Looks like Windows 8 RT has failed

Discussion in 'Operating Systems' started by ComputerBox34, Apr 2, 2013.

  1. ComputerBox34

    ComputerBox34 Right in the Box

    Messages:
    10,977
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
  2. MrCrispy

    MrCrispy 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,944
    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    They will say what they have always been saying, that the future lies in hybrid devices like Ultrabooks and a single unified interface, i.e. Metro in RT.

    It is a good vision but clearly the user and market acceptance is just not there.
     
  3. MrCrispy

    MrCrispy 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,944
    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    Also I wonder if the price drop isn't due to the lower price of an RT license?
     
  4. valis1

    valis1 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    It's no surprise to me... if Microsoft provided W8 without Metro for the PC users... it may have been a hit above W7. Apart from the general consumer, touchscreen systems are a hit in the Medical sector... though some of them are running these systems off *nix based systems.

    I was lucky enough to lock down the $15 upgrade from W7, and MS unfortunately sent me the full retail DVD with two product key. lol.
     
  5. chinesepiratefood

    chinesepiratefood 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,629
    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2005
    I don't think RT is selling all that well but a few models being cut by $50 is by no means evidence that it has "failed".

    They aren't going to abandon it, and more apps + next gen ARM SOCs will improve sales more than likely. That is unless Intel manages to match performance per watt. Then RT will most likely die. But IF that happens then there is no need for RT, because it's primary advantage is battery life so why would they WANT to keep RT if it could be matched/exceeded by Intel's backward compatible offerings?
     
  6. ComputerBox34

    ComputerBox34 Right in the Box

    Messages:
    10,977
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    Dell was the only one cutting prices by $50...probably because that's all they could afford.

    Others were cutting by hundreds.

    Windows RT was doomed from the start simply because it made 0 sense. Why have a tablet that has the traditional desktop...that can only run ARM based/metro apps. The only ARM based app that I can think of that took advantage of desktop mode is Office. That's it. It's way too confusing for the average person to understand.
     
  7. chinesepiratefood

    chinesepiratefood 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,629
    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2005
    The desktop only exists in RT because Microsoft has not had time to replace all the needed desktop applications with Metro ones. It would have been worse if they had waited until RT no longer NEEDED the desktop (windows 9 or beyond) because at that point if Intel hadn't provided a low power alternative then the market for small Windows devices would not exist, it would be Windows XP tablets all over again.
     
  8. jmilcher

    jmilcher [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,268
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Where is heatlessun? I know he can some how spin this, being the M$ rep he is lol.

    RT is pretty much wrong place wrong time.
     
  9. ComputerBox34

    ComputerBox34 Right in the Box

    Messages:
    10,977
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    and this is a valid excuse because....?

    You make it sound like they put a half baked OS out there
     
  10. Wrench00

    Wrench00 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,423
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Heheh The Microsoft White Knight is strangely not present in this thread.

    Problem with Metro is that its terrible. It has such a bad stigma now associated with it because of Windows 8 that people are now shunning other MS products with the same doomed design.

    Not to mention you can't use it for business purposes. You need to licence it.. What a fucking joke.
     
  11. valis1

    valis1 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    LMAO... the day Microsoft completely removes the desktop, Microsoft stock will plummet.

    To those praising Metro... and it's functions... obviously you're obsessed with twitter and facebook and cannot comprehend organizational skills that the GUI desktop has provided users for nearly three decades. Metro is a failure... Touchscreen is Ok... Metro = Windows ME.
     
  12. MrCrispy

    MrCrispy 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,944
    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    Now that Sinofsky is gone, we are slowly seeing MS reverse some of the decisions he made - e.g. Blue will bring back unified search, i.e. no more 3 categories of search in the charms bar.

    I wonder how things would look if Sinofsky and Ballmer hadn't insisted so strongly on forcing Metro and killing off every other product to make Win 8 shine.
     
  13. MrCrispy

    MrCrispy 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,944
    Joined:
    May 14, 2007

    Wrong. The desktop exists because it IS Windows, its not a mobile OS. 'Removing' the desktop can be done by just removing the desktop tile in the Start screen, that won't make it a slim lean mobile OS.

    The intention of RT has always been to be a hybrid OS so it can run both kinds of apps. WoA is still a huge OS. Metro still is just a wrapper on top of Win32. So it's never ever going to be as slim as Android/iOS, and in fact MS already has a mobile OS which they could've used for tablets if they wanted.
     
  14. bigdogchris

    bigdogchris [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    17,886
    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Microsoft should not of gone with a unified approach. They should of launched WinRT as it's own unique product, like Apple did with iOS.

    Regardless of your opinion of Windows 8, the whole thing has been a distraction from what is important and that is Microsoft finding a way into the tablet market. The tablet market is exploding so you can't blame Microsoft for wanting a piece of that.

    Microsoft tried to heavy-hand their way into the OS market by basically saying "if you like our OS on a desktop, here it is on a tablet!" That vision seriously backfired because rather than getting a OS truly developed for a tablet or truly developed for a desktop, you got a hybrid OS that is kinda one -kinda the other. When you try to make everyone happy you make no one happy.

    A more successful launch would of been:

    1. WinRT on tablets without desktop mode. Focus on touch and the devices.
    2. No x86 tablets. You don't need a bunch of OS options. Give me one thing that works and is easy to use.
    3. Windows 8 without Metro. This fits into no x86 tablets. Developers don't have to focus on 2 UI's across three OSes, but rather 2 different UI's on 2 different devices.
    4. No unified OS. Rather, invest resources from unification budget put into Enterprise utilities for management and deployment of WinRT.
    5. Invest remaining resources into adding Windows 8 features for desktops/laptop OS improvement. If it wasn't for Metro, I would of halted our 7 Ent. deployment and switched to 8 in a heartbeat.

    The time and money that Microsoft spent making the unified OS could of been put into making both products better on their own devices. WinRT could of been better and Windows 8 could of been better if they were built separately.

    There is no law or proof saying that tablet and desktop devices must be identical in how you use them to be successful Apple proved this.
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2013
  15. MrCrispy

    MrCrispy 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,944
    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    You are forgetting one imp fact - the hope at Redmond was that the future would consist of Win 8 ultrabooks. Every single demo of Win 8 back from its early days was done on a hybrid pc. Never on a desktop pc/laptop. MS and Intel hoped Ultrabooks would be the next big thing and desktops and laptops would die out.

    On that class of device, Win 8 sort of makes sense. The problem is its the only device on which it makes sense. Using Win 8 on a non touch pc, or a RT tablet like Surface, is not a good experience. So they compromised everything for the sake of hybrid and bet the future on it.
     
  16. ComputerBox34

    ComputerBox34 Right in the Box

    Messages:
    10,977
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    The only difference that I can tell between ultrabooks and traditional laptops are that ultrabooks are sleeker, thinner, and lighter. Some have touchscreens but they are still all x86 based devices. It's really just a rebrand of the term "laptop." If MS was trying to put all of their eggs in this basket, then they are much more short sighted than I previously thought.

    Windows 8 is perfect on a Surface-like device. One where the screen docks with a keyboard and be used like a traditional laptop....and then later undocked if you want to use the screen only for presentation purposes or on the go. (although they have to do something about the flimsy keyboard, needs to be able to stand on its own without the kickstand) Anything else and there's huge compromises.
     
  17. valis1

    valis1 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    Hey MrCrispy, I fixed it for you.
     
  18. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,022
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    There's also the fact that it needs to be more competitive.

    I mean, looking at Asus's tablet line on Newegg, there were fully fledged x86 Atom Windows 8 tablets that cost less than the cheapest Windows RT tablet. Who in their right mind would seriously consider a Windows RT tablet over a Windows 8 tablet?

    And let's not get into how expensive it is compared to Android tablets of similar hardware...

    Edit: Case in point:

    Asus ME400C with 64gb SSD is $480, has an Atom Z2760.
    Asus Vivo Tab RT with 64gb SSD is $600, and has the Tegra 3.
    Asus Transformer TF700T with 64gb is $530, and has the Tegra 3.

    There is simply no value to be had for a Windows RT tablet.
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2013
  19. pxc

    pxc [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    33,064
    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2000
    The whole big problem with the $500-$800 WinRT tablets were its competition.

    WinRT has much less software selection than iOS and Android
    WinRT can be sluggish compared to other tablets with similar CPU capability
    WinRT tablets come with mediocre LCDs, at mediocre resolutions

    Also, WinRT isn't "cool", along with the other 3 things above, make it a must miss for most potential buyers.

    If someone had $500 and asked my opinion, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend a current gen iPad 16GB (retina LCD, fast CPU, fast GPU, huge selection of apps in virtually every category... besides MS Office). I can't think of a good reason why I would recommend a WinRT tablet to a general users, even with a $50 price drop.
     
  20. MrCrispy

    MrCrispy 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,944
    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    I think the hope was RT would be much more popular with app developers, which means apps and publicity, + huge MS ad budget, which would lead to more demand etc etc. MS basically wanted to recreate Apple's success by having a product that was so 'desirable' people would buy it. Its anything but desirable based on public perception. Same problem exists for Windows Phone. And because customers aren't there, content creators, oem's and developers are starting to ignore the platform and go where the money is (iOS and Android).

    This is all basic stuff, MS simply cannot buy its way into every category. They did this with Xbox (lost billions for years but now makes a profit), failed miserably with Windows Mobile, Zune, Kin etc.
     
  21. bigdogchris

    bigdogchris [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    17,886
    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Ultrabooks should eventually be able to be powered by ARM, so WinRT could still work for that.
     
  22. Fort_Major

    Fort_Major Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    425
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2006
    Pricecuts do not mean failure; in fact if anything it has shown that they sometimes breathe new life into products by lowering entry level.

    Microsoft losing several of it's major (and arguably one of its best and the other one of its largest) OEM Hardware partners for Windows RT is probably going to be a much bigger stickler for the long term longevity and feasibility of Windows RT.
     
  23. wonderfield

    wonderfield [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,396
    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2011
    I don't believe that, no. What are the 'needed desktop applications'? Office 2013 could have been developed similarly to the way Metro IE10 was: as a Metro interface to a desktop application. Why it wasn't speaks to what Microsoft was actually attempting to do with RT. The rest — Notepad, Calculator, Paint, etc. — are so trivial that including a desktop due to their potential absence in Metro would have been completely foolish. These are some of the least complex Windows applications ever developed, and replacing them with Metro equivalents would have been trivial to the point of absurdity.
     
  24. heatlesssun

    heatlesssun [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    44,157
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    You generally beat me to most Windows 8/RT threads.;)

    I've never been a big fan of Windows RT as in Windows on ARM since it doesn't run desktop software. The first Windows 8 device I bought was a Clover Trail Atom. Why? Because it does everything a Windows RT device does, with about the same battery life, weight, bit better performance and it runs desktop software. And that's kind of a big deal for Windows tablet buyers.

    That said we'll see how things pan out. Microsoft officially lowered the resolution of Windows 8/RT certified devices to 1024x768 and there are signs that Microsoft is including in the Blue update the ability to run Windows 8/RT on 7" or 8" devices. And there's still one piece of the puzzle that we don't know about and that is the Xbox. There was talk of a Surface Xbox gaming tablet. Seriously, a Windows 8/RT based gaming tablet with the ability to run some Xbox games? Why not? That would have a decent chance of doing pretty well.

    So at this point I'm willing to call Windows RT in its current product form a failure but I don't think that it reflects so much on Windows 8 in general as it reflects prices that are too high with a device that lacks the ability to run desktop apps. But I doubt that Microsoft is going to abandon Windows on ARM, but it may not selling licenses and general purpose computing devices under the Windows RT name and use the OS in gaming devices or something else under its one brands.
     
  25. heatlesssun

    heatlesssun [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    44,157
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    I've read somewhere that that's what the Office team had proposed but it was shot down, so sure why. Not really sure how that would have worked in that there's still a lot of dialogs in Office 2013 that are straight out of the 1990's, no attempt was made to even simply enlarge buttons on small dialog windows. At any rate a Metro version of Office is on the way no doubt, but I don't think it will be meant to be a full replacement of the desktop version as the Windows RT API just doesn't support a lot of the concepts of conventional desktop applications currently.
     
  26. Fort_Major

    Fort_Major Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    425
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2006
    I noticed your absence also.
    I don't think this will help Microsoft much.
    Come on, you have gotta be kidding me. You see people spending money on a 4th device, in addition to the xbox/sp3/wii they probably already have, the iPhone/Nexus and the iPad they have. No, I don't think this will help Microsoft either. If every single device sold for the past (however long it takes them to get this) automatically plays these games then that's a bonus to people who suckered in and got the RT tablet and remembered what bookend they stuck it on. I don't really see it as a selling point, since this is not something people base their buying decision on.


    Somebody needs to post that on the front pages of [H]!!!!
     
  27. pxc

    pxc [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    33,064
    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2000
    I'm not sure putting an ARM processor in an Ultrabook will solve the problems the WinRT platform has. You can already buy a dockable WinRT tablet + keyboard (package is essentially an Ultrabook form in size and weight), for insanely expensive prices.

    For around the same price, you can buy an ULV IB Ultrabook which blows it away in virtually every spec, give or take an hour or two of battery life, a lb of weight and different screen sizes.
     
  28. Fort_Major

    Fort_Major Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    425
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2006
    Short of Microsoft RT/Metro API team putting the pedal to the modal in a manner that they've not done in over a decade+ I doubt there is any way they can make Metro office do much more than what Google's version of Office does. You could make maybe a 5 dollar Spreadsheet App that might be lucky if it mimics the behavior from one of the world's first widespread selling spreadsheet
    [​IMG]

    You keep the colors and the fonts the same for pure Retro-ness
     
  29. heatlesssun

    heatlesssun [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    44,157
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    And you generally beat me to these threads as well.;)

    It would allow for Windows 8/RT to run on smaller and cheaper devices and isn't pricing something that many people have pointed out is a problem for Microsoft with tablets?

    If such a device had deep integration into the Xbox then I think it could do better than you might think if it were priced right and could be used as a controller for the XBox.

    You're too funny!:D I've from day one never been a big fan of Windows RT and this forum is full of my comments about Clover Trail tablets being superior and I've always recommended Clover Trail devices over Windows RT devices. Hell, if a supposed Microsoft fanboy like myself isn't recommending Windows RT devices, do you really thought I saw much of a chance of success? :confused:
     
  30. heatlesssun

    heatlesssun [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    44,157
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    There are a few Metro apps out there that prove that decent productivity apps can be built with Metro. There's a very nice diagraming app in the Windows 8 that works well across different input methods, no Visio in power but it does show what can be done:http://grapholite.com/#Diagrams

    There's always people that point out that tools like Office are too complex, I think a Metro version of Office could be a great way of delivering a clean and basic set of tools for people that only need that kind of capability.
     
  31. MrCrispy

    MrCrispy 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,944
    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    The reason no other MS products, like Office, use Metro is Sinofsky - he kept all Win 8 knowledge in the Windows team and there was a lot of internal friction at MS About this. Sinofsky made sure everything not done by him got cancelled/discarded.

    You know what, heatless has from day one said that Win 8 works best on a hybrid device, and that is my conclusion as well. It's too bad all other form factors were compromised for this one.
     
  32. bigdogchris

    bigdogchris [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    17,886
    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    I wonder if an adoption rate slower than Vista proves that the unified OS is the wrong decision?
     
  33. yossarian

    yossarian Gawd

    Messages:
    798
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2004
  34. valis1

    valis1 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    183
    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010

    HOLYFUCK LMAO!! Windows did NOT develop the "desktop" ... it was around far before Windows 3.1... IBM was the first to develop what is known as the desktop!!


     
  35. Fort_Major

    Fort_Major Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    425
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2006
    Except we all know Microsoft can't balance two things at one and it's "not your pc", "not your OS" and it's "not your Office" it's Microsoft. And you use it how Microsoft dictates and not how "you who paid the money for it" wishes to.

    So you will ultimately end up with one version of Office. I'm sure that Office is getting prepped in a handbasket on the Nile river just like Visual Studio was.
     
  36. Fort_Major

    Fort_Major Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    425
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2006
    Pro Argument for Microsoft's killing the desktop:
    Cite smartphone and tablet sales surging

    Fail to mention Microsoft has never done "well" in either arenas and has long since been considered a major competitor.

    Winning news article. Print it!
     
  37. Fort_Major

    Fort_Major Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    425
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2006
  38. heatlesssun

    heatlesssun [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    44,157
    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    People who say this never have any explanation as to how this is supposed to happen. Dumping isn't even the tip of the iceberg here. There's simply far too much code and capability built into the Windows desktop for it go away anytime in the next couple of decades. I could see Microsoft transition more things to Metro, having a Metro only option for Windows, but as long as the desktop metaphor remains popular, and even with declining sales it's still a huge market, I don't see how Microsoft can just drop it. Heck Metro apps are actually nothing more than desktop apps, they are COM based like ActiveX controls but heavily sand boxed and with now windowing controls.
     
  39. MrCrispy

    MrCrispy 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,944
    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    That pcworld article is a joke - the site is no better than a random blog, should be ashamed.

    The desktop is not going anywhere, it IS Windows and the world runs on it. Anyone claiming 'desktop is dead' is a complete and utter idiot with no clue.

    What Microsoft is trying to do is try to stay relevant in a world where everyone thinks an iPad is a computer and mobile is becoming increasingly popular. Unlike Apple, they don't have the luxury of abandoning legacy support and a fan base that will follow them blindly. Or like Google where the revenue comes from services and the platform is free.

    They HAD to make Windows a choice on tablets/phones etc. In doing so, maybe they have moved too far and alienated their core audience, while at the same time the expected new users on tablets aren't coming.

    The problem is now how do they proceed? Simply wait? Revert? Spend more money?
     
  40. Eman D. Rahym

    Eman D. Rahym Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    424
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    Are not we seeing that with Blue? From what I've read of the leaked build Microsoft is working very hard to address complaints about Metro without actually abandoning Metro itself.

    No way is Microsoft going to walk away from the cash cow that is the Windows desktop. On the other hand, neither is Microsoft going to ignore the paradigm shift happening right before our eyes. PC sales are down, not because of Windows 8, but because there are suddenly viable alternatives to the PC itself. Microsoft would be nuts not to go after that market.

    With regard to RT "failing," doesn't it seem a little premature to make that declaration five months after its release based only on one article? I don't seem to recall the iPad or Android jumping out of the gates either. Microsoft knows they are way behind iOS and Android. They also know that market is where the growth is. Competing in that market is going to take pretty much re-imagining the company from top to bottom. Will they succeed? Who knows? I wouldn't count them out just yet, though.