Windows 8 ARMED!

[Snowdog]

I know I’m not the most objective observer on this topic, and let’s be honest, I don’t think you are either, but I’ve seen more interest in pen computing since the iPad came out, not less. Maybe it’s my bias but clearly it’s coming to Android and we’ll see how that plays out.

Android is quite open, we are going to see a lot of different third party options, but I doubt pen will ever be standard. I have nothing against having this as an optional feature, but I don't want the OS dependent on it. Back to my point when I brought up Pen. When you leave the pen out of a windows tablet, what have you got?? Windows tablets without a pen seems utterly pointless to me. Just an awkward interface to Desktop/KB apps. Which is why it attracts Pen aficionados such as yourself. But if you are not so into pen computing, windows tablet is a hard sell.

Going around in circles on this one but you seem to keep ignoring that this is what Microsoft has RIGHT NOW without the cost and risk developing for ARM, just let Intel do the work for them. What you’re saying is that Microsoft is going to spend a metric ton of hundred dollar bills to do NOTHING.

Possibly because people keep answering when you say this, and you ignore it. What risk? It's a port. Were the PPC/MIPS/Alpha ports a huge risk/expense. All indications are that MS is supporting both x86/ARM SoCs. The risk (like with PPC/Alpha/MIPS ports) will be on MS partners that bring doomed to fail ARM Windows machines to market. It's a cheap hedge. Throw it out there, let the partners risk failing products and if happens to catch on, MS benefits, if it doesn't and Intel continues to dominate Windows, MS benefits. It is a simple cheap hedge, lights a little fire under Intel.

Maybe, but there’s ZERO logic to it after Microsoft has been reminded countless times that they need an iPad and now Android competitor. And yes they could have used Windows CE but all I’m saying they are trying to do is to LEVERAGE Windows on tablet platforms, not replicate it. Once again, they have that TODAY and it’s clearly not working. Eventually even Microsoft and Ballmer get the memo.

The thing is (despite your claim that I can't see past my biases) I really can put myself in the shoes of others, and putting myself in the place of an MS insider, I think it is actually easy to make a case for going with essentially the same strategy with a few tweaks. This is just a quick one off the top of my head, if I were actually an insider and taking a week to build a slide deck on going for full windows NT again, I think a very compelling business case could be developed for the shakeout vs WinCE Tablet or even against a stripped non compatible NT kernel.

WinNT Assets:
Windows has superior pen capabilities, and massive legacy software base as unique assets.

Challenge mitigation:
Weight/battery life: Next Gen SoCs will finally get close enough to leveling playfield on battery life/weight.

Mediocre Touch experience: Awesome new Touch launcher, more MS pack in touch specific apps, new touch app store.


I do think this is the plan. New HW to cover their Battery/weight, new touch launcher software/pack in apps and appstore for the touch experience issues.

ARM is just a hedge/fire under Intels butt on SoCs and they will let the market decide which SoC wins (and it will be Intel).

You don't even have to assume Ballmer is incompetent to go this route, there is some merit. I just happen to think it will end up a day late and a dollar short.

 

[Tawnos]

I never said Windows was bloated for a Desktop OS. I don't consider it any more bloated than OSX.

But it should be obvious that it is fairly bloated compared to the smartphone OS used for Android/Apple tablets. I thought most people here understood that. If you doubt it you can look up system requirements for each. You can also read about how Windows performs on systems meeting those minimal requirements like an Atom with 1G of ram.

Do you really need me to Google it for you?

Nah, I can look directly at the code, or walk into the office next door and play with one of these systems you're claiming are slow . It really sounds like you're retorting to appeal to ridicule. "Ha! Everyone _knows_ Windows is too bloated to compare to tablet, it's common sense!"

I asked something like this earlier, and I repeat it now: can we limit the speculation on this, good or bad? I prefer product evaluations not to be tainted by unrealistic expectations made without supporting evidence.

 

[Red Falcon]

No RISC, no reward.

 

[Snowdog]

I asked something like this earlier, and I repeat it now: can we limit the speculation on this, good or bad? I prefer product evaluations not to be tainted by unrealistic expectations made without supporting evidence.

I was having an interesting and fairly civil conversation with heatless, I will see it to its conclusion.

Curious. Do you really think people will stop speculating on the internet because you don't like it?

I enjoy speculation. It is a kind of mystery game where you try to work out motivations/outcomes from limited information. Argument/Debate helps test the strength of those inferences.

 

[Tawnos]

I was having an interesting and fairly civil conversation with heatless, I will see it to its conclusion.

Filled with baseless claims and unsupported assertions.

Curious. Do you really think people will stop speculating on the internet because you don't like it?

Nope, but I can point out that there are so many better things one could do with their time and hope at least some get the message.

I enjoy speculation. It is a kind of mystery game where you try to work out motivations/outcomes from limited information. Argument/Debate helps test the strength of those inferences.

Debate requires evidence and analysis of facts. What you're doing is, well, this.

 

[Snowdog]

Debate requires evidence and analysis of facts. What you're doing is, well, this.

Re-read my post, I never said I was in a formal debate. Since you insist on being pedantic:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/debate
–noun
1.
a discussion, as of a public question in an assembly, involving opposing viewpoints:

You seem to keep jumping on me because I called Windows bloated in comparison to other tablet OS's, here are some facts that you must want because this your third interruption about this:

Windows:

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-CA/windows7/products/system-requirements
1 gigahertz (GHz) or faster 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor
1 gigabyte (GB) RAM (32-bit) or 2 GB RAM (64-bit)

iOS:

http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPad-Teardown/2183/2
This translates into ~128MB of memory per die, for 256 MB total. (NOT 512MB, as we previously reported.)

So Windows minimum requirement is 4 Times as much as iOS. Quadruple the requirements, counts as bloated in my book.

Also if you read review, you get the sense you really want to avoid running windows at the minimum specs:
http://apcmag.com/the-asus-eee-pc-t-91mt-review.htm

While Windows 7 is a good OS, the mix of Atom Processor and 1gb memory makes the T-91MT sluggish to use. Any speed boost from using a SSD is lost with the long boot time and large memory footprint.

Clearly the choice of Windows 7 Home Professional means that the touch screen is fully supported by the OS, and makes the netbook a viable choice for people who would never consider another operating system like Linux. Adding an extra 1gb memory module would improve the situation drastically, however, this will add to the T-91MT already premium price. The ideal situation would be for Microsoft to make a lighter variant of Windows for netbooks that is is not crippled like the Starter Edition.

Any other facts you require?

 

[Tawnos]

Re-read my post, I never said I was in a formal debate. Since you insist on being pedantic:


You seem to keep jumping on me because I called Windows bloated in comparison to other tablet OS's, here are some facts that you must want because this your third interruption about this:

Windows:


iOS:


So Windows minimum requirement is 4 Times as much as iOS. Quadruple the requirements, counts as bloated in my book.

Also if you read review, you get the sense you really want to avoid running windows at the minimum specs:
http://apcmag.com/the-asus-eee-pc-t-91mt-review.htm

Any other facts you require?

Eh, you don't know what you're talking about, and I'm okay with letting it go.

 

[heatlesssun]

When you leave the pen out of a windows tablet, what have you got?? Windows tablets without a pen seems utterly pointless to me. Just an awkward interface to Desktop/KB apps. Which is why it attracts Pen aficionados such as yourself. But if you are not so into pen computing, windows tablet is a hard sell.

You got this bit wrong. Yes, most apps on Windows are designed for keyboards and mice and don't have a nice touch UI that's correct. However, there are actually a decent number of core apps that work VERY well only with touch. Kindle, Nook, IE, FF, slow but growing number of games and media playback work perfectly fine touch only. I get the full web without having to deal with the pissing match between Adobe and Apple. It's a very fun and solid web browsing experience. Same with the other stuff I've mentioned. It does work better on better screens and faster hardware, web surfing on my tm2 is better than my HP Slate but that's a Core 2 Duo device with a discrete GPU vs an Atom with integrate graphics. The same could be said between a conventional laptop and netbook with the same specs. The device with better hardware provides a better user experience touchsreen device or not.

Where the pen comes into play for me and why I like pens is handwriting recognition and note taking in OneNote. If I'm in bed just doing passive stuff I use the touchscreen exclusively. If I want to input text I use the pen. Could use the on screen keyboard but I find inking much more pleasant, natural and faster, especially with one-handed operation

I almost NEVER use the pen for passive interaction, only when I'm doing something oddball and I will use it for manipulating photos and such. This combination of pen and touch are EXTREMELY efficient and liberating, allowing one to choose the best method for the situation at hand. I've seen no touch only device come anywhere close to allowing for this kind of productivity.

Possibly because people keep answering when you say this, and you ignore it. What risk? It's a port. Were the PPC/MIPS/Alpha ports a huge risk/expense. All indications are that MS is supporting both x86/ARM SoCs. The risk (like with PPC/Alpha/MIPS ports) will be on MS partners that bring doomed to fail ARM Windows machines to market. It's a cheap hedge. Throw it out there, let the partners risk failing products and if happens to catch on, MS benefits, if it doesn't and Intel continues to dominate Windows, MS benefits. It is a simple cheap hedge, lights a little fire under Intel.

And as I said before, those ports where NOT for a different form factor or devices with a low power footprint or different UI metaphor. This is Microsoft's tablet strategy, not simply a port to a new processing architecture. This is where you are TOTALLY underestimating the risk not understanding the goal of this effort. It’s is about slates and tablets. Period. Or it had better be. Are you not in agreement that Windows desktop isn’t well suited for touchscreen devices? Is it not said in the media almost EVERYDAY how Microsoft is losing out to Apple and Google in slates? How can one logically conclude that their tablet strategy is Windows desktop when it’s clear that that’s already failed? It’s as though you think that after all of this that Microsoft’s tablet strategy is Windows Desktop System on Chip Home Premium. It’s crystal clear that this WILL NOT WORK for consumption devices! It doesn’t work now. That said I wouldn’t call them all doomed if you go beyond consumption devices. While Android is ruling the roost right now in OEM slates in terms of numbers people will pay more for good Windows slates than anything Android based because of the productive capabilities. But again, that’s the situation now and Windows ARM effort isn’t about that niche market that they have the lion’s share of now anyway.

The thing is (despite your claim that I can't see past my biases) I really can put myself in the shoes of others, and putting myself in the place of an MS insider, I think it is actually easy to make a case for going with essentially the same strategy with a few tweaks. This is just a quick one off the top of my head, if I were actually an insider and taking a week to build a slide deck on going for full windows NT again, I think a very compelling business case could be developed for the shakeout vs WinCE Tablet or even against a stripped non compatible NT kernel.
You don't even have to assume Ballmer is incompetent to go this route, there is some merit. I just happen to think it will end up a day late and a dollar short.

I agree with a lot of this. But that LAST sentence is why there’s so much risk involved. This could all be a day late and a dollar short. R.I.P. Microsoft. I'd say a product that needs to do well to keep the company relevant particularly in the general consumer space represents enormous risk by definition.

 

[heatlesssun]

Also if you read review, you get the sense you really want to avoid running windows at the minimum specs:
http://apcmag.com/the-asus-eee-pc-t-91mt-review.htm

I do agree with a lot of this. Windows 7 runs MUCH better with 2GB of RAM. I do think that a lot of what you call bloat isn't so much bloat as just not needed on a slate device.

For instance my HP Slate 500 comes with Windows Professional, so it's got things like a web server and it'll even record HDTV OTA with the proper tuner. I think it's pretty safe to leave things out like in low, low cost slates as no one is going to use them as web servers or DVRs.

 

[Snowdog]

How can one logically conclude that their tablet strategy is Windows desktop when it’s clear that that’s already failed?

But it's only failed for 10 years. 12ths the Charm.

When I watch the section of the keynote on SoCs, to me it is essentially saying next Winodws version (Win8) is expanding hardware support to SoCs. Not that they are making a radically different mobile and desktop OS. They are exanding the HW that Windows runs on.

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/...ry.aspx?contentID=ces11_video_liveKeynoteDay1 (starts around 48:00)

The goal is Windows on a wide range of hardware, compatible with the great legacy of windows applications.

I have already outlined briefly the case I think would be made for it being full windows desktop. SoC for size/battery life. Much better new touch layer on top of Windows, more MS touch apps and a touch app store. In theory that addresses the major shortcomings.

The second reason I think it is full windows desktop (with the above additions) is that is essentially what they showed us at the keynote. They showed the Intel SoC running standard quicken and they highlighted full legacy support (over and over). If it were a stripped and lean tablet OS, it would not run all the legacy software. The ARM SoC version also appears to be exactly the same as the Intel SoC except for the CPU architechure. IOW it is full desktop windows as well. They weren't showing managed code apps, they were showing ports of full desktop apps (office).

I see the SoC port as necessary work to drive down power use for all MS mobile designs, but I think the will still run full windows desktop, and legacy SW.

Win8 running on tablets/laptops/workstations will be essentially the same, they are just making the kernel changes to deal with the bios/bus/chipset differences in an SoC. They might sell this as separate SKU for a lower price to better compete in mobile but it will essentially be the same upper layers software, offering the same compatibility with legacy and I believe the same touch software will come with both SoC build and regular x86 builds (if indeed they are even different SKUs).

My prediction on WinARM SoC is that it is a hedge that will go nowhere as it is a parallel effort with WinTel SoC and that has the legacy advantage.

I think I have been clear what I think the relations ship is between WinTel Standard, WinTel SoC, and WinARM SoC. (essentially identical fucntionality except loss of legacy apps in WinARM SoC). What do you extpect?

I'll bookmark this thread for further discussion when new info pops up to discuss.

 

[heatlesssun]

I think I have been clear what I think the relations ship is between WinTel Standard, WinTel SoC, and WinARM SoC. (essentially identical fucntionality except loss of legacy apps in WinARM SoC). What do you extpect?

And there's the rub. If you loose x86 compatibility why would you bring along the bloat that you refer to? By not having to support x86 compatibility you automatically loose a lot of bloat. If Microsoft could then modularize Windows better it then becomes easier to scale to a target hardware platform, I believe that Microsoft has made the same observation.

Whatever they do I would expect a fast slick UI, very good battery life and the ability to run well on cheap hardware. These are the keys.

The next step now is getting the beta out the door and I'm thinking that won't be much later than Summer.

 

[Snowdog]

And there's the rub. If you loose x86 compatibility why would you bring along the bloat that you refer to? By not having to support x86 compatibility you automatically loose a lot of bloat. If Microsoft could then modularize Windows better it then becomes easier to scale to a target hardware platform, I believe that Microsoft has made the same observation.

Whatever they do I would expect a fast slick UI, very good battery life and the ability to run well on cheap hardware. These are the keys.

The next step now is getting the beta out the door and I'm thinking that won't be much later than Summer.

But OTOH, do you think they won't have x86 SoC tablets, and only ARM SoC tablets??? Do you think you won't be able to install Win8 on your current tablets??

That seems dubious. If you have x86 tablets with legacy support, who is going to choose the ARM model without?

I think it is inevitable that ARM is just an afterthought.

Edit:
Interesting, I just read Paul Thurrotts thoughts on the Keynote, he seems to also think MS is continuing the windows everywhere strategy.
http://www.winsupersite.com/article...s-Everywhere-Wake-Up-Microsoft-It-s-2011.aspx

 

[Snowdog]

Win8 running on tablets/laptops/workstations will be essentially the same, they are just making the kernel changes to deal with the bios/bus/chipset differences in an SoC. They might sell this as separate SKU for a lower price to better compete in mobile but it will essentially be the same upper layers software, offering the same compatibility with legacy and I believe the same touch software will come with both SoC build and regular x86 builds (if indeed they are even different SKUs).

Quoting myself from the the past to compare with the Windows 8 reveal today:

http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/01/microsoft-unveils-windows-8-tablet-prototypes/

I think it is quite safe to say that as a I suspected it will still be full windows everywhere. Tablets and Desktop will still be running the same OS. There will be no lean and mean version for tablets. They will be counting on hardware advancement to get them the performance they need.