) and the Surface Pro becomes obvious as (at least for now) an x86-processor tablet running Windows 8.
The Surface RT is an ARM based tablet with Windows RT, the Surface Pro is an Intel based processor with Windows 8 Pro on it... but there are Atom based tablets and they generally run Windows 8 PRO, actually. To be honest, I think all of the Atom based tablets are defacto NON-RT tablets, as RT *is* the Windows for ARM variant. Make sense?
It is ALL very confusing. That is a big part of the problem for Microsoft right now.
But yeah, for me, it was all a question of how much detail I wanted to go into explaining the various configurations of Windows 8 and hardware platforms. It would have been a whole article in itself and honestly, that has been done all over the place already.
It is ALL very confusing. That is a big part of the problem for Microsoft right now.
But yeah, for me, it was all a question of how much detail I wanted to go into explaining the various configurations of Windows 8 and hardware platforms. It would have been a whole article in itself and honestly, that has been done all over the place already.
that you got me strate on windows. the next time i turn my work in to microsoft developers meeting. Ha ha
My wife went to some Microsoft training last year down in North Carolina where she saw Windows used on a Toshiba tablet, so I do know that Windows 8 will run on ARM. The fact that a Surface RT tablet has been jailbroken and the full Windows 8 resides already on that tablet only with the desktop disabled clearly says Windows 8 can also run on Atom--albeit under the Surface RT's hardware specs it doesn't do all that well. In essence, Surface is Surface with two different grades of hardware designed for two different purposes. On the other hand, Windows RT is just the "Modern UI" interface portion of the full Windows 8 (not necessarily Windows 8 Pro) which doesn't need the same hardware capacity as the desktop.
ARM Architecture Vs x86 processor
W8 (RT)
1.ARM Architecture devices are slow compared to x86 architecture .
2.ARM Architecture are not capable of heavy graphics adapters .
3.64 Bit ARM Architecture are not developed yet .
4.Low cost chips .
5.Low power consumption .
6.More secure ARM Architecture than x86 architecture .
W8 Pro 32 bit 64 bit OS
x86 Architecture Advantages
1.x86 architecture are fast as compared to ARM Architecture .
2.x86 architecture are capable of heavy graphics handling .
3.both 32 as well as 64 bit are available.
W8 (RT)
1.ARM Architecture devices are slow compared to x86 architecture .
2.ARM Architecture are not capable of heavy graphics adapters .
3.64 Bit ARM Architecture are not developed yet .
4.Low cost chips .
5.Low power consumption .
6.More secure ARM Architecture than x86 architecture .
W8 Pro 32 bit 64 bit OS
x86 Architecture Advantages
1.x86 architecture are fast as compared to ARM Architecture .
2.x86 architecture are capable of heavy graphics handling .
3.both 32 as well as 64 bit are available.
Windows 8 exists in a Windows 8 and a Windows 8 Pro mode.
Windows 8 is like XP Home.
Windows 8 Pro is like XP Pro. Able to join domains, etc.
I've tended to refer to Windows RT and Windows 8 Pro when I meant either version of Windows 8 for Intel.
Windows 8 is like XP Home.
Windows 8 Pro is like XP Pro. Able to join domains, etc.
I've tended to refer to Windows RT and Windows 8 Pro when I meant either version of Windows 8 for Intel.
DELL LATTITUDE 10 was available for pre-order on the same day W8 and W8 RT were released. I ordered mine that same day, although Dell did not get it out to me until 01/09/2013. I ordered mine with docking station, all cables, both batteries 30 WHR and 60 WHR, Wacom pen, and portable ODD (opticle drive) and ordered a Kensington 10" carrying case w/Bluetooth keyboard on amazon......base price $649 everything ordered just under $1200, best investment I ever made....I spend in ink, and paper $easily $120 a month...for Dell badges and IBM, Sony, Lexmark..etc...etc..I use my tablet along with Microsoft office 2013 by turning all documents into digital and email them directly to the EU at completion of call... the Latitude 10 works flawless and will pay for itself within a few months because I no longer user paper or ink....everything is digitally signed and emailed out within Latitude 10 Tablet. combine the Tablet with W8 pro 64 bit PC and WP8 (RT) Nokia 920 and I have no issues or problems from one device to the next looking up docs, PDF, Excel, Word...etc...etc..no matter what device I use it is seamless networking at it's peak...try doing that with android or and apple product....W8, WP8(RT) W8(RT) all you do is log into your Windows, Microsoft , Live ID... and you are set and always linked..
2 cell 30whr after being all day working 12 hour day and not shutting it down and getting up next morning battery still shows over 50% charge ..4 cell 60 whr shows 65% to 70% charge switched over to 60 whr after first week of use .... 2 days without charge and being used to just close calls out, sending drop cards , badges over email...charge drops to 10% ...that's leaving it on for two days and system sleeps while not in use....so, I would say pretty good battery life ...I bought a 200 watt inverter which allows me to plug right in with the standard charger but I am finding out that was an unnecessary purchase...but might prove needed as the battery will degrade over time as they all do.
I apologize for my ignorance ...but after investigating why certain post were not showing up after refreshing I discovered to my surprise (ignorance) that, if you select all posts instead of a quantity your post magically appear but seem to be out of logical order.. still trying to get use to this format on here...again my apologies....
is frowned upon here, and it was removed: I'll just say ,I Have the Dell Pro Tablet and it has been available to order on line since 10/25/2012...but took Dell until 01/09/2013 to deliver it to my door step....let me say this....why anyone outside of price would settle for an android tablet or Ipad (W8 same cost if not cheaper than Ipad) is beyond logical reasoning...both android and Ipad are a compromise now that I know how well each W8 device works between each other...What ever type of tablet you decide to go with whether it be W8 (RT) limited function or W8 Pro Tablet 32 bit OS ... fully functional as a PC OS...it is definitely several steps up and beyond any android tablet or Ipad.....but again there will be those who will look at you and say : I don't like the Metro UI or the Start button is missing or it is eye candy no back bone to the OS..and you look at them with a smile and say you have a point...while under your breathe you are thinking : you either never tried it, or you hold some sort of prejudice against Microsoft and are full of it. think about these responses logically....: what is about a static UI and both really have not changed much over the years. The two (android and IOS ) are more alike each other than WP8 or W8 OS'S. Their excuses show a shallow thought process and doesn't even merit a response other than,"I see your point"...you can't argue with ignorance...
But if you place a URL in them the system itself very well may remove the post as it is considered as Spam.
The Nasty Spammers have been hitting the site quite hard over the past few days well harder than normal. Some Links get Black Listed and when the system finds then they get deleted.
To get around that you can Insert a space between the Domain Name and the .whatever which is what I do a lot of the time or you can delete the http header so instead of HTTP://www. whatever it just reads the www.whatever.
So an example is
http://www.techrepublic .com/forum/discussions/102-401053?tag=nl.rCOMBINED&s_cid=rCOMBINED
remember to remove the space from between techrepublic and the .com for a working link.
Or you could post it as
www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-401053?tag=nl.rCOMBINED&s_cid=rCOMBINED
Col
The Nasty Spammers have been hitting the site quite hard over the past few days well harder than normal. Some Links get Black Listed and when the system finds then they get deleted.
To get around that you can Insert a space between the Domain Name and the .whatever which is what I do a lot of the time or you can delete the http header so instead of HTTP://www. whatever it just reads the www.whatever.
So an example is
http://www.techrepublic .com/forum/discussions/102-401053?tag=nl.rCOMBINED&s_cid=rCOMBINED
remember to remove the space from between techrepublic and the .com for a working link.
Or you could post it as
www.techrepublic.com/forum/discussions/102-401053?tag=nl.rCOMBINED&s_cid=rCOMBINED
Col
I *did* touch on the differences between RT and Pro and called RT *crippled* in the article. Where did you come up with the idea that I was intentionally *hiding* a fact a bluntly confronted? I didn't spend 500 words revisiting the differences that everyone should know by now - but I certianly didn't try to pass it off as if there were no difference between the two.
For what it is worth - I agree, the Modern-UI app market is more of a "trivial app" or "leisure app" market. But that isn't really any different than Android or iOS. Remember when the iOS/Android arguments were all about, "It is about the apps"? And, to a certain extent at that time, it was true. Android reached momentum, and now it isn't all about the apps. That realization gave birth to the rebuttal, "Android doesn't need 5000 fart apps" - which was *also* true.
The point is, the MS app store will grow and mature. Android will always lag behind iOS on apps. At some point, that doesn't matter as much. You know, once Twitter came to Android, I found out it didn't matter that it was iOS exclusive. They could have kept it - I would have been fine.
I'd point out that this is how Microsoft *came ouf of the corner*... swinging like Mike Tyson and beating the competition to the canvas in some important ways. Android came out of the gate eating paste and sniffing daisies, not getting serious until they teamed with Verizon and Motorola for the Droid 1.
Now it just depends on how many consumers *get* it with what Microsoft is doing, and how many people value that. I don't honestly KNOW those details - I don't think *anyone* does. But I think Microsoft has a strong position and opportunity. I think a lot is going to depend on Microsoft being able to communicate that to users, to price competitively.
I doubt it will make a tremendous difference in the next 18 months. I think the Haswell chips and dropping prices on IvyBridge along with natural upgrade cycles and OEM license bundles will begin to change the Win32 environment, and like every other Win release, slowly this new approach will gain steam. It might be 3 to 5 years out before we see a change, and maybe Microsoft will give up before they get that far - or maybe it will move to slow and they'll abandon it. There is no doubt going Microsoft at this point is a risk.
For what it is worth - I agree, the Modern-UI app market is more of a "trivial app" or "leisure app" market. But that isn't really any different than Android or iOS. Remember when the iOS/Android arguments were all about, "It is about the apps"? And, to a certain extent at that time, it was true. Android reached momentum, and now it isn't all about the apps. That realization gave birth to the rebuttal, "Android doesn't need 5000 fart apps" - which was *also* true.
The point is, the MS app store will grow and mature. Android will always lag behind iOS on apps. At some point, that doesn't matter as much. You know, once Twitter came to Android, I found out it didn't matter that it was iOS exclusive. They could have kept it - I would have been fine.
I'd point out that this is how Microsoft *came ouf of the corner*... swinging like Mike Tyson and beating the competition to the canvas in some important ways. Android came out of the gate eating paste and sniffing daisies, not getting serious until they teamed with Verizon and Motorola for the Droid 1.
Now it just depends on how many consumers *get* it with what Microsoft is doing, and how many people value that. I don't honestly KNOW those details - I don't think *anyone* does. But I think Microsoft has a strong position and opportunity. I think a lot is going to depend on Microsoft being able to communicate that to users, to price competitively.
I doubt it will make a tremendous difference in the next 18 months. I think the Haswell chips and dropping prices on IvyBridge along with natural upgrade cycles and OEM license bundles will begin to change the Win32 environment, and like every other Win release, slowly this new approach will gain steam. It might be 3 to 5 years out before we see a change, and maybe Microsoft will give up before they get that far - or maybe it will move to slow and they'll abandon it. There is no doubt going Microsoft at this point is a risk.
Android is getting multitasking and this alone puts it into different league. So far I have discovered exactly one (1) nice Modern UI app - Manga Reader. It is logical fullscreen, does not require lots of settings, and still does useful things like buffering and search. The other apps? The App Store app perfectly reveals some Modern UI problems - inconvenient navigation, hard to compare 2 similar apps, eirther shows empty space or takes refuge in the browser. The Weather app is useful, but why do I see min/max forecasts from several sources and only one hourly forecast? Next to Hello World, but ads are there. Nice move, Microsoft, you forgot I have already payed for the OS? Skype does not have enough settings to make the camera work...
Modern UI cannot scale, thus App Store cannot mature. Yearly upgrades may fix that in several years, maybe.
Let us call things by the names - RT tablet is a niche machine for Office nerds (alternatively, a grave of unused hardware power), iOS tablet is a MAC accessory, and Android tablet is an expansive toy on a quest of becoming a cheap computer. Pro is a modest computer that makes purchase of a tablet unnecessary.
Pro is Windows 7 SP2 plus RT. We know Windows 7 alone failed on slates dramatically. Is Pro doomed to be a success? I guess Microsoft is making yet another mistake positioning Pro as a tablet. Pro can take nearly all nettop, laptop, and ultrabook market and considerable part of desktop upgrades while preventing lots of tablet purchases, but to do this it should be distanced from RT and tablets in general as much as possible. Maybe not even discussed in one article with iOS and Android.
Modern UI cannot scale, thus App Store cannot mature. Yearly upgrades may fix that in several years, maybe.
Let us call things by the names - RT tablet is a niche machine for Office nerds (alternatively, a grave of unused hardware power), iOS tablet is a MAC accessory, and Android tablet is an expansive toy on a quest of becoming a cheap computer. Pro is a modest computer that makes purchase of a tablet unnecessary.
Pro is Windows 7 SP2 plus RT. We know Windows 7 alone failed on slates dramatically. Is Pro doomed to be a success? I guess Microsoft is making yet another mistake positioning Pro as a tablet. Pro can take nearly all nettop, laptop, and ultrabook market and considerable part of desktop upgrades while preventing lots of tablet purchases, but to do this it should be distanced from RT and tablets in general as much as possible. Maybe not even discussed in one article with iOS and Android.
And while I won't argue that Windows' "Modern UI" currently lacks apps, I'm going to also point out that every other UI started with a relatively low number of apps. I know some are claiming that Blackberry 10 will "launch with the highest number of apps than any other OS", but BB-10 is not an "all-new" OS and that even its core QNX started somewhere with zero apps.
I personally believe your definitions of the different systems--RT, iOS, Android--are overly simplistic; overlooking some of their primary purposes for existing. WinRT and iOS are very similar to each other as they are extensions of their parent OS--meant for easy use in the hands where most people really don't need the power of the desktop OS. Android, due to its independence from any desktop OS (including Linux) is more of a netbook OS with tablet capability--demonstrated by the most popular Android "tablet" is the ASUS Transformer; little more than a netbook with a removable keyboard. I'm not saying it's bad, but its poor showing in the actual tablet market *except* as a media-consumption-only device like the Kindle Fire shows that it lacks that critical infrastructure that made the iPad such a success and could lose big time to WinRT for exactly that reason--over time.
Windows 8 is essentially, as you say, Windows 7 plus RT--though I am happy to see that Microsoft did eliminate a lot of old, legacy code that brought its overhead down almost 50% as well as its footprint on the hard drive. By everything I've seen in testing it myself and read online, Win8 is fully functional and notably faster on hardware even dating back to '07's "Vista Ready" machines. Now, without actually trying it, I wonder how well Win8 would run on those Netbooks that came out between '07 and '09--when the iPad shut them down?
I personally believe your definitions of the different systems--RT, iOS, Android--are overly simplistic; overlooking some of their primary purposes for existing. WinRT and iOS are very similar to each other as they are extensions of their parent OS--meant for easy use in the hands where most people really don't need the power of the desktop OS. Android, due to its independence from any desktop OS (including Linux) is more of a netbook OS with tablet capability--demonstrated by the most popular Android "tablet" is the ASUS Transformer; little more than a netbook with a removable keyboard. I'm not saying it's bad, but its poor showing in the actual tablet market *except* as a media-consumption-only device like the Kindle Fire shows that it lacks that critical infrastructure that made the iPad such a success and could lose big time to WinRT for exactly that reason--over time.
Windows 8 is essentially, as you say, Windows 7 plus RT--though I am happy to see that Microsoft did eliminate a lot of old, legacy code that brought its overhead down almost 50% as well as its footprint on the hard drive. By everything I've seen in testing it myself and read online, Win8 is fully functional and notably faster on hardware even dating back to '07's "Vista Ready" machines. Now, without actually trying it, I wonder how well Win8 would run on those Netbooks that came out between '07 and '09--when the iPad shut them down?
QNX was developed for real-time embedded applications and as such, never had 'apps' and was not a consumer product. It is similar to using the Linux kernel for Android. BB10 was developed from the gro.und up.
By an interesting side note, it has been reported that a jailbroken SurfaceRT revealed the full Windows 8 underneath--capable of running even legacy software, though admittedly not very well. The point is that Windows RT is to Windows as iOS is to OS X; they're intended to be part of an integrated package where data synchronization is nearly automatic while allowing the user to carry a much lighter and more convenient device for true mobility purposes.
A couple of obvious advantages to a tablet format vs the clamshell have to do with Apple's own PoS application and sales staff at places like car dealerships. When you're talking to customers who are wandering between products, you simply can't force them to sit down at a table to tell you what they want--they may not even know until they see it. With a tablet, the agent can walk with the customer/client and call up specific data on the spot and even start the purchase process (in the case of a car) before ever going back to a desk. In fact, Mercedes has made it possible to even go as far as signing the purchase contract on the tablet and having the printout ready in moments. This same capability is eminently possible with WinRT and since most car dealerships use Windows-based computers that means that the documents themselves are even more readily synchronized and logged.
In all honesty, your argument is little different than those decrying the original iPad when it was announced three years ago. The interesting thing is that even Apple was surprised at the uses--quality of life uses--that developed for it. Don't count Windows RT out as a mobility OS. I really believe you're going to be surprised at where Microsoft will go with their new system.
A couple of obvious advantages to a tablet format vs the clamshell have to do with Apple's own PoS application and sales staff at places like car dealerships. When you're talking to customers who are wandering between products, you simply can't force them to sit down at a table to tell you what they want--they may not even know until they see it. With a tablet, the agent can walk with the customer/client and call up specific data on the spot and even start the purchase process (in the case of a car) before ever going back to a desk. In fact, Mercedes has made it possible to even go as far as signing the purchase contract on the tablet and having the printout ready in moments. This same capability is eminently possible with WinRT and since most car dealerships use Windows-based computers that means that the documents themselves are even more readily synchronized and logged.
In all honesty, your argument is little different than those decrying the original iPad when it was announced three years ago. The interesting thing is that even Apple was surprised at the uses--quality of life uses--that developed for it. Don't count Windows RT out as a mobility OS. I really believe you're going to be surprised at where Microsoft will go with their new system.
I agree Apple makes great products for the general consumer but that is not me. I started out with punch cards on a IBM mainframe. My first computer was a Wang. I gave up on Windows mobile when I found I could get better Android apps to connect to my desktop and Sharepoint sites than with Windows moble apps. I just got a Samsung Note 2 and it is the best phone to date plus as a small tablet, it works great for connecting to Sharepoint, client networks, and cloud based databases. I see no compelling reason to use Window mobile at all and do not see it gaining much market share.
I have Windows 8 Pro but have not fully implemented it. We are in a test phase prior to full implementation and so far, we like it. My next laptop/tablet will probably be an ultra book from Lenovo, Samsung, or Asus.
I have Windows 8 Pro but have not fully implemented it. We are in a test phase prior to full implementation and so far, we like it. My next laptop/tablet will probably be an ultra book from Lenovo, Samsung, or Asus.
I believe DColbert can attest that I've stated before that WindowsRT and Windows Phone have to battle the old WinMob's reputation. You've just stated that you won't use Windows RT and yet you're perfectly happy so far with Windows 8--which includes RT in the form of its "Modern" interface. Just because the apps you want or think you need aren't available yet doesn't mean they won't be. Wouldn't it be nice to leave that heavy laptop behind when you go to a meeting or a 'business lunch' and still have all your presentations and other talking points available? RT IS windows--proven by the fact that a jailbroken Surface RT has the full version of Windows underneath--capable even of running legacy apps, albeit not that well due to performance constraints. You're letting WinMob's reputation color your objective analysis of the tablet.
It is telling that you're an IT shop entering the testing phase of Windows 8 for deployment and you *like* it. That has been my experience with IT professionals, too, including my own engineers. The ones who are afraid of it haven't tried it yet or tried it during developer release and between early experiences and bad press, they're afraid of it now. The WinMo effect and the Win Vista effect have made IT pros highly skeptical of new Windows platforms and that is slowing adoption at this point. People like us who are trying it and like it show that this trend is likely to reverse eventually. In that sense, we're kind of the canaries in the coalmine and the evengelists for Windows 8. We're jumping in and yelling back to the cowards on the beach, "Jump in, the water is FINE..." and... it is.
I also agree that RT got off on a bad foot. Vupline is right about the reasons why eventually RT may make more sense to you than Android. In particular, even now, once you really get a command of Windows 8 Pro, you'll find it aggravating that your Android devices don't work the same way when they could (if not for patents, anyhow.
) You'll also realize that RT is not as powerful as Windows 8 Pro, but in many ways more powerful than Android. That is, you can have all the RT classic interface apps running and have all your modern-UI apps running too. Not LESS, but actually MORE, than the other mobile platforms can do. I don't want to display a bias toward RT... at this point, I'm hanging onto my TF300 and not positive I want to lock into Redmond's ecosystem across the board. But I *see* the strategy and the justification and reason *why* it would make sense. I see how I could benefit from having a single homogenous platform solution using Win 8 and RT.
Vulpine is right about app growth, too. As (if) things catch on and gain momentum, the apps will come. They did for Android, they are with Android tablets. The "lack of apps" argument only matters if no one shows up and the device dies (WebOS). The users come first, then the apps come. Now, there is no guarantee that RT *will* catch on. That is the card that hasn't been played yet. But I'm pretty sure it will get laid on the table before Microsoft folds.
I also agree that RT got off on a bad foot. Vupline is right about the reasons why eventually RT may make more sense to you than Android. In particular, even now, once you really get a command of Windows 8 Pro, you'll find it aggravating that your Android devices don't work the same way when they could (if not for patents, anyhow.
) You'll also realize that RT is not as powerful as Windows 8 Pro, but in many ways more powerful than Android. That is, you can have all the RT classic interface apps running and have all your modern-UI apps running too. Not LESS, but actually MORE, than the other mobile platforms can do. I don't want to display a bias toward RT... at this point, I'm hanging onto my TF300 and not positive I want to lock into Redmond's ecosystem across the board. But I *see* the strategy and the justification and reason *why* it would make sense. I see how I could benefit from having a single homogenous platform solution using Win 8 and RT. Vulpine is right about app growth, too. As (if) things catch on and gain momentum, the apps will come. They did for Android, they are with Android tablets. The "lack of apps" argument only matters if no one shows up and the device dies (WebOS). The users come first, then the apps come. Now, there is no guarantee that RT *will* catch on. That is the card that hasn't been played yet. But I'm pretty sure it will get laid on the table before Microsoft folds.
when they choose to be. They were newcomers to the OS world. Apple and CP/M pre-dated DOS. Microsoft was a newcomer to the office productivity (word processing/spreadsheet) world. They were a newcomer to the browser world. Banyan and Novell owned the networking/server world.
I believe, having lived/worked in computers since the late 70's, that Microsoft will own a major portion of the smartphone and tablet world. I have a Windows Phone 8 Nokia phone, a Windows 8 Enterprise touchscreen tablet (Acer Iconia Tab W500), and am playing with Windows Server 2012. It's all about the ecosystem. Apple does not have anything for the enterprise. Google does not have anything for the enterprise. Microsoft is it. All my co-workers at my various client offices, both private enterprise and government, have Windows PC's at home. Microsoft is it. They will eventually own the market in smartphones and tablets. It will probably take them 3 - 5 years to get there.
Excellent article, Donovan.
Thanks - Mark in Ohio
I believe, having lived/worked in computers since the late 70's, that Microsoft will own a major portion of the smartphone and tablet world. I have a Windows Phone 8 Nokia phone, a Windows 8 Enterprise touchscreen tablet (Acer Iconia Tab W500), and am playing with Windows Server 2012. It's all about the ecosystem. Apple does not have anything for the enterprise. Google does not have anything for the enterprise. Microsoft is it. All my co-workers at my various client offices, both private enterprise and government, have Windows PC's at home. Microsoft is it. They will eventually own the market in smartphones and tablets. It will probably take them 3 - 5 years to get there.
Excellent article, Donovan.
Thanks - Mark in Ohio
when they do gain the intitiative you suggest it will be a sad day in my honest opinion.
I wonder why all bloggers refer to W8 as an SUV. To me, when you are driving a vehicle that looks, sounds and performs as the majority of vehicles on the road do, a more accurately portrayed analogy would be a minivan. Nothing exciting here. Move on.
I wonder why all bloggers refer to W8 as an SUV. To me, when you are driving a vehicle that looks, sounds and performs as the majority of vehicles on the road do, a more accurately portrayed analogy would be a minivan. Nothing exciting here. Move on.
People call anything bigger than a Honda Civic an SUV these days. There are actually fewer SUV's on the road today than there was 10 years ago, because they are all making CROSSOVERS now, despite everyone calling them SUV's still. They are cars made to LOOK like off road vehicles. They are essentially people movers, which are exactly what you say MINIVANS, not SUV's by a long shot!.
Jacked-up station wagons. At least one insurance company has already renamed the class to "Sport Utility Wagon" rather than "SUV".
You are bang on. A Ford Ranger is listed as a pickup. My Explorer, which is just a higher end body stuck on the IDENTICAL chassis, is called a wagon by ICBC (our insurance company). I had them classify it as a truck for me and registered it at over 5100lbs because I carry and tow. That way I don't have to do the annual AirCare tests either.
A POVs (personally operated vehicles) where I live have to have pollution checks until they can officially be classified as antiques--even pickup trucks. I have a 1990 F-150 that, with luck just passed its pollution check for the last time. Going to do my best to get an antique tag on it before it comes due for the next one in two years. Not that it risks failing (thing had remarkably low numbers for its age) but simply the fact that it's a true survivor.
It's a LOT harder to put antique/vintage or collector tags on old cars here. They have to be original/stock, in collectors shape and even then can not be driven as daily drivers. just for shows, parades etc., they have pretty limited coverage too.
As far as the US, I know the rules were different but similar, you might want to check the state guidelines on that.
A 1990 F-150 is quite a trick to keep on the road these days. From 87-94 they had some real issues and almost lost their place on top of the market. I've laid a few 88's and a 91 to rest myself and I NEVER like to let a car die, I feel I have let both it and myself down if I don't strip and rebuild it.
Good show though, keep her chuggin' along as long as you can!
As far as the US, I know the rules were different but similar, you might want to check the state guidelines on that.
A 1990 F-150 is quite a trick to keep on the road these days. From 87-94 they had some real issues and almost lost their place on top of the market. I've laid a few 88's and a 91 to rest myself and I NEVER like to let a car die, I feel I have let both it and myself down if I don't strip and rebuild it.
Good show though, keep her chuggin' along as long as you can!
Most Windows 8 RT/store apps still have a way to go to be as mature as their iOS counterparts. Having used it regularly on a tablet for 8+ months the mail and IE apps are not full-featured and often a source of frustration, even printing a pdf the way I wanted required a visit to the desktop app. They'll probably get there eventually but in the meantime at least I can flip to desktop mode to get those features I know and love.
I like the W8 whole charms context-sensitive thing and can see that being more popular once people get their heads round it. Tricky thing is I would still recommend iOS to the man in the street, but give W8 time.
As you say, these mobile OSes all do the essentials well enough, like hot drinks it just comes down to which you prefer (or are used to), coffee, tea or hot chocolate?
I like the W8 whole charms context-sensitive thing and can see that being more popular once people get their heads round it. Tricky thing is I would still recommend iOS to the man in the street, but give W8 time.
As you say, these mobile OSes all do the essentials well enough, like hot drinks it just comes down to which you prefer (or are used to), coffee, tea or hot chocolate?
Thank you for a reasoned response to the question, "which is the superior mobile OS?" The only thing I would add is to ask the person, "what ecosystem are you currently in?" If a person is in the apple ecosystem already (iphone and mac) then he will most benefit from purchasing an ipad and the same, I think, goes for current Android users and Windows users. A person with a DROID razor may not enjoy an ipad as much because syncing data, apps and such will be cumbersome.
Anyway, good article
Anyway, good article
I agree - ecosystem lock-in is a critical consideration. I left that out of this one because:
1: I touched on this in my iPhone or Android article on TR:
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/smartphones/iphone-or-android-five-questions-to-help-you-decide/4456?tag=content;siu-containerhttp://www.techrepublic.com/blog/smartphones/iphone-or-android-five-questions-to-help-you-decide/4456?tag=content;siu-container
Which still remains one of my most popular recent articles, so I figured everyone had read it already.
2: I would have had to cut something else to fit a discussion about this aspect into the article.
In fact, I am chomping at the bit to jump onto Windows 8 Pro and RT with a touch screen Haswell or Ivybridge hybrid *and* an RT device... but expense, career uncertainty, and the fact that I'm heavily invested in the Android ecosystem at this point are all keeping me in a holding pattern. There are other reasons too, but the most significant at this point is probably my investment in Android.
Honestly I see my future as being Android for smart-phone and 7" content consumption, a 11-12" hybrid Intel Win 8 ultrabook, and a 10" Win RT hybrid tablet for light travel. I can't see myself leaving Android completely or locking totally into Microsoft's ecosystem. But it is *possible* that if Windows gets it right enough, I could opt-out for the reasons you state (cumbersome synchronization and non-portability of single app purchases across devices, etc...)
1: I touched on this in my iPhone or Android article on TR:
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/smartphones/iphone-or-android-five-questions-to-help-you-decide/4456?tag=content;siu-containerhttp://www.techrepublic.com/blog/smartphones/iphone-or-android-five-questions-to-help-you-decide/4456?tag=content;siu-container
Which still remains one of my most popular recent articles, so I figured everyone had read it already.
2: I would have had to cut something else to fit a discussion about this aspect into the article.
In fact, I am chomping at the bit to jump onto Windows 8 Pro and RT with a touch screen Haswell or Ivybridge hybrid *and* an RT device... but expense, career uncertainty, and the fact that I'm heavily invested in the Android ecosystem at this point are all keeping me in a holding pattern. There are other reasons too, but the most significant at this point is probably my investment in Android.
Honestly I see my future as being Android for smart-phone and 7" content consumption, a 11-12" hybrid Intel Win 8 ultrabook, and a 10" Win RT hybrid tablet for light travel. I can't see myself leaving Android completely or locking totally into Microsoft's ecosystem. But it is *possible* that if Windows gets it right enough, I could opt-out for the reasons you state (cumbersome synchronization and non-portability of single app purchases across devices, etc...)
Weighting in at 10gigs, a third of the size of a 32gb tablet is used by the OS.
iOS and Android weight in at about 100megs. 0.1 gigs
So is Windows 8 100 times better? Because its a 100 times bigger...
iOS and Android weight in at about 100megs. 0.1 gigs
So is Windows 8 100 times better? Because its a 100 times bigger...
In my visit to Best Buy, one of the things I checked out on the Samsung Atom based Win 8 Pro device, the Surface RT 64gb and 32GB was the free drive space on C:
For exactly this reason. The 32GB Surface RT had 2.5GB free on the sales floor.
And I've argued that it is silly to buy an iPad Mini 16gb at their entry price when you can get a Nexus 7 with 32gb of memory and an unlocked mobile radio for $300.
So subjective value is becoming a differentiator in this market on multiple different levels.
Is the iOS experience so premium it is worth paying more for less than the competition? Is it just a commodity value proposition, or is there something more tangible there? Do these same arguments apply to Windows 7 devices?
If the Windows device is more productive, efficient, and enjoyable to use, maybe it is WORTH paying a premium and having an OS that takes 100 times the space.
For exactly this reason. The 32GB Surface RT had 2.5GB free on the sales floor.
And I've argued that it is silly to buy an iPad Mini 16gb at their entry price when you can get a Nexus 7 with 32gb of memory and an unlocked mobile radio for $300.
So subjective value is becoming a differentiator in this market on multiple different levels.
Is the iOS experience so premium it is worth paying more for less than the competition? Is it just a commodity value proposition, or is there something more tangible there? Do these same arguments apply to Windows 7 devices?
If the Windows device is more productive, efficient, and enjoyable to use, maybe it is WORTH paying a premium and having an OS that takes 100 times the space.
You can user the Pro device as your sole computing machine.
But I think I'd rather buy one of those 150 dollar net books that if I drop it or it gets stolen, I don't care.
But I think I'd rather buy one of those 150 dollar net books that if I drop it or it gets stolen, I don't care.
In fact, that was one of the reasons for the old tablet failure of Windows--you had to have a huge hard drive in it just to hold the OS and a few programs.
I just checked my old XP machine. Its a fairly mature machine, it has been running and accumulating garbage since 2003. The windows folder is 7.8GB on disk, 7.1gb size total.
I check some of my XP VM's, a fresh install of XP seems to equal about 2.5gigs before updates.
Windows 2000 was about 2 gigs, 98 was about 500mb, win95 was 130mb. I don't know what winME was.
My matured win7 machine is 21.8gb.
Damn Microsoft, what the hell did you do?
My Win7 VM is 7 gigs, but that's pretty empty.
In short, I don't think any Windows OS has actually reached 20 gigs at install. But it looks like after all the frameworks and such are installed, it does exceed 20gb. That's extremely excessive. And 10 years ago, having 2 gigs of flash memory used by the OS would have been very expensive.
But a minor correction, the tablets of 10 years ago did not need 20gb for the OS. But your point that Windows has always been way to big is correct. MS will never learn from their mistakes. If they would just make Windows modular so that those needed backwards compatibility could have it, and those that don't can leave it off their system, windows would be much more successful on tablets.
I check some of my XP VM's, a fresh install of XP seems to equal about 2.5gigs before updates.
Windows 2000 was about 2 gigs, 98 was about 500mb, win95 was 130mb. I don't know what winME was.
My matured win7 machine is 21.8gb.
Damn Microsoft, what the hell did you do?
My Win7 VM is 7 gigs, but that's pretty empty.
In short, I don't think any Windows OS has actually reached 20 gigs at install. But it looks like after all the frameworks and such are installed, it does exceed 20gb. That's extremely excessive. And 10 years ago, having 2 gigs of flash memory used by the OS would have been very expensive.
But a minor correction, the tablets of 10 years ago did not need 20gb for the OS. But your point that Windows has always been way to big is correct. MS will never learn from their mistakes. If they would just make Windows modular so that those needed backwards compatibility could have it, and those that don't can leave it off their system, windows would be much more successful on tablets.
And that the browser functioned like another OS in the OS,
(the video with that guy in the conference describing the decisions behind windows 8)
So their solution was to shove the massive lump of an OS under the carpet and put a new table on top of it. Of course the lump make the table unstable and hard to use.
So win8 apps are just html5 apps, why wouldn't you just write html5 apps then? Why try and integrate them into the OS? Now its like having many browsers. They didn't solve their issue at all. The OS is still more of an obstacle to productivity when people only want a web browser. It seems like MS is just desperately grasping at the last straws of relevance, and by doing so, pissed off the people that have kept them relevant all these years.
Its sort of like if GM in its desperation to attract new younger customers, decided to invent a car that uses a gamepad instead of a wheel and pedal, even though it would drive away all their older customers that don't want to learn a new way to drive.
(the video with that guy in the conference describing the decisions behind windows 8)
So their solution was to shove the massive lump of an OS under the carpet and put a new table on top of it. Of course the lump make the table unstable and hard to use.
So win8 apps are just html5 apps, why wouldn't you just write html5 apps then? Why try and integrate them into the OS? Now its like having many browsers. They didn't solve their issue at all. The OS is still more of an obstacle to productivity when people only want a web browser. It seems like MS is just desperately grasping at the last straws of relevance, and by doing so, pissed off the people that have kept them relevant all these years.
Its sort of like if GM in its desperation to attract new younger customers, decided to invent a car that uses a gamepad instead of a wheel and pedal, even though it would drive away all their older customers that don't want to learn a new way to drive.
What the author misses is the fact that a convergence of sorts is taking place between smartphones & tablets - "phablets" if you will. In that game, iOS is far superior to both Androids & Windows. Most Android users have different versions of the OS on their phones and tablets and the user experience across these platforms is in-consistent. Even more so if the hardware comes from two different manufacturers i.e. there is both hardware & OS fragmentation. And from the point of view of enterprise support, trying to cater to the needs of large numbers of users with different versions of Android and on varying form factors - phones & tablets - will be a cost driver and an upgrade hell. A nightmare in short.
According to Google's own statistics, 54% of users are still stuck on Gingerbread (Android 2,3, released in 2010) and only 2,7% are on the latest Android version 4.1 - a.k.a. JellyBean. To this complexity, one needs to add in the confusion that will result due to different firmware and operator skins that sit atop the OS. Few enterprise IT shops will be able to develop cost-effective support models for this chaotic situation. Google has now attempted to stem this fragmentation by changes to the legalese in the for using the SDK - but I doubt that will have any immediate impact. Other than driving heavyweights like Samsung to OSes like Tizen.
This situation is not the same as the DOS vs MacOs battles of the early 80s. Microsoft retained full control over the software releases and the APIs such that there was no "forking" of the OS. Hence, hardware variations had minimal to no impact for the end user or the IT support shop.
That is not the case now, the combination of hardware & software fragmentation for Android will result in difficult to support IT assets and poorer quality apps. A situation the tightly integrated iOS avoids.
According to Google's own statistics, 54% of users are still stuck on Gingerbread (Android 2,3, released in 2010) and only 2,7% are on the latest Android version 4.1 - a.k.a. JellyBean. To this complexity, one needs to add in the confusion that will result due to different firmware and operator skins that sit atop the OS. Few enterprise IT shops will be able to develop cost-effective support models for this chaotic situation. Google has now attempted to stem this fragmentation by changes to the legalese in the for using the SDK - but I doubt that will have any immediate impact. Other than driving heavyweights like Samsung to OSes like Tizen.
This situation is not the same as the DOS vs MacOs battles of the early 80s. Microsoft retained full control over the software releases and the APIs such that there was no "forking" of the OS. Hence, hardware variations had minimal to no impact for the end user or the IT support shop.
That is not the case now, the combination of hardware & software fragmentation for Android will result in difficult to support IT assets and poorer quality apps. A situation the tightly integrated iOS avoids.
Another aspect to the iOS vs Android vs Windows debate is the issue of assset depreciation. Writing again from an enterprise perspective, I wonder what the useful life of smartphones and tablets are - particularly when they can no more be upgraded or repaired. Seen from this perspective and the fact that even the oldest iPhones are capable of running the latest iOS, I would argue that an enterprise could at the very least expect an useful economic life of 2 years from an iOS device and say a salvage value of 0. For an Android device, the difficulties in upgrading would mean that it would have to be depreciated over 1 year and will have a salvage value of 0. Hence, over a 5 year period, emabrking on the Android platform will mean greater outlays than on the iOS.
On an iPhone 1?
I think your statement has gone off the tracks.
"the fact that even the oldest iPhones are capable of running the latest iOS,"
I think your statement has gone off the tracks.
"the fact that even the oldest iPhones are capable of running the latest iOS,"
The oldest iPhone safely capable of running iOS 6 is the iPhone 3GS; the iPhone 3 pretty much capped out on 5 and I'm not sure even the original iPhone could handle 4 very well. That said, the iPhone 4 I use is having no trouble with iOS 6 and may do pretty well with 7. So I will agree with the intent of your argument--probably offering between 4 and 5 years of usable life with the iPhone vs a likely maximum of 3 years with even the current round of Android devices.
Is superficial. It isn't real accurate to compare the support or availability for iOS upgrades to Android. I mean, don't get me wrong, it is a tangible issue that is worth discussing in a review of the merits of the two different platforms - but it doesn't align very neatly.
With Apple you've got a single manufacturer with a very small number of devices, a single model at a time (sometimes with some overlap with the previous generation, at MOST), and tremendous clout across a number of different industries and a willingness to really stay in the fight, even if it is financially uncomfortable, to get things their way or have them not be at all.
With Android you've got more than half a dozen major manufacturers, multiple models per manufacturers, many of them overlapping, a huge range of device quality and price points and hardware capabilities, each making their own custom modifications to a base OS provided by a traditionally hands-off platform developer, and then delivered through carriers who are notorious for controlling and manipulating the market to their benefit and treating their customers and handset manufacturers like second class citizens if they can get away with it.
It is a problem, and it HAS been a worse problem in the past than it seems to be headed in the future. But the REALITY of the situation is the people who complain the LOUDEST about this issue are almost inevitably those who own the *competition's* product. Most Android users don't know and don't care on Froyo vs. ICS vs. JB. It is like the difference between a 1st generation Escalade, a 2nd generation and a current generation. Only a very small group of people who REALLY care can tell them apart. To everyone else, they look like giant Cadillac SUVs - all the same and basically capable of more or less the same tasks.
And I'll tell you what... most iOS users I've encountered, they're the same way. They don't care and won't upgrade their OS until something MAKES them upgrade. This issue only matters to us propeller heads... and the bigger propeller head, the more likely they're on machines that either offer quick manufacturer upgrades to the latest, or they've rolled their own ROMs anyhow.
It becomes a real non-issue. It matters to people who it matters to, and they're the people who can get around it, and it doesn't matter to people who can't, and they don't care.
With Apple you've got a single manufacturer with a very small number of devices, a single model at a time (sometimes with some overlap with the previous generation, at MOST), and tremendous clout across a number of different industries and a willingness to really stay in the fight, even if it is financially uncomfortable, to get things their way or have them not be at all.
With Android you've got more than half a dozen major manufacturers, multiple models per manufacturers, many of them overlapping, a huge range of device quality and price points and hardware capabilities, each making their own custom modifications to a base OS provided by a traditionally hands-off platform developer, and then delivered through carriers who are notorious for controlling and manipulating the market to their benefit and treating their customers and handset manufacturers like second class citizens if they can get away with it.
It is a problem, and it HAS been a worse problem in the past than it seems to be headed in the future. But the REALITY of the situation is the people who complain the LOUDEST about this issue are almost inevitably those who own the *competition's* product. Most Android users don't know and don't care on Froyo vs. ICS vs. JB. It is like the difference between a 1st generation Escalade, a 2nd generation and a current generation. Only a very small group of people who REALLY care can tell them apart. To everyone else, they look like giant Cadillac SUVs - all the same and basically capable of more or less the same tasks.
And I'll tell you what... most iOS users I've encountered, they're the same way. They don't care and won't upgrade their OS until something MAKES them upgrade. This issue only matters to us propeller heads... and the bigger propeller head, the more likely they're on machines that either offer quick manufacturer upgrades to the latest, or they've rolled their own ROMs anyhow.
It becomes a real non-issue. It matters to people who it matters to, and they're the people who can get around it, and it doesn't matter to people who can't, and they don't care.
I don't know if I should push that agenda as one of the smallest fish in a very big pond. But I appreciate the thought.
I largely agree with your analysis of these three platforms in that iOS is a great consumption device. It does have a stable OS and beautiful hardware, though I wouldn't say the hardware is cutting edge. Proprietary connectors, 4:3 screen ratios and STILL no mini HDMI out puts it behind the curve in terms of hardware. That may not be a deal breaker for the majority of users out there, but for public speaking of any kind, from the classroom to the board room, these are serious hold backs.
Android does everything iOS can do, and then some, though not with the same level of elegance. I agree with that, and that people can forgive a little less spit and polish when they get a similar product for half the price (or less) with generally available and usable ports. No beef with your Android analysis as long as you're talking Nexus-level devices. The readers based on Android are not the do-everything tablets you describe, but offer a true consumption niche that does quite well when compared with that purpose on an iOS device for a lot less. Will it do everything an iPad will? No. But if you just want content consumption they can offer better screens for reading at very reasonable prices.
Windows 8 Pro tablets are everything you say except complicated. I've been using Windows 8 Pro on a desktop for 3 months and do not miss Windows 7. It is so much easier than other versions of Windows once you learn how to get around. It may not be as intuitive as iOS, but its hardly a complicated monster.
I was confused at first because you mention Windows RT in the intro, but when you discuss Windows 8 its clearly the Pro version you describe. RT is a new OS, and yes it isn't as capable as Pro -- yet. It will eventually become the new Windows. It has distinct advantages such as no registry (like most other modern OSes) and a very light footprint. iOS and Android have a three-year head start on RT, so give RT a little more time and I believe it will offer so much more than the others.
But why mention Windows at all if you don't mention the other key new player in this space: Ubuntu. With an OS that scales nicely from consumer devices like phones and tablets to hard core corporate devices like desktops and servers -- on the same kernel -- it has every bit as much a chance of upsetting the dominance of Apple and Google as Windows does.
Android does everything iOS can do, and then some, though not with the same level of elegance. I agree with that, and that people can forgive a little less spit and polish when they get a similar product for half the price (or less) with generally available and usable ports. No beef with your Android analysis as long as you're talking Nexus-level devices. The readers based on Android are not the do-everything tablets you describe, but offer a true consumption niche that does quite well when compared with that purpose on an iOS device for a lot less. Will it do everything an iPad will? No. But if you just want content consumption they can offer better screens for reading at very reasonable prices.
Windows 8 Pro tablets are everything you say except complicated. I've been using Windows 8 Pro on a desktop for 3 months and do not miss Windows 7. It is so much easier than other versions of Windows once you learn how to get around. It may not be as intuitive as iOS, but its hardly a complicated monster.
I was confused at first because you mention Windows RT in the intro, but when you discuss Windows 8 its clearly the Pro version you describe. RT is a new OS, and yes it isn't as capable as Pro -- yet. It will eventually become the new Windows. It has distinct advantages such as no registry (like most other modern OSes) and a very light footprint. iOS and Android have a three-year head start on RT, so give RT a little more time and I believe it will offer so much more than the others.
But why mention Windows at all if you don't mention the other key new player in this space: Ubuntu. With an OS that scales nicely from consumer devices like phones and tablets to hard core corporate devices like desktops and servers -- on the same kernel -- it has every bit as much a chance of upsetting the dominance of Apple and Google as Windows does.
Or better yet, we're talking about NFL here, not Arena or Canadian League football.
The artist who plays at the cafe is a pro-level musician, so is Dave Matthews. It isn't fair to compare them.
In the election, the press focuses on Obama and Romney, not Gary Johnson.
And a lot of times it isn't the quality, skill, talent or capability. It is the amount of money BEHIND the player pushing the media blitzes that make the public aware. That is the case here, too. Ubuntu cannot compete with the advertising budgets of Google, Apple and Microsoft, so it would be amazing if they could get 5% of the market share. Gary Johnson couldn't swing that much mind-share, for example.
These 3 platforms are a present threat to one another. They're the clear contenders. Ubuntu is interesting, they're doing cool things, I like the platform - but it didn't fit in this conversation any more than WebOS or Blackberry. That may all change in the next year or two. I'd welcome that change, if it happens.
And I'm also not a regular Ubuntu user at this point - so I wouldn't do it justice, anyhow. I'll leave that to our resident Linux expert, Jack Wallen. He'll do a much better job of it than I ever could.
As for Windows vs. RT, yeah, that was a minefield and awkward to navigate clearly in the space I had. I had to address it, but that could be a stand-alone discussion itself if I removed Apple and Android from this piece.
As for the difficulty factor - I *love* Windows 8 - but I had to read up and learn about the gestures and mouse-alternatives. I didn't have to do this with Android or iOS. I sat down and played around and quickly figured out, "this is how I do THIS..."
But I also quickly found, "That is it, you can't do much more." Especially with iOS. Microsoft's approach is, "Man, I've seen this done, how do you do it?" and then once you figure it out you start going, "I wonder if I can do... *this*..." and you *can*! Higher learning curve, more reward.
That is my take, anyhow.
The artist who plays at the cafe is a pro-level musician, so is Dave Matthews. It isn't fair to compare them.
In the election, the press focuses on Obama and Romney, not Gary Johnson.
And a lot of times it isn't the quality, skill, talent or capability. It is the amount of money BEHIND the player pushing the media blitzes that make the public aware. That is the case here, too. Ubuntu cannot compete with the advertising budgets of Google, Apple and Microsoft, so it would be amazing if they could get 5% of the market share. Gary Johnson couldn't swing that much mind-share, for example.
These 3 platforms are a present threat to one another. They're the clear contenders. Ubuntu is interesting, they're doing cool things, I like the platform - but it didn't fit in this conversation any more than WebOS or Blackberry. That may all change in the next year or two. I'd welcome that change, if it happens.
And I'm also not a regular Ubuntu user at this point - so I wouldn't do it justice, anyhow. I'll leave that to our resident Linux expert, Jack Wallen. He'll do a much better job of it than I ever could.
As for Windows vs. RT, yeah, that was a minefield and awkward to navigate clearly in the space I had. I had to address it, but that could be a stand-alone discussion itself if I removed Apple and Android from this piece.
As for the difficulty factor - I *love* Windows 8 - but I had to read up and learn about the gestures and mouse-alternatives. I didn't have to do this with Android or iOS. I sat down and played around and quickly figured out, "this is how I do THIS..."
But I also quickly found, "That is it, you can't do much more." Especially with iOS. Microsoft's approach is, "Man, I've seen this done, how do you do it?" and then once you figure it out you start going, "I wonder if I can do... *this*..." and you *can*! Higher learning curve, more reward.
That is my take, anyhow.
Android = complicated unstructured and at some point gets to be more hassle than it's worth.....
Iphone= easy to use smooth but very limited in what can be done and wil eventually be surpassed....;)
W8,WP8, RT = best of both : the ability to do so much more but with better structuring. Yes the learning curve is there but at the same time the reward of taking the time to overcome that learning curve is limitless and if given the proper time to mature will become (as long as MS doesn't get to far ahead of themselves) the product of choice which EU's both, residential and business has been waiting for...
explanation of comment ..to put into context: (as long as MS doesn't get to far ahead of themselves): Meaning: as long as they provide a slow controlled improvements and do not repeat what they did with VISTA...(we all know they jumped off the rails with VISTA ) they (MS) has a chance to do what we were all hoping someone would , and that is give us a one size fits all OS, no more patch work devices to haggle with..
Iphone= easy to use smooth but very limited in what can be done and wil eventually be surpassed....;)
W8,WP8, RT = best of both : the ability to do so much more but with better structuring. Yes the learning curve is there but at the same time the reward of taking the time to overcome that learning curve is limitless and if given the proper time to mature will become (as long as MS doesn't get to far ahead of themselves) the product of choice which EU's both, residential and business has been waiting for...
explanation of comment ..to put into context: (as long as MS doesn't get to far ahead of themselves): Meaning: as long as they provide a slow controlled improvements and do not repeat what they did with VISTA...(we all know they jumped off the rails with VISTA ) they (MS) has a chance to do what we were all hoping someone would , and that is give us a one size fits all OS, no more patch work devices to haggle with..
I'm going to essentially agree with all your postings yesterday about your Dell tablet with Windows 8--Microsoft has managed to merge mobility and the desktop first, though not necessarily best in the long run. Of course, your Dell is not the first tablet to run a full version of Windows 8--Microsoft was using Toshiba tablets at their North Carolina education center long before the Surface tabs were released. However, the question still arises as to whether legacy apps without any direct touch design can be effective in the long run. After all, Windows Touch has been a failure for over ten years because the developers were too conservative or too lazy to adapt to the touch environment. Even now, the vast majority of Windows users argue that "mouse and keyboard is the 'best' input method". With that mindset and the obviously tiny text on your Dell's display when in desktop mode, I hate to say that at least for now it will remain a niche product--a "fad" as it were. This will change, don't get me wrong, but will the change come before, or after Apple has managed its merger? It's obvious by simply looking at iOS/OS X that Apple has been striving for this merger for several years and intends to make it a smoother, more intuitive transition for their users where as far as Windows users are concerned, this is a drastic change between Win7/Win8 despite the fact that Microsoft has been trying to guide users to touch for more than 10 years.
I did mention that I agree with the essence of your statements. However, I do have to disagree with some of the specifics. As I've already said here, Windows 8 as it stands isn't really tablet-friendly once you get out of the "Modern" interface. A good portion of that is the simple fact that even with a stylus you just can't be as accurate as you'd like working at the default resolution. iOS was built around this fact and even with the higher PPI and 'resolution' of its Retina displays, the default text size remains fairly legible across all applications. That's only a quibble, I know. My overall point is that iOS and Android--for as much as I dislike the latter--are simply not built to be a desktop/laptop replacement and were never intended to serve the same purposes. In my opinion, even trying to put a full desktop on a tablet-sized device is doomed to failure unless the apps themselves can adjust to the actual display size rather than just the resolution of the display. If you want a full desktop on a 'tablet', then your tablet needs to be a minimum of 13" and even a 15" tablet would be hard to use for any length of time--not because of the weight, but because desktop font sizes would still be a strain on the eyes. On the other hand, at that size you really could do anything--including docking it when you have access to a table or desk.
Mobility and desktop capabilities need to be significantly different; Windows 8 demonstrates this fact with its Modern/Desktop pages. When you're walking down the street, you need large, easy to touch icons that don't distract you from your environment. Modern is perfect for that purpose. When you're at a table/desk, the Desktop is acceptable because you're more able to focus on your device. Two different situations, two different uses; same device.
Yes, I know I'm rambling. I only hope you see that while Windows 8 does the best at serving two different purposes, neither the hardware manufacturers nor the users seem to understand this yet.
I did mention that I agree with the essence of your statements. However, I do have to disagree with some of the specifics. As I've already said here, Windows 8 as it stands isn't really tablet-friendly once you get out of the "Modern" interface. A good portion of that is the simple fact that even with a stylus you just can't be as accurate as you'd like working at the default resolution. iOS was built around this fact and even with the higher PPI and 'resolution' of its Retina displays, the default text size remains fairly legible across all applications. That's only a quibble, I know. My overall point is that iOS and Android--for as much as I dislike the latter--are simply not built to be a desktop/laptop replacement and were never intended to serve the same purposes. In my opinion, even trying to put a full desktop on a tablet-sized device is doomed to failure unless the apps themselves can adjust to the actual display size rather than just the resolution of the display. If you want a full desktop on a 'tablet', then your tablet needs to be a minimum of 13" and even a 15" tablet would be hard to use for any length of time--not because of the weight, but because desktop font sizes would still be a strain on the eyes. On the other hand, at that size you really could do anything--including docking it when you have access to a table or desk.
Mobility and desktop capabilities need to be significantly different; Windows 8 demonstrates this fact with its Modern/Desktop pages. When you're walking down the street, you need large, easy to touch icons that don't distract you from your environment. Modern is perfect for that purpose. When you're at a table/desk, the Desktop is acceptable because you're more able to focus on your device. Two different situations, two different uses; same device.
Yes, I know I'm rambling. I only hope you see that while Windows 8 does the best at serving two different purposes, neither the hardware manufacturers nor the users seem to understand this yet.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
