Minecraft Will Not be Certified for Windows 8

Your point, my point, what's the point?

No opinions or speculation here will really change anything about what will actually happen. Everyone hug each other and stop worrying about it. :)
 
Oh yea? How about you go hug yourself! How's that feel, huh? Feel good?
 
pelo said:
Your point:

MS won't lock down x86 because of potential lawsuits and angry customers.

My point:

MS has already started that locking down process (OEMs, WinRT, Bootloader). The lawsuits won't come because there are alternatives and they're not a monopoly anymore.
Click to expand...

No they won't lock it down because that's ridiculously dumb and they have no reason to do it. WinRT is a separate thing completely. Whether or not that is they way everything goes isn't even going to be a discussion for a decade or so.

Your point is lacking logic, reason, and several other ingredients. Bootloader lockdown? That's called security, not greed. OEM lockdown? Dozens of OEMs are releasing hardware the day Win8 launches, a lot of it really good stuff. And much more will follow. WinRT? It's inherently locked down because of what it is, a self-contained market. Just like iOS and Google Play. So basically you don't really have a point, just a lot of fear about unfounded things.
 
Okay I hadn't read the hug comments yet, can I get in on that action?
 
OldPueblo said:
No they won't lock it down because that's ridiculously dumb and they have no reason to do it. WinRT is a separate thing completely. Whether or not that is they way everything goes isn't even going to be a discussion for a decade or so.

Your point is lacking logic, reason, and several other ingredients. Bootloader lockdown? That's called security, not greed. OEM lockdown? Dozens of OEMs are releasing hardware the day Win8 launches, a lot of it really good stuff. And much more will follow. WinRT? It's inherently locked down because of what it is, a self-contained market. Just like iOS and Google Play. So basically you don't really have a point, just a lot of fear about unfounded things.
Click to expand...

So you had just as much hardware and software freedom on Win7 as you do on Win8? Next time you build a system, which version of Win8 will you buy? The system builders kit or the full version? and why?

And they would lock it down if it means they make more money. Incorporating everything through a 30% Microsoft swipe means they'll make more money. Corporate users won't ever upgrade to Win8 because it offers them nothing. Microsoft is offering support for Win7 through 2017.

WinRT? It's inherently locked down because of what it is, a self-contained market.
Click to expand...

That doesn't explain why it restricts the user to Metro only Microsoft approved software.

I can see a Windows 9 "Professional", where MS provides a desktop version but at an inflated price tag. I think it's very clear they're heading towards a locked down Metro-type of unified operating system for an overwhelming majority of users that stretches from phones to tablets to the desktop.
 
pelo said:
That doesn't explain why it restricts the user to Metro only Microsoft approved software.
Click to expand...

So how much expertise is there in writing fast and battery efficient Windows ARM desktop software? I guarantee if Microsoft had opened up the Windows RT desktop that there would be a mountain of crappy, slow and battery draining apps that would completely undermine the platform. Think of all the years the early Windows desktop suffered because of crap software.
 
heatlesssun said:
So how much expertise is there in writing fast and battery efficient Windows ARM desktop software? I guarantee if Microsoft had opened up the Windows RT desktop that there would be a mountain of crappy, slow and battery draining apps that would completely undermine the platform. Think of all the years the early Windows desktop suffered because of crap software.
Click to expand...

Yea, but how wouldn't this frame of thought stretch to the Surface tablet as well? Aren't the limiting factors of the Surface tablet the exact same? In fact, aren't they even worse? Ivy Bridge ULV processor in a tablet format will consume a lot of power even if the software is optimized, how do you think it will react with your typical desktop applications that haven't even been recompiled in the last 5+ years?

If Microsoft wants to offer a variety of devices, they'll need to do so under a single umbrella. The desktop x86 interface isn't it. It just won't work on a tablet or phone or their Xbox720/Durango/whatever it's called. They won't completely abandon the content creators and business users, but if they don't adapt that model they risk being blindsided by Android/iOS.
 
All I see in this thread is a lot of fearmongering, honestly...

The versions of Windows 8 that have analogous Windows 7 versions are just as open as their Windows 7 counterparts. There's nothing you can install on Windows 7 that you can't install on Windows 8.

WindowsRT is an alternate version targeted directly at the iPad and Android-based tablets, and it shouldn't even enter into this discussion, because the certification that Notch turned down DOES NOT APPLY to WindowsRT, it only applies to Windows 8.
 
pelo said:
Yea, but how wouldn't this frame of thought stretch to the Surface tablet as well? Aren't the limiting factors of the Surface tablet the exact same? In fact, aren't they even worse? Ivy Bridge ULV processor in a tablet format will consume a lot of power even if the software is optimized, how do you think it will react with your typical desktop applications that haven't even been recompiled in the last 5+ years?
Click to expand...

Not exactly sure what you're getting at. My point is that there is a lot more experience with desktop x86 software on Windows and zero with desktop ARM Windows software.

pelo said:
If Microsoft wants to offer a variety of devices, they'll need to do so under a single umbrella. The desktop x86 interface isn't it. It just won't work on a tablet or phone or their Xbox720/Durango/whatever it's called. They won't completely abandon the content creators and business users, but if they don't adapt that model they risk being blindsided by Android/iOS.
Click to expand...

Yes, the traditional desktop Windows UI is problematic on tablets, that's why Windows 8 got rid of the nearly useless on tablets Start Menu and went with the much more balanced Start Screen. Desktop software can be designed to be touch screen friendly like Office and Angry Birds and it's much easier to launch with the Start Screen.
 
pelo said:
So you had just as much hardware and software freedom on Win7 as you do on Win8? Next time you build a system, which version of Win8 will you buy? The system builders kit or the full version? and why?

And they would lock it down if it means they make more money. Incorporating everything through a 30% Microsoft swipe means they'll make more money. Corporate users won't ever upgrade to Win8 because it offers them nothing. Microsoft is offering support for Win7 through 2017.



That doesn't explain why it restricts the user to Metro only Microsoft approved software.

I can see a Windows 9 "Professional", where MS provides a desktop version but at an inflated price tag. I think it's very clear they're heading towards a locked down Metro-type of unified operating system for an overwhelming majority of users that stretches from phones to tablets to the desktop.
Click to expand...

No actually none of that is clear at all. But you can enjoy thinking about it I guess. Yes, my Win8 experience has so far been exactly the same as Win7 in terms of installing programs and using them, as intended. I have no idea what you mean by system builders kit, I honestly think you have no idea how Win8 works you're just misinterpreting everything you've reading about it. There is no version of Win8 that you can or will be able to buy that will be vastly different than Win7. WinRT will only come on tablets and it very likely will be abundantly clear that regular windows apps won't work on it.
 
pelo said:
Yea, but how wouldn't this frame of thought stretch to the Surface tablet as well? Aren't the limiting factors of the Surface tablet the exact same? In fact, aren't they even worse? Ivy Bridge ULV processor in a tablet format will consume a lot of power even if the software is optimized, how do you think it will react with your typical desktop applications that haven't even been recompiled in the last 5+ years?

If Microsoft wants to offer a variety of devices, they'll need to do so under a single umbrella. The desktop x86 interface isn't it. It just won't work on a tablet or phone or their Xbox720/Durango/whatever it's called. They won't completely abandon the content creators and business users, but if they don't adapt that model they risk being blindsided by Android/iOS.
Click to expand...

There are two very different surface tablets, you can't really lump them together when you're talking about them. Then, people will be buying the i5 one for it's form factor and not as much for the battery life. If battery life is paramount then they'll be buying something with a bigass battery with a more power friendly processor, not a really thin tablet. And x86 works very well on a tablet with Win8, I use one every day for work. Both metro and the desktop. As MS planned.
 
heatlesssun said:
Not exactly sure what you're getting at. My point is that there is a lot more experience with desktop x86 software on Windows and zero with desktop ARM Windows software.
Click to expand...

I was talking about the perf-per-watt and high power consumption. The 10W ULV Ivy i5's (might even be 17W?) are orders of magnitude higher than the SoCs in ARM-based tablets. On top of this, the processor in use for the Surface isn't an SoC either, which means you've got to add the RAM, the WiFi, the 3G/4G/LTE, and South Bridge chipset to the equation as well. This means the battery life isn't nearly as good as a purpose-built ARM SoC. The ARM stuff also has more optimized software whereas with the x86 version you'll get the desktop applications that have no idea what a tablet is and will be wondering why your supposed-to-be-a-desktop device is only clocked at just over 1Ghz :p
 
Minecraft would be better if it was named Micecraft and Windows 8 would be better if there was a starter version that only recognized 1 GB of RAM or something, but sold for $20 or something. Hehe, Micecraft!
 
SkribbelKat said:
Minecraft would be better if it was named Micecraft and Windows 8 would be better if there was a starter version that only recognized 1 GB of RAM or something, but sold for $20 or something. Hehe, Micecraft!
Click to expand...
or you could just upgrade to windows 8 for like 35 bucks???
 
Semantics said:
or you could just upgrade to windows 8 for like 35 bucks???
Click to expand...

$35 is like a 75% markup over $20. In some emerging markets, that's the difference between one and two months' pay. :( I really think a starter version is in Microsoft's best interest and I'm actually surprised they didn't maintain a starter SKU in their product line.
 
SkribbelKat said:
$35 is like a 75% markup over $20. In some emerging markets, that's the difference between one and two months' pay. :( I really think a starter version is in Microsoft's best interest and I'm actually surprised they didn't maintain a starter SKU in their product line.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be surprised if starter edition sold like shit in said emerging markets(couldn't find any numbers on it though), as why would they pay for something crippled when they can hit up their local black market or just pirate it entirely.
 
Semantics said:
I wouldn't be surprised if starter edition sold like shit in said emerging markets(couldn't find any numbers on it though), as why would they pay for something crippled when they can hit up their local black market or just pirate it entirely.
Click to expand...

It mostly ended up on systems from the OEM before shipment. The point, I think, was for cost reductions at the manufacturer to allow a lower price point to find its way to the users. I'm not 100% sure, but I think that starter was never directly retailed.
 
pelo said:
I was talking about the perf-per-watt and high power consumption. The 10W ULV Ivy i5's (might even be 17W?) are orders of magnitude higher than the SoCs in ARM-based tablets. On top of this, the processor in use for the Surface isn't an SoC either, which means you've got to add the RAM, the WiFi, the 3G/4G/LTE, and South Bridge chipset to the equation as well. This means the battery life isn't nearly as good as a purpose-built ARM SoC. The ARM stuff also has more optimized software whereas with the x86 version you'll get the desktop applications that have no idea what a tablet is and will be wondering why your supposed-to-be-a-desktop device is only clocked at just over 1Ghz :p
Click to expand...
Well Office 2013 is a desktop app that knows what a tablet is and in time there’ll probably be more tablet friendly desktop apps and even now there are desktop apps that work better on a tablet than many might think, particularly if one is using a pen and devices like the Galaxy Note have made pens not quite the failure that Apple would lead you to believe, heck pens are a pretty popular accessory on the iPad.

Ivy Bridge based tablets are essentially ultrabooks and while they don’t get great battery life compared to ARM or even Clover Trail tablets they are pretty powerful. The Core i5-3317U which is chip that’s in the new Samsung Series 7 Slate has a base clock of 1.7 Ghz with turbo up to 2.8, well above the 1 Ghz you mentioned. Heck, my current Series 7 Slate is powerful enough to run Visual Studio 2012 comfortably and can even play some PC games at low settings with just a Sandy Bridge. We’re talking about full x86 powered devices that weigh less than two pounds with around 5 to 6 hours of battery life. Those are not exactly bad specs.
 
heatlesssun said:
Well Office 2013 is a desktop app that knows what a tablet is and in time there’ll probably be more tablet friendly desktop apps and even now there are desktop apps that work better on a tablet than many might think, particularly if one is using a pen and devices like the Galaxy Note have made pens not quite the failure that Apple would lead you to believe, heck pens are a pretty popular accessory on the iPad.

Ivy Bridge based tablets are essentially ultrabooks and while they don’t get great battery life compared to ARM or even Clover Trail tablets they are pretty powerful. The Core i5-3317U which is chip that’s in the new Samsung Series 7 Slate has a base clock of 1.7 Ghz with turbo up to 2.8, well above the 1 Ghz you mentioned. Heck, my current Series 7 Slate is powerful enough to run Visual Studio 2012 comfortably and can even play some PC games at low settings with just a Sandy Bridge. We’re talking about full x86 powered devices that weigh less than two pounds with around 5 to 6 hours of battery life. Those are not exactly bad specs.
Click to expand...

I agree, but people buying tablets aren't buying them to run Visual Studio 2012 at great speeds.

Not that there isn't a market for that, it's just that the current tablet trend is towards content consumption and not content creation. Thus the x86 variants lack in the mobility aspect that's favored over raw compute power.

It'll take Haswell and Sky Lake in order for Intel to truly reach the level of performance-to-power consumption that's required to run a tablet at the power of a laptop. The atom variants, though they look good, aren't yet SoCs. The Medfield chips offer better compute power than most ARM SoCs (I say most because the Snapdragon from Qualcomm is within spitting distance already), but they suffer from legacy x86 software issues. At the end of the day, an Atom is still an Atom.
 
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012...e-toting-windows-8-tablet-hits-on-october-26/

That's sort of what I mean. At $800, that's already Ultrabook pricing, but instead of an i5 you get the i3 ULV and limited storage. Add the keyboard and the stand and you're already at Ultrabook/Ultraportable weight.

Though you'd have to wonder why you'd buy either the tablet or the Ultrabook when you can get what I did, an X220, with an IPS screen, twice the battery life, better keyboard, same weight, and still have access to the same Win8 OS at a lower price.

Thin, small and light won't happen with Ivy ULVs and the first-gen Microsoft Win8 tablets. I'd look to the first half of next year to Haswell to get something that separates itself from laptops/Ultrabooks as far as weight and size goes.
 
pelo said:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012...e-toting-windows-8-tablet-hits-on-october-26/

That's sort of what I mean. At $800, that's already Ultrabook pricing, but instead of an i5 you get the i3 ULV and limited storage. Add the keyboard and the stand and you're already at Ultrabook/Ultraportable weight.

Though you'd have to wonder why you'd buy either the tablet or the Ultrabook when you can get what I did, an X220, with an IPS screen, twice the battery life, better keyboard, same weight, and still have access to the same Win8 OS at a lower price.

Thin, small and light won't happen with Ivy ULVs and the first-gen Microsoft Win8 tablets. I'd look to the first half of next year to Haswell to get something that separates itself from laptops/Ultrabooks as far as weight and size goes.
Click to expand...

You mixing up a lot of specs and the comparisons do really match up. I have the x220 convertible which is a bit heavier than the conventional x220 so I do know that machine. These Ivy Bridge tablets are coming with 1080P screens which the x220 and even the x230 doesn't have. These Acers can get 7 to 8 hours of battery life in 2.3 pounds if you don't have a keyboard. And of course the standard x220 has no touch or pen capabilities.

If one wants a standard laptop, then get a standard laptop and sure you can get a bit cheaper device but you also don't get all of the features of tablet or hybrid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top