dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1359
share rss forum feed


Octavean
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-31
New York, NY
kudos:1

Next-Gen Windows 8 Tablets Will Nearly Eliminate Windows RT

quote:
By Ed Hardy, TabletPCReview Editor | Saturday, May 11, 2013 | 204 Reads

Windows 8 tablets with Intel's Bay Trail processor are scheduled to debut before the end of this year. These are going to offer performance and battery life that will drastically reduce demand for Windows RT.

The Problem

Ever since the successful release of the,....

»www.tabletpcreview.com/default.a···sID=4119

I have to say I found this quote interesting:

quote:
A great many consumers are either confused because they don't understand the difference between Windows RT and the full Windows 8, or they rejected the platform entirely because they think a tablet with Windows ought to act like one.

I've always maintained that there is room in the market for different kinds of tablets. Which is why I think X86 / X64 PC tablets and ARM tablets can coexist serving different functions with some overlap.

The idea that an ARM based tablet can't run full desktop PC software is not an alien concept. Apple iPad users have been living with that reality for quite some time and Android users would also likely have an equally subdued expectation.

Windows RT is no more and no less then its iOS and Android competition in this respect. IOS and Android devices are selling quite well though. So figuratively speaking, no one seems to look the iOS / Android gift horse in the mouth but Windows RT is dismissed summarily for essentially being on equal footing in terms of this feature (or lack thereof).


darcilicious
Cyber Librarian
Premium
join:2001-01-02
Forest Grove, OR
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Frontier FiOS

said by Octavean:

The idea that an ARM based tablet can't run full desktop PC software is not an alien concept. Apple iPad users have been living with that reality for quite some time

I think the difference here is that most Apple users probably came from an iPhone and then got an iPad (as opposed to having an OS X machine and then getting an iPad) -- I say this primarily due to the popularity of the iPhone among and beyond Mac users.

Windows however is a different beast -- more people are probably coming from the desktop world to a Windows (RT) tablet than from the Windows Phone world... just a guess on my part as to why there might be more confusion among Windows users at any rate.
--
♬ Dragon of good fortune struggles with the trickster Fox ♬


Octavean
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-31
New York, NY
kudos:1

That very well may be the case. Many people knew how to use the iPad the moment of release due to experience with the iPhone. Much like my experience with Windows 8 helped a great deal with my Server upgrade to Server 2012 Essentials,....hit the ground running no real problem.

Although, I think a lot of people fully understand the limitations of ARM based devices without having ever owned one.

There are always going to be people who don't understand but there may be no helping that as some may never understand (or care about) specific details of technology.

I guess what I am saying is that I have this notion that people even in the know will reject Windows RT because it won't run legacy Windows applications natively (I've heard of emulation) and instead buy an ARM based iOS or Android device that also won't run legacy Windows applications.

Maybe maybe not,.....

One thing I don't question much is that Windows users typically expect backward compatibility as a minimum feature or a given.

Apple had Rosetta but even that has fallen into a state of obsolescence with OS X 10.7.X and 10.8.X.



Tedsky

join:2009-05-01
Welland, ON

Octavean was saying ...

said by Octavean:

I guess what I am saying is that I have this notion that people even in the know will reject Windows RT because it won't run legacy Windows applications natively (I've heard of emulation) and instead buy an ARM based iOS or Android device that also won't run legacy Windows applications.

Recently, i acquired an Asus VivoTab TF600T WinRT (ARM) unit, and wonder whether this unit can be booted to Android via a USB stick inserted into the USB adapter that goes into the proprietary charging port underneath the unit?

Any thoughts anyone? Does the VivoTab TF600T's processor support Android via a USB-port boot up?

Thanks in advance,
Ted


aurgathor

join:2002-12-01
Lynnwood, WA
kudos:1

Just try it... it either works, or doesn't.



aurgathor

join:2002-12-01
Lynnwood, WA
kudos:1
reply to Octavean

I think MS should've created an emulator that would enable running x86/x64 apps, at least those that do not depend very heavily on the underlying hardware. Even with a speed penalty, a slow app is still better than a non-running app.
--
Wacky Races 2012!



Octavean
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-31
New York, NY
kudos:1
reply to Octavean

I think companies are often a bit concerned about releasing a product that won't perform well and thus won't reflect well on the product brand and or company.

Presumably this was Microsoft's excuse when they released Windows XP Media Center Edition initially as OEM only and while I didn't like the reasoning back then I eventually came to agree with it over time (after working with the product).

So as an official Microsoft preinstalled feature of Windows RT I don't think an emulator would reflect well on their efforts in this segment of the market (not that many think highly of their efforts here). However, as a downloadable add-on that might put a different spin on it. Still not sure about it though,...

Still, I'm not stuck on the idea that Microsoft should have to find a way to run x86 / x64 programs either by hook or by crook on Windows RT / ARM whereas Apple iOS and Google Android don't. Even if Microsoft did some kind of emulation I don't think it would effect sales of Windows RT tablets significantly.



aurgathor

join:2002-12-01
Lynnwood, WA
kudos:1

I think it all depends on the definition of "significantly".

I'm guessing 10% - 30% more units sold (and not returned after finding out what RT really is) with an emulator. Is that a lot? No, but I think it would still be a sizeable number.

Obviously, to keep RT alive, and not just on life support, MS needs to come up with additional pros and reasons, and methinks an x86/x64 emulator would be a pretty convincing one, especially if it's coupled with a price drop.

But what do I know...
--
Wacky Races 2012!



J E F F
Whatta Ya Think About Dat?
Premium
join:2004-04-01
Kitchener, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Rogers Portable ..
reply to Octavean

The interface on the RT and Pro are almost, if not, identical. The Pro is sold as an upgrade to the RT. Both are very different OS's though as they cannot run the same software.

The iOS and Android (Linux) have never looked liked the OS's that they are fashioned with. iOS looks and feels different than OS X, and Android really isn't anything like Linux in any shape or form.

And as already mentioned, both the Apple tablet and Android tablet came from wildly successful smart phones with identical OS's. No one expect nor wanted OS X or Linux on their smartphone. And everyone knew how to use the tablets when they came out, same software and everything.

Real issue here is MS's failure to get any traction in the smartphone category.
--
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. - Albert Einstein



aurgathor

join:2002-12-01
Lynnwood, WA
kudos:1

said by J E F F:

Both are very different OS's though as they cannot run the same software.

Native Metro apps should run on both. I don't know if that would still mean 2 separate executables, or is it some kind of intermediate code where the same program file would run on both.
--
Wacky Races 2012!


Octavean
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-31
New York, NY
kudos:1
reply to aurgathor

said by aurgathor:

I think it all depends on the definition of "significantly".

I'm guessing 10% - 30% more units sold (and not returned after finding out what RT really is) with an emulator. Is that a lot? No, but I think it would still be a sizeable number.

Obviously, to keep RT alive, and not just on life support, MS needs to come up with additional pros and reasons, and methinks an x86/x64 emulator would be a pretty convincing one, especially if it's coupled with a price drop.

But what do I know...

Well what does anyone really know (for sure) when talking about hypotheticals like this. Its all very academic at this point.

I'm sure I've posted this link before but here it goes again:


How to run normal x86 Windows apps on your Windows RT tablet


I still question the overall viability of it on a large scale (outside the hands of knowledgable users with reasonable expectations).

I personally would be more interested in free or very low cost applications running natively. So for example, buy Photoshop for Windows (x86 / x64) get a free version (or cheap version ~$0.99) for download onto Windows RT. Better still, buy some app on any platform and be able to download it for free on any other platform (Xbox, Wii, PlayStation, Roku, Kindle FireHD, iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad, Windows Store, Mac App store and so on). There are all sorts of problems with this approach too though (like not a snowball's chance in hell).

Practically speaking, emulation would serve to circumvent Metro and Metro apps which Microsoft is likely not interested in doing. Like iOS and Android devices, they are intended to be locked down to their respective stores / ecosystems to bolster sales there. This would seem to be what Microsoft wants for Windows RT.

For Windows users x86 / x64 applications are something of an ecosystem unto itself. This may have something to do with why many see the lack of x86 / x64 support in Windows RT as undesirable as it introduces a new and different ecosystem.


aurgathor

join:2002-12-01
Lynnwood, WA
kudos:1

said by Octavean:

Practically speaking, emulation would serve to circumvent Metro and Metro apps which Microsoft is likely not interested in doing. Like iOS and Android devices, they are intended to be locked down to their respective stores / ecosystems to bolster sales there. This would seem to be what Microsoft wants for Windows RT.

What MS wants is a rather complex issue since in this case they supply the HW, the OS, and some (most?) of the SW that runs on them. I think a few things should be very obvious, such as they would like to sell more devices (it's a major FAIL so far), and MS also wants to get their Metro interface on as many systems as possible, and an emulator can definitely help with both, but especially the first one. It could have some negative effect on their app store, but I think the increased sales of devices would more than compensate for that.

Edit: from dib22's link:
quote:
More than half of Windows 8 users just treat it like Windows 7
Almost nobody using Windows Store apps, survey finds

Just to prove my point!
--
Wacky Races 2012!


Octavean
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-31
New York, NY
kudos:1
reply to Octavean

I don't really question the point you're trying to make overall. Its a fair bet that Microsoft wants Windows RT devices to sell well. I think we just differ on speculation as to why Microsoft wants Windows RT devices to sell well.

I don't think Microsoft simply wants to sell Windows RT devices and for OEM launch partners, which seem to have largely stepped off the sinking ship, to simply sell Windows RT devices. I think Microsoft wants to establish a walled garden with steady revenue stream not unlike the Xbox-360, Apple online stores and so on,....

If Windows RT won't be lucrative or at least a source of revenue after the initial sale why not just drop it like the Kin / Kin2 / Zune,....? Judging from the numbers no one would miss it. Android and iOS are tied into such revenue streams and given Microsofts tactic of copying competing / successful models its hard to believe that their aim for Windows RT on ARM is any different.

Its a bit like asking for pre-jailbroken / rooted devices officially supported by the manufacturer at the point of first sale. No its not the same but the effect is potentially the same by providing a path around an intended revenue stream.