Microsoft: 500M Will Run Windows 8 In 2013

Diriel said:
Hmm, I suppose the whole Unity / Gnome 3 / Win3-Metro thing just has me annoyed. You are right, I can BEAT them into submission :) It would be nice if I did not have to pull out the Brawl Stick and get mid-evil however.

Honestly, I got used to the touch interface on my Atrix pretty quickly. I have used a friends Kindle, and it was pretty reasonable. I may actually get one so I can more easily test out the EPub to .mob thing, and they do make nice readers.

But seriously how hard would it be for a dev to target Touch / Desktop if there were a clean API? The old saying goes something like "there is a tool for that" ;) well, there should be anyhow.

Diriel
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to beat anyone into submission, it's pretty clear that plenty of people are not going to like Windows 8 no matter what and I imagine that many people want to see it fail because they think the idea of tablet/desktop fusion is the wrong way to go.

Again all I'm saying that it works better than I think most opponents say. I'm not saying it the greatest solution, I'm not saying that maybe a separate tablet OS would be a better way or that a switchable tablet/desktop UI would be better.

But at this point Microsoft for its sake has to force the issue of tablets and touch. Microsoft is just behind in the mobile space and they best tool they have to get into tablets is their desktop dominance. Maybe that will backfire. But there's a lot of qualities in Windows 8 that no single OS can easily replicate and I think that's the angle here.

Windows 8 will piss off a lot of folks, I think a lot of folks will like it and everyone else in the middle really isn't going to care, they'll simple see a new version of Windows and adapt to it. That's my guess, most people just don't care that much about this stuff, they simply want a nice functional computer.
 
If I make people sick maybe its because the things they say simply don't make any sense in my experience and I simply point that out. I've got my x220t hooked to an external 24" monitor. I've got Word, OneNote, desktop IE, Metro IE, Visual Studio 11 and the Metro Mail client all open and I can switch between the desktop apps and have as many running on the desktop as I always have. Yes, only on full screen Metro app at a time, but the desktop is still there. There's simply no loss of multi-tasking with the apps you or I have always used, just some apps that you might want for some tasks and that work well on a tablet.
Click to expand...

What I am getting at .... is the Metro Paradigm adds in an extra layer that is a minor annoyance. I guess what I am saying is: I can switch from Touch Centric, to Desktop Centric pretty easily. I do get that when you "dock" you can use your keyboard and mouse, but you still have to navigate *around* Metro. You said that you use Keyboard shortcuts to limit that annoyance. Ok. Fair enough. MS does not always release an OS in Well Polished form. ME. XP ( 2k was better, hands down), Vista... pissed a bunch of folks off. Personally the only thing about Vista that really annoyed me was they purposely moved things around just for the sake of moving stuff. Then again there were the launch bugs, and UAC ... /sigh Now Win7 was my 2nd favorite MS OS hands down, right behind good old Win2k :) Third would be XP, I have used it and repaired it for friends for years now. I am the neighborhood IT dude. And I do not mind saying I have forcefully move a few folks over to Ubuntu ;)

Like I said before, I get what you are saying. Some of us get annoyed at things that people like you can not even recognize as being an annoyance. My friend Mark is like that.. works at the local Jr. College in the multimedia / server dept. He is an MS shill from the word go... "Oh man you will LOVE Windows ME...it is GREAT..." ... Not... He is an official MS Beta Site so I kind of expect that of him. He is also Very Highly MS trained... comes to fixing the hard to fix stuff, I go ask Mark :) Rarely, but I have at times.

Diriel
 
It seems pretty unlikely given that Windows 7 took 27 months to sell that many copies, and Vista NEVER reached 500million at all. Windows 8 would have to sell at about DOUBLE the rate of Windows 7 to reach that many copies by the end of 2013.


Ballmer saying stupid stuff isn't exactly new though:

“There’s no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance.”

“Google’s not a real company. It’s a house of cards.”

“You don’t need to be a computer scientist to use a Windows Phone. I think you do to use an Android Phone"

"I have never, honestly, thrown a chair in my life."
 
I actually do see what you are saying about MS being behind an EightBall. iOS and OSX are not exactly the same, they are separate. They just shake hands real well. I do not like Apple much, but I do respect what they have achieved with iOS - OSX.

I just wish for once they would really go all out. If they could pull off a Desktop / Touch - seamless hand off interface they would seriously kick some ass. At that point you would see a LOT of folks nodding their heads and breaking out the Cred Cards. Hell, me included!

Now, at least one person commented "they took out Aero, it looks terrible". I dunno, AERO was ok for a week or two, but eventually I turned it off. Not that I hated it, just was not overly into it. K.I.S.S. :) So you will not please everyone. I truly respect MS for biting the bullet and killing AERO. These days, as you say, they are trying to make one OS fit several different levels of hardware. They NEED Win8 to fit well... Vista hurt them pretty bad in regards to Intel Laptops etc.

On another note, I can hardly wait to see how well the newest ARM 15's do with Win8. Hell for that reason, and only that reason, I may actually buy an ARM / Win8 device to tinker with.

Diriel
 
kooda said:
I won't upgrade unless there is some compelling reason to switch ( which I haven't seen ). I don't have any tablet devices.
Click to expand...

I would expect Windows 8 upgrade sales to be on the light side. A couple of things that could change that are performance, battery life and Metro apps. I really have a hard time believing that there aren't going to be ANY Metro apps that at least some less than enthusiastic for Windows 8 types will want to run. For laptop users Metro apps can have one nice side effect, they can really boost your battery life.
 
Does microsoft really have 500 million employees? Or is it going to be given away free in happy meals? :eek:
 
Does microsoft really have 500 million employees? Or is it going to be given away free in happy meals?
Click to expand...
<<---| :D

In reality, I would like to want to go out and buy Win8... I just do not see MS paying enough attention to detail to make me want to go buy it. The last decade or so they have determinedly screwed stuff up enough to make me skeptical. Lets face it Win7 was one of those "Oh shit...ok guys FIX IT NOWZZZ!!!!" type of things (in regards to Vista).
 
So far the only 'must have' features' in Windows 8 I've seen are the Fast Boot and better data transfer info (more a nice to have on that one).

The rest is either useless to me or just minor progression from 7.

Some of my customers have asked for a 7 machines before 8 comes out after I left them with a Tablet laptop with 8 on it for half an hour. If a first intro to an OS puts that much fear into average Joes then that's a bad thing.
 
As someone who deals with fixing a lot of laptops, and some desktops, I agree fully with what daglesj just said. The sad thing is, I "cold cocked" my brother-in-law with Ubuntu 10-10 if memory serves (from vista) and he took to it fast and easy. He is the type who --fearlessly goes where only a-holes usually surf-- and just about every month was knocking on my door saying "Here, fix it, it is broke again. I will be back in 30 minutes, thanks" /facepalm ... 300 Virus / 1000 Malware later... yeah 30min my A$$!

So for quite a few peeps to say...umm... can I have whats out NOW rather than that new stuff please.. that should tell the MS peeps something. The guy I mention above surfs and IM's...well and transfers pics for storage. So his case was pretty easy :)
 
I'm sorry, but since Windows 95, I've had almost all the functionality in Windows I've ever needed.

The only additions that have mattered was USB support and the move to 64-bit. But I've had to pay over and over again. And improving Windows poor coding and base security doesn't count. That shouldn't have been bad in the first place.

Microsoft is a case study in market manipulation. Anti-competitive practices that go way back to early in DOS. And a lot of people have their livelihoods hooked to Microsoft's bandwagon both from working with Windows and at one time their investments in MS. So I'm not surprised they have defenders.

After Vista, I thought they may have smartened up a little. However, they look like they are back to their old tricks with Windows 8 for ARM. ARM is likely the future, imho. Pretty soon they'll be able to do your taxes, surf the web, answer e-mail, etc well enough to be a low cost alternative to laptops/desktops. And Microsoft is getting on the ground floor with their proprietary nonsense.
 
aol-1996-vs-microsoft-windows-8.jpg
 
Where I work we have over 900 computers. I am responsible for ~200 of them. XP has worked fine for us and is only now being replaced with Windows 7. The move to Windows 7 has been very smooth, with a very short learning curve.
But moving to Windows 8 would be catastrophic. Getting everyone up to speed would probably take a year or more. The lost production time would triple the cost of the upgrade.
And, I doubt our proprietary software would run on it.
I had Windows 8 running on a computer to get some reactions. It was hated by everyone that tried to use it. This makes the upgrade to Windows 8 even harder.

We are now looking at 'alternative' operating systems.

Stinky
 
Heatless, have you tried win8 on ARM? I haven't personally, but a friend of mine has and I've read a bit on it and it looks very very poor. That side of the market isn't going to go well for MS unless they seriously change the way their OS behaves with that architecture.

And also, you can't overlook how disjointed Metro and desktop interface apps are. It really feels, looks and behaves like two entirely different operating systems. If you want Metro apps on the desktop then you essentially have to buy a touchscreen. If you want to use desktop apps on a touchscreen then you really need a mouse. Which begs the question, why not separate the two entirely? At the moment windows 8 has some serious coherency issues and the desktop is treated as a legacy interface that sooner or later MS will ignore.

The worst thing of all is the price. On the desktop (which is essentially ignored) people really have no reason to upgrade and they likely won't. Most win8 desktops will be sweetheart deals with OEMs who will get a good deal on licensing fees. On the mobile tablet/phone end the pricing is exponentially worse. Considering it's still running like shit on ARM, this means MS is charging a lot more for their windows license than ARM makes for each chip sale including royalties. It doesn't stop there, though. x86 chips cost a lot more than competing ARM chips and Intel makes a very large profit per chip when compared to ARM as well. Considering these two costs, a win8 tablet is going to cost $100> just for the windows/x86 tax. For a high end $500 tablet, that means the OEMs lose 20% on their profit margins which in turn means shittier hardware as well. But it's an x86 tablet so wouldn't you want to pay more? Well, no. We've had windows tablets and windows phones and they've both bombed. Performance wise there might be a difference but this isn't something that's noticed by the end user and is negated by the bulkiness of the windows OS. Hell, if an ARM chip clocked at 1ghz can provide enough processing power then you know you don't need to buy Intel. It gets even worse if you consider the difference in the quality and quantity of applications when compared to android/iOS.

Windows has ignored the desktop and attempts to cater to the mobile crowd but will charge much more for a worse experience. Who the hell are they planning to sell to?
 
pelo said:
And also, you can't overlook how disjointed Metro and desktop interface apps are. It really feels, looks and behaves like two entirely different operating systems.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's the issue it feels almost schizophrenic. I've been using it for an hour or so most days for nearly three months and it still doesn't sit right. I cant get happy with it.

If it takes that long it's not working, for me anyway. Plus I find I only ever go to Metro to look for standard desktop apps via the Search. I've installed most of the Metro apps available but haven't really found one yet (of the sensible usable ones) that I cant really do in my browser.
 
pelo said:
Heatless, have you tried win8 on ARM? I haven't personally, but a friend of mine has and I've read a bit on it and it looks very very poor. That side of the market isn't going to go well for MS unless they seriously change the way their OS behaves with that architecture.
Click to expand...

No I've not seen Windows RT, technically Windows 8 is x86 only. Since it's not a complete product saying it runs like crap now may not mean anything. Smooth performance is an ESSENTIAL part of the Metro style.

pelo said:
And also, you can't overlook how disjointed Metro and desktop interface apps are. It really feels, looks and behaves like two entirely different operating systems. If you want Metro apps on the desktop then you essentially have to buy a touchscreen.
Click to expand...

I'll agree with the disjointed part, it is something that can be adapted to I think, but sure, it very different. However it's not true that you necessarily need a touch screen to run Metro apps. Everything in Windows 8 does work with a mouse and keyboard only, however a number of the Metro apps don't work as well as they should with a mouse and keyboard. Some, like the mail client, I think work better with a mouse a keyboard. There will certainly be Metro apps that work best with touch but here will also be ones that work best with mice and keyboards.

pelo said:
If you want to use desktop apps on a touchscreen then you really need a mouse. Which begs the question, why not separate the two entirely? At the moment windows 8 has some serious coherency issues and the desktop is treated as a legacy interface that sooner or later MS will ignore.
Click to expand...

Since most desktop apps are designed with only a mouse and keyboard in mind this is true. However, touch input is also available to the desktop, along with pen. Windows 8 may actually see a number of desktop Windows apps that actually work well with touch as more touch hardware enters the market.

pelo said:
The worst thing of all is the price. On the desktop (which is essentially ignored) people really have no reason to upgrade and they likely won't. Most win8 desktops will be sweetheart deals with OEMs who will get a good deal on licensing fees. On the mobile tablet/phone end the pricing is exponentially worse. Considering it's still running like shit on ARM, this means MS is charging a lot more for their windows license than ARM makes for each chip sale including royalties. It doesn't stop there, though. x86 chips cost a lot more than competing ARM chips and Intel makes a very large profit per chip when compared to ARM as well. Considering these two costs, a win8 tablet is going to cost $100> just for the windows/x86 tax. For a high end $500 tablet, that means the OEMs lose 20% on their profit margins which in turn means shittier hardware as well. But it's an x86 tablet so wouldn't you want to pay more? Well, no. We've had windows tablets and windows phones and they've both bombed. Performance wise there might be a difference but this isn't something that's noticed by the end user and is negated by the bulkiness of the windows OS. Hell, if an ARM chip clocked at 1ghz can provide enough processing power then you know you don't need to buy Intel. It gets even worse if you consider the difference in the quality and quantity of applications when compared to android/iOS.

Windows has ignored the desktop and attempts to cater to the mobile crowd but will charge much more for a worse experience. Who the hell are they planning to sell to?
Click to expand...

As is well understood, most people get Windows 8 with new hardware and I would expect that at least initially upgrade sales on Windows 8 will be very light. And we still haven't seen pricing info. My guess is that Microsoft might have some good upgrade deals to get the ball rolling.
 
As is well understood, most people get Windows 8 with new hardware and I would expect that at least initially upgrade sales on Windows 8 will be very light. And we still haven't seen pricing info. My guess is that Microsoft might have some good upgrade deals to get the ball rolling.
Click to expand...

We don't need the pricing info. Do you know how much ARM makes on royalties/licensing fees per chip? Literally cents per chip sold. Android and iOS are both completely free. Intel has always charged a premium for their chips and I don't see that changing. Furthermore, MS HAS to charge on their operating system. They have no choice. Unlike Google or Apple who make their money off ads/browsers and hardware, MS's bread and butter are licensing fees. If Microsoft cuts prices on their win8 licenses they're going to go out of business.

But even if it costs the same for equivalent hardware. So what? Which operating system/platform provides the end user with more? Well, compare win8's metro apps with Android and the Apple app store and you'll get your answer very quickly. Unless Win8 tablets/phones are significantly LESS expensive I wouldn't buy one and I'm sure this is true for most users. Unfortunately for MS, it's not going to be less expensive but rather more expensive and there's not much they can do about it.
 
Microsoft will just pull their "we're ending support on Windows 7 on XXX date", to make the business sector change over. Ending support for XP is the ONLY reason we are upgrading to Win7 in my company. (10000+ workstations)
 
Dekoth-E- said:
Given that Win 7 which is unquestioned one of the best if not the best OS Ms has ever produced has yet to hit that number. I find myself laughing uncontrollably at this notion.
Click to expand...

I'm not. Windows 8 is designed for x86 and ARM. I can easily see 500 million tablets, desktops, laptops and phone combined sold in 2013.

To put it in perspective, in a single day last October, 4 million iPhone 4s was sold.
 
pelo said:
But even if it costs the same for equivalent hardware. So what? Which operating system/platform provides the end user with more? Well, compare win8's metro apps with Android and the Apple app store and you'll get your answer very quickly. Unless Win8 tablets/phones are significantly LESS expensive I wouldn't buy one and I'm sure this is true for most users. Unfortunately for MS, it's not going to be less expensive but rather more expensive and there's not much they can do about it.
Click to expand...

You can't buy iOS without hardware so I don't know how you come to the conclusion it's free. And yes due to Microsoft Android for most Android device makers isn't free either. Yes initially the Metro app count will be ultra low compared to iOS and Android but you do get 4 full Office applications free.

But sure, I don't expect Windows RT to be that strong. Where Windows tablets will be interests is in the Atom and hybrid device space. There's simply no competitor to x86 tablets when it comes to all in one capabilities and full productivity. And I'm sure that Intel, Microsoft are the OEMs are fully aware of price issues, it's one of the historical issues with Windows tablets. We just don't have enough information at this point to know how it will play out.
 
Azhar said:
I'm not. Windows 8 is designed for x86 and ARM. I can easily see 500 million tablets, desktops, laptops and phone combined sold in 2013.

To put it in perspective, in a single day last October, 4 million iPhone 4s was sold.
Click to expand...

Plus Q4 of this year. 500 million is definitely ambitious but 400 million Windows 8 copies and Windows RT devices combined for 5 quarters doesn't seem like completely wishful thinking.
 
But sure, I don't expect Windows RT to be that strong. Where Windows tablets will be interests is in the Atom and hybrid device space. There's simply no competitor to x86 tablets when it comes to all in one capabilities and full productivity.
Click to expand...

On a tablet? Productivity? Are you buying one of those weird tablets that come with keyboards with the funky "laptop" naming scheme? :p

The advantages of windows legacy and compatibility goes away as soon as you stick it on a tablet. It does well on laptops/desktops because that's what people use for productivity. This is the reason winRT isn't going anywhere (the other is that the OS is too bulky and doesn't play well with ARM-based chip architecture). So the app availability weighs in much more heavily in the tablet space than it does elsewhere and that's where iOS and Android are both much better suited and in responsiveness to touch-based usage as well.

Whilst you need Apple specific hardware, technically iOS is still free. Android is completely free. MS can't compete with Apple in sex appeal and they won't be able to compete with Android in price nor apps. Sorry, dude. I really see no chance in hell for win8 succeeding in any segment of the market. It's a matter of too little too late and too costly.
 
not ready for a change, I'll stick to Windows 7 for a lot longer. Unless the windows 8 does like what I seen in the Iron Man movies, I might think about having this technology :D.
 
pelo said:
Heatless, have you tried win8 on ARM? I haven't personally, but a friend of mine has and I've read a bit on it and it looks very very poor. That side of the market isn't going to go well for MS unless they seriously change the way their OS behaves with that architecture.
Just like intel years ago, ARM's continuous improvement will solve Win8 bloat.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
pelo said:
On a tablet? Productivity? Are you buying one of those weird tablets that come with keyboards with the funky "laptop" naming scheme? :p

The advantages of windows legacy and compatibility goes away as soon as you stick it on a tablet. It does well on laptops/desktops because that's what people use for productivity. This is the reason winRT isn't going anywhere (the other is that the OS is too bulky and doesn't play well with ARM-based chip architecture). So the app availability weighs in much more heavily in the tablet space than it does elsewhere and that's where iOS and Android are both much better suited and in responsiveness to touch-based usage as well.
Click to expand...

This makes no sense when talking about Windows 8 (which is technically only x86) tablets. With my Samsung Series 7 Slate (maybe that's a laptop naming scheme to you) I can put it in a dock and use it like any other Windows laptop or desktop with a keyboard and mouse and even an external monitor. Take it out of the dock and I can use touch and/or pen and it works like a mobile OS tablet. Heck I can play Angry Birds with a mouse in or touch, and currently Angry Birds is only a desktop app. Devices like the S7S are extraordinarily flexible. The current problems with devices like these are cost and battery life. If those issues can be worked out, and clearly Intel has a vested interest in good x86 tablets and are working on them with OEMs and Microsoft, Windows 8 could be compelling on tablets.

pelo said:
Whilst you need Apple specific hardware, technically iOS is still free. Android is completely free. MS can't compete with Apple in sex appeal and they won't be able to compete with Android in price nor apps. Sorry, dude. I really see no chance in hell for win8 succeeding in any segment of the market. It's a matter of too little too late and too costly.
Click to expand...

Ok, iOS is free, just that every copy one obtains has to be done so with the purchase of a $400+ dollar device.

As for the sex appeal, well Microsoft doesn't make tablets, that's up to the OEMs but I'm pretty sure there are going to be some very good Windows 8 and Windows RT tablets. Microsoft will price what it has to price to be competitive and apps aren't going to be a problem. Even if Windows 8 and Windows RT are a flop, they'll still probably outsell Macs, iPads, Android tablets and Chromebooks combined. Far to big of a market too ignore. Plus since its a new market developers will be highly motivated to get their apps out ASAP to make a name for themselves in a virgin market.

Of all of this things that challenge Windows 8 and Windows RT the number of Metro apps for them isn't going to be one of those challenges.
 
Yes it is... Have you seen the Metro app selection? Mind you, Win8 is near release as well so unless there's an exponential increase in content creation people are going to be extremely disappointed. Btw, you just admitted that iOS and Android had better app stores but now they don't? Let's be real here. They do and they will.

The docking thing is interesting, but Android already offers that and as does Ubuntu. It could work for Windows but it can also work for the others here.

Microsoft will price what it has to price to be competitive and apps aren't going to be a problem. Even if Windows 8 and Windows RT are a flop, they'll still probably outsell Macs, iPads, Android tablets and Chromebooks combined.
Click to expand...

In what space? On the desktop? Sure. On tablets/phones? They've got no chance in hell. Win8 isn't about the desktop/laptop experience either so using this as leverage makes little sense. The point of win8 and Metro was to appeal to the emerging tablet/phone (really established by now, but emerging for MS) segment and there they will get absolutely plastered. Productivity and x86 compatibility, the two biggest advantages that windows carries, aren't worth crap on a phone/tablet. Remember, RIM offered the same thing with their phones/mobile OS when compared to Apple/Android and they've disappeared. Nobody wants productivity on the tablet/phone space because productivity on that end equates to building a laptop. Point being, if MS wants to sell win8 anywhere other than laptop/desktops then they can't use productivity and x86 compatibility as selling points. They need cheaper prices and a wider selection of applications and at the moment they're losing big time in the app department and the only way they'll win in price is if both Intel and MS are willing to sell at a loss.
 
pelo said:
Yes it is... Have you seen the Metro app selection? Mind you, Win8 is near release as well so unless there's an exponential increase in content creation people are going to be extremely disappointed. Btw, you just admitted that iOS and Android had better app stores but now they don't? Let's be real here. They do and they will.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how you're judging the number and quality of Metro apps on an OS that's not even finished

.
pelo said:
The docking thing is interesting, but Android already offers that and as does Ubuntu. It could work for Windows but it can also work for the others here.
Click to expand...

Actually there have been Windows tablets that had docs long before Android and there's at least on out for Windows now, the Iconia W500. Plus, where are the full function desktop mouse and keyboard apps for Android? The same argument that you use about Windows 8 and RT tablets suitability for productivity also applies to Android. And really, there's just no way that Android even comes close to Windows 8 in productivity when both are hooked to mice and keyboards.

pelo said:
In what space? On the desktop? Sure. On tablets/phones? They've got no chance in hell. Win8 isn't about the desktop/laptop experience either so using this as leverage makes little sense. The point of win8 and Metro was to appeal to the emerging tablet/phone (really established by now, but emerging for MS) segment and there they will get absolutely plastered. Productivity and x86 compatibility, the two biggest advantages that windows carries, aren't worth crap on a phone/tablet. Remember, RIM offered the same thing with their phones/mobile OS when compared to Apple/Android and they've disappeared. Nobody wants productivity on the tablet/phone space because productivity on that end equates to building a laptop. Point being, if MS wants to sell win8 anywhere other than laptop/desktops then they can't use productivity and x86 compatibility as selling points. They need cheaper prices and a wider selection of applications and at the moment they're losing big time in the app department and the only way they'll win in price is if both Intel and MS are willing to sell at a loss.
Click to expand...

All I'm saying is that the key to the success of Windows 8 tablets (I have already conceded that I don't think Windows RT tablets will do that well) with be the quality, price, size and weight, performance and battery life of x86 tablets in the $500 to $800 price range. If there x86 devices that can do these things, they will sell VERY well. Not enough to dethrone the iPad and not enough to hurt the cheapest Android devices but Android devices in that price range could see a lot of competitive issues.
 
$500-$800 is 1.5x-to-4x more expensive than competing Android ARM platforms.

http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/129808-nvidia-aims-for-quad-core-kal-el-tablets-at-199

I'd expect $500 on the lowest end of the scale for a proper working win8 x86 tablet and if you want comparable features with Android/Apple at $400 then expect to fork out over $700.

Economies of scale favor Microsoft on laptop/desktops, but it's also the one place that no one argues they'll win. Win8 selling on OEM produced desktops and laptops isn't the point, though. It's everywhere else that's the problem.
 
pelo said:
$500-$800 is 1.5x-to-4x more expensive than competing Android ARM platforms.
Click to expand...

There is no competing x86 Android platform that is 100% Windows compatible and runs full desktop productivity software and works as a touch and pen tablet at any price.
 
If you want productivity on the tablet/phone then you'll only have a Microsoft that quickly Blackburies itself into the ground. It's been attempted by them both and it's failed. You still haven't pointed out why it's different this time around.
 
pelo said:
If you want productivity on the tablet/phone then you'll only have a Microsoft that quickly Blackburies itself into the ground. It's been attempted by them both and it's failed. You still haven't pointed out why it's different this time around.
Click to expand...

Though Tablet PCs never sold in large numbers they have been around for 10 years and are still available. When coupled with a pen Windows tablet has some very unique capabilities. Sure they are niche but the tasks are productive and not easy to replicate on other platforms.

The main reason why Tablet PCs have sold in larger numbers are that they have traditionally been expensive, x86 hardware has been too hot and heavy and power hungry and Windows has up until Windows 8 been really a mouse and keyboard only OS even though support for touch and pens has been around for a while.

You're acting as though all of these problems are still present. Windows 8 on my Samsung Series 7 Slate is a completely superior tablet experience to any prior Windows version in absolutely every way. As much as people want to criticize Metro for being desktop and keyboard and mouse unfriendly on a touch capable tablet its virtually impossible to make the same characterization and not sound crazy. Even most Metro opponents will concede that Metro works on tablets. That's certainly not something many said of Windows 7.

Again, the success of Windows 8 on tablets will be tied to hardware. Good devices at good prices and I don't see why Windows 8 tablets should gain some traction.
 
Personally I am watching the ARM space for upcoming, and interesting, products. The ARM 15 series in quad core, with the newer graphics sound pretty decent. Not sure how Win8 will be, but I know Linux support will be reasonable, and it can be made to run reasonable with a UI that fits how I prefer to work and play.
 
lol

well i wont be part of that 500m, from what i have seen so far of win 8, i see no reason what so ever to upgrade from win 7 to win 8, win 7 is great, its like XP all over again but better lol
 
Savi said:
lol

well i wont be part of that 500m, from what i have seen so far of win 8, i see no reason what so ever to upgrade from win 7 to win 8, win 7 is great, its like XP all over again but better lol
Click to expand...

As I've said, I don't expect Windows 8 upgrade sales to do well, at least not initially. For desktop users who don't want Metro apps, or Storage Spaces or improved performance or file versioning or faster booting or settings syncing or improved multi-monitor support there's absolutely no reason to upgrade.
 
cant u just run win8 without the metro interface and just use the improvements in the "old" gui interface?
 
gigatexal said:
cant u just run win8 without the metro interface and just use the improvements in the "old" gui interface?
Click to expand...

Probably not, though Microsoft hasn't actually categorically denied this. But honestly if you look at HP's and Dell's performance, I think they might be more interested in selling Windows 8 and new touch capable hardware than Microsoft, so just another keyboard and mouse only PC OS isn't anything that means a much to Microsoft's partners that are desperate to sell something besides conventional PCs. In fact Dell made a comment that he expect touch capable machines to cost more, which isn't a shock, I do wonder how much more. OEMs are no doubt looking for devices with better margins.
 
I bought a touchscreen all-in-one PC for my father as a desktop replacement. It was pretty cheap, though the hardware wasn't exactly stellar; High end Pentium dual core SB with HD3000 graphics and a ~500gig HDD for ~$600. He hasn't used the touchscreen once, though :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top