×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

HP Kills ARM-based Windows Tablet, Likely Thanks To Microsoft Surface

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the children-who-never-learned-to-share dept.

HP 192

MojoKid writes "That didn't take long. HP has publicly confirmed that it has cancelled plans to bring a Windows RT (aka Windows on ARM) tablet to market in time for the Windows 8 debut. The company has decided to focus on its x86 customer base instead. HP spokesperson Marlene Somsak has said, 'The decision was influenced by input from our customers. The robust and established ecosystem of x86 applications provides the best customer experience at this time and in the immediate future.' Sources at HP have confirmed that Microsoft's Surface unveil last week was a huge factor in this decision. HP isn't willing to go head to head with Microsoft when it comes to launching new, unproven products. Abandoning x86 is impossible, but dropping Windows ARM is a way for the computer manufacturer to signal its supreme displeasure without unduly risking market share. It also increases the burden on Surface itself. If other OEMs follow suit, MS could find itself as the only vendor selling ARM-based W8 tablets."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

192 comments

Not that HP was ever very good at Tablets But... (5, Interesting)

CajunArson (465943) | about 2 years ago | (#40498873)

HP's track record with tablets is not all that impressive, but this is a big blow to Windows 8... which frankly *only* makes sense on a tablet unless there is a de-metrofication project going on in the skunkworks.

Having said that.. HP could jump onto Android or even attempt to bring some zombified version of WebOS back from the dead using the ARM platform.

Re:Not that HP was ever very good at Tablets But.. (5, Insightful)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | about 2 years ago | (#40499121)

Well... I'm actually more surprised that HP refuses to take the lead on ANY consumer-related goods. Or enterprise products/services, for that matter.

Man, I thought for a while that HP might be able to turn it around and get back to its roots of being a kick-ass engineering company, but it's pretty obvious that those days are now gone. I'm pretty sure that even the old engineering fogeys who might have been able to tell the yung'uns about what HP culture was like before have left the ship. At this point, it's just a large computer manufacturing company like Dell and Acer, with some enterprise big iron and consulting thrown in.

Sad to see them go.

Re:Not that HP was ever very good at Tablets But.. (-1, Offtopic)

symbolset (646467) | about 2 years ago | (#40499217)

I was expecting the usual Microsoft team to get on here and start bashing their longtime partner. Thanks for not disappointing me. See you in the Dell thread!

Re:Not that HP was ever very good at Tablets But.. (1, Troll)

recoiledsnake (879048) | about 2 years ago | (#40499669)

I was expecting the usual Microsoft team to get on here and start bashing their longtime partner. Thanks for not disappointing me. See you in the Dell thread!

Wow you make it sound as if Microsoft cheated on their loyal spouse on their 25 year anniversary or something.

These are business entities and do things as long as they make them profits.

E.g. http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/03/09/2015233/hp-to-put-webos-on-pcs-in-2012 [slashdot.org]
http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/11/02/09/2316203/hp-unveils-webos-tablet-plans-webos-computer [slashdot.org]

I was expecting the usual Microsoft haters to show up and sympathize with poor innovative HP being held back by Microsoft, and you didn't disappoint.

Re:Not that HP was ever very good at Tablets But.. (1)

symbolset (646467) | about 2 years ago | (#40499871)

I was expecting that too. It would surprise if an HP contingent showed up though. They have more class than that usually.

Re:Not that HP was ever very good at Tablets But.. (-1, Offtopic)

symbolset (646467) | about 2 years ago | (#40499369)

Sorry for the insult, my mistake. I can see you're not in that crew.

Agilent (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40499815)

The company you are remembering is now called Agilent, and doing quite well.

HP is the demon-spawn of the Carly.

Re:Agilent (1)

UnknownSoldier (67820) | about 2 years ago | (#40500451)

HP jumped the shark long before Carly joined in 1999. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carly_Fiorina [wikipedia.org] )

They have a habit of buying tech companies no one wants.

Back in 1990 they had a *ultra* low power 128-bit (!!) CPU (Saturn) used in the HP48 SX / GX line of calculators and basically did nothing with the tech.

They are basically run around like a chicken with its head cut off. Hey guys we're don't know where we are going but we are making great progress getting there!

HP: Not Quite Dead Yet !

The "glory" days where HP Engineering meant quality were dead by the mid 1990's.

Re:Not that HP was ever very good at Tablets But.. (4, Insightful)

Astronomerguy (1541977) | about 2 years ago | (#40499921)

Well... I'm actually more surprised that HP refuses to take the lead on ANY consumer-related goods. Or enterprise products/services, for that matter.

Man, I thought for a while that HP might be able to turn it around and get back to its roots of being a kick-ass engineering company, but it's pretty obvious that those days are now gone. I'm pretty sure that even the old engineering fogeys who might have been able to tell the yung'uns about what HP culture was like before have left the ship. At this point, it's just a large computer manufacturing company like Dell and Acer, with some enterprise big iron and consulting thrown in.

Sad to see them go.

All the engineers left when HP split into 2 companies a few years ago. They're still going strong at Agilent: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agilent_Technologies [wikipedia.org]

Re:Not that HP was ever very good at Tablets But.. (2)

idontgno (624372) | about 2 years ago | (#40500047)

All the engineers left when HP split into 2 companies a few years ago. They're still going strong at Agilent

So, the corporation known as HP is the "B" Ark, except the Golgafrinchans actually sent the "A" Ark instead?

This explains a great deal about HP in the last decade-plus.

Re:Not that HP was ever very good at Tablets But.. (0)

man_of_mr_e (217855) | about 2 years ago | (#40499533)

This is only the ARM tablet they are canceling, they're not canceling their x86 tablets, which will also run Windows 8.

Re:Not that HP was ever very good at Tablets But.. (4, Insightful)

Sir_Sri (199544) | about 2 years ago | (#40499761)

HP's track record with tablets is not all that impressive, but this is a big blow to Windows 8

Quite the opposite. Window RT is a monumentally stupid idea. HP not supporting it is nothing but good. The level of consumer confusion it will create is disastrous. "Why does this work on your tablet and not mine" why does my tablet not have an arm, or need an arm?

If microsoft wants to gradually trend the market towards having split arm and x86 business at the same time they can do it themselves, no one in their right mind should be producing windows arm anything.

Now microsoft doing it might shame intel into competing better and so on, that's good. But theoretical competition that drives innovation being good isn't the same as confusing users who, for the last 30 years have never understood system requirements and adding a new completely completely unresolvable compatibility problem is really bad for the windows market and stands in opposition to the one thing they're trying to do, which is make a simplified experience for users.

Re:Not that HP was ever very good at Tablets But.. (2)

Deathlizard (115856) | about 2 years ago | (#40499833)

I doubt it's a blow to windows 8, since they seem to be still committed to the x86 tablet platform.

Frankly, I think most OEM's are scared of Windows RT simply because it looks so much like windows 8, that non tech savvy customers will buy it thinking it has all the capability of windows 8, but will freak out and complain once they realize that its pretty much Windows Phone 8 with a big screen and an incapability to run windows desktop apps.

HA! HA! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40498875)

Steve fucked up the entire tablet ecostructure. HA HA

Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (1, Insightful)

mbkennel (97636) | about 2 years ago | (#40498895)

"If other OEMs follow suit, MS could find itself as the only vendor selling ARM-based W8 tablets."

Everybody else's tablets/notebooks: $1000
Microsoft's + Apple's: $600

Ballmer knows he can't outfox Apple, but HP? All too easy.

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (0)

dc29A (636871) | about 2 years ago | (#40498971)

Apple's: $600

iPad 2 is 400$ and iPad 3 is 500$.

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (5, Insightful)

asliarun (636603) | about 2 years ago | (#40499341)

Apple's: $600

iPad 2 is 400$ and iPad 3 is 500$.

You fail to mention that this is the base-bottom price. The high-end iPad (64GB storage, 3G connectivity) costs $830 - and this is without any accessories, not even a cover. Here's the way I see it, and I say this without any bias: The iPad is going to face very stiff competition at two ends of the spectrum.

At the low end, it will start facing serious competition from $200-$300 Android 4.0 and 4.1 tablets, many of which have extremely good screens, construction quality, and an equally good number of apps in the Android app store. Look at the recently announced Nexus 7. It has an IPS display, similar pixel density as the iPad3, 8hr battery life, Tegra3 CPU, and is priced at an extremely competitive $200. And it runs Android 4.1 Jellybean which is quite slick based on initial reviews.

At the high end, it will start facing competition from ultrabooks and x86 based Win8 Pro tablets. If you are already paying $900 for a media consumption device that lacks the capability of running heavy-weight apps, you might as well pay a hundred bucks more and get an ultrabook or an x86 tablet that can do everything and will give you a viable laptop replacement alternative. What would be a very interesting would be a dual core Intel Medfield (Clover Trail?) Surface tablet or even a non-Surface tablet. It would run all your x86 and Windows apps, give you the same battery life and standby life as an ARM chip, and would outperform the best ARM chip in the market. Core for core, the 1.6Ghz single core Medfield that is shipping with the Lava phone is head to head with the much touted Tegra 3 or Exynos or Snapdragon, and has very similar power consumption and standby numbers. The only place they will lag is in the graphics horsepower, which is probably why you will mostly see 1366x768 screen res. i3/i5 tablets would not be very viable as their power consumption is still too high - although I'm sure this won't stop big vendors from coming out with ridiculously heavy Win8 Pro i3/i5 tablets with cooling vents and what-not.

Anyway, just my thoughts. I do think that HP is correct in not supporting Win8 RT - it cannot carve our a niche for itself when it is getting hammered by Win8/x86 on one end, and Android/iOS/ARM on the other.

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40500007)

Sorry, but if a tablet is $100 less for half the screen real-estate, how is that serious competition?

Also, the original ultrabook - MacBookAir - is $1000 so how is that competition again?

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (3, Insightful)

Gr8Apes (679165) | about 2 years ago | (#40500083)

This will be in what, 1 year? 2 years? And you'll still be comparing it to this years iPad3 because, as we all know, Apple never updates its hardware, software, nor innovates or anything in a 1+ year timeframe. Here's a more reasonable prediction: Win 8 tablets will come out and will perform reasonably, have little to no software, and be essentially useless for the first year or two. Their battery life will be much less than advertised and generally fall/fail quickly after that. The screens will compare nicely with that of the iPad 2, now at least 3 years old and 2 generations back and no longer sold. Their market penetration will be under 5% across the first 2 years.

As for Android, if they can't straighten out some of their ecosystem issues, I don't see their growth rate continuing at the current rate or higher, but falling rather significantly. The Nexus 7? It's got about 1/3 the screen real estate, by pixel count and size with a single front facing 1.2 MP camera only good for skype etc. And it's 2/3s the price. Hmmm, iPad Killer? Nope. Nice toy? Definitely.

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (4, Insightful)

steelfood (895457) | about 2 years ago | (#40500159)

RT's inability to run x86 apps is a huge drawback. That alone makes it compete with Android and the iOS on Google and Apple's terms. In an established market, where there already are two dominant players, any competitor would have to offer significant improvements over the existing products to even be able to play ball, much less succeed (in this day and age where patents are granted to anybody who files, actual success is a crapshoot). I was pretty surprised to hear companies had even signed on to Windows RT. There may have been a market for HP's Windows RT offering. I honestly doubt it. I think HP was working on a Windows RT product only because it was present, not because there was any potential for sales. And I suspect many of the other vendors thought and will react the same way.

On the other hand, being able to run legacy and new x86 apps is a huge selling point for an x86 tablet (with a proper touch interface no less). Notice that the announcement doesn't mention canning any products based on the x86 version of Windows 8. That's because so long as enterprises are stuck on x86, there will always be a market for x86 laptops, even ultra-thin laptops disguised as tablets. HP knows this. They'd be blind to not see that the market potential for x86 Windows tablets is even today much higher than any potential for Windows RT tablets.

I think this may be good for Microsoft with respect to Windows RT. Too many form factors has always been Android's bane. If Windows RT needs only to support one piece of hardware or even only the standard configuration Surface set, the software will probably work better. Of course, whether Windows RT can actually compete with Android and the iOS is up for debate (and I honestly don't really see any compelling reason why it would). But it stands a better chance if Surface was the only piece of hardware it needs to run on and support.

I suspect based on the ridiculous license pricing and their release of their own hardware that Microsoft is intentionally moving itself into position to be the only hardware provider for Windows RT. If they do successfully break into the ARM tablet market with it, they'd have their cake and eat it too. I don't know whether this will work out in the long run, and I think they think the same way too, because it seems they're hedging their bets with the x86 version of Surface. But they stand to gain a lot more than they'll lose.

But Microsoft's goal may not be not to break into the tablet market so much as it is to maintain their dominant position in the enterprise market with a tablet offering. By having an answer to Android and iOS tablets, companies have an option that integrates well with their existing infrastructure. So perhaps in this regard, they will succeed.

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40500177)

You know what I find funny? You mention that the ipads will face stiff competition because of CPU, memory ....

And I zoned out. CPU and specs aren't nearly as important any longer. Apps are king, and Win8 doesn't have any.

I don't expect a lot from HP or MS. They don't 'get' pads, and once they do, they still must compete with the Apple app ecosystem.

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (2)

DM9290 (797337) | about 2 years ago | (#40499051)

"If other OEMs follow suit, MS could find itself as the only vendor selling ARM-based W8 tablets."

Everybody else's tablets/notebooks: $1000
Microsoft's + Apple's: $600

Ballmer knows he can't outfox Apple, but HP? All too easy.

I payed $399 for my 64gig Acer Iconia Tablet

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (0)

noh8rz4 (2667697) | about 2 years ago | (#40499329)

Ouch. I would have gotten an iPad 2 instead. How big is the screen?

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (1)

symbolset (646467) | about 2 years ago | (#40499421)

It's widescreen, 720p plus a little. With 1080p hdmi output.

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (0)

noh8rz4 (2667697) | about 2 years ago | (#40500065)

i dont' know man, I think the iPad would have been a better choice. it has 3G and you can get whatever apps or music at the iTunes store.

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (1)

symbolset (646467) | about 2 years ago | (#40500103)

Some of them do have 3G, and some don't. To each his own. If you have an Android phone and are well-invested in Android apps that you like, then an Android tablet makes some sense because you don't have to buy the apps again. If you have an iPhone, it would push the other way.

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (0)

mystikkman (1487801) | about 2 years ago | (#40499977)

"If other OEMs follow suit, MS could find itself as the only vendor selling ARM-based W8 tablets."

Everybody else's tablets/notebooks: $1000
Microsoft's + Apple's: $600

Ballmer knows he can't outfox Apple, but HP? All too easy.

I payed $399 for my 64gig Acer Iconia Tablet

I hope it integrates well with your OpenMoko phone.

Sorry bro, but that stuff ain't selling and probably will be scrapped soon.

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (2)

CannonballHead (842625) | about 2 years ago | (#40499099)

I don't know where you got your prices. $1000 for a notebook? Not normally. Tablets? I haven't seen a $1000 tablet yet. My ASUS TF300 that I just got was $385, and my Viewsonic gTablet before that (last year) was around $340 or so. Google's Nexus 7 is going for $200.

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (1)

sideslash (1865434) | about 2 years ago | (#40499219)

ARM tablets, sure. But the forthcoming x86 Windows 8 tablets are going to be ~$900 and up. They're really ultrabooks in a different form factor, so the pricing won't be that unusual.

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40499569)

They're really ultrabooks in a different form factor,

They're really netbooks in a different form factor.

They're really cellphones in a different form factor.

I think it's an excellent time for HP to silently work on a Linux ARM tablet...it would have a LOT more apps right off the bat, and be a lot more secure.

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40499637)

Asus sells the EEE Slate for ~$1300. x86 based tablets running Win 7 have been selling for ~$1500 until recently. Not that manty people knew about them.

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (1)

Microlith (54737) | about 2 years ago | (#40499179)

Perfect, isn't it? Leverage your monopoly in the desktop space to push the APIs you use on your tablets, and then reserve the tablet space for yourself!

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | about 2 years ago | (#40499853)

Leverage your monopoly in the desktop space to push the APIs you use on your tablets, and then reserve the tablet space for yourself!

Even if Microsoft manages to kill OEM interest in Win8 ARM tablets, they won't be the only player in the tablet space. They'll still be competing with Win8 x86 tablets -- which OEMs aren't rushing to give up on yet -- and, more significantly, they'll still be competing with Android and iOS tablets.

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (5, Interesting)

jkmartin (816458) | about 2 years ago | (#40499263)

The only person Ballmer can outfox is Ballmer. Bold prediction here: Surface will never see production. Microsoft is late to the party and unable to buy or bully their competition. Unless they are willing to take huge losses (as with the Xbox) to establish some foothold and heavily subsidize an as yet unknown killer-app the Surface will just be Zune v2 (nice specs, terminally uncool, doomed to a protracted and very public death).

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (2)

marcosdumay (620877) | about 2 years ago | (#40499931)

Unless they are willing to take huge losses

Microsoft taking huge losses on a gamble? That would be unheard of.

Now, seriously, it is obvious that they'll take huge initial losses to try to establish some foothold. The question is only if that'll be enough.

They are subsidizing a killer-app: Office. (1)

mbkennel (97636) | about 2 years ago | (#40500005)

Office will be on the tablets, hard-wired like phone carrier junkware, and it will be a special Microsoft-only build process to install "desktop-quality" apps in the otherwise restrictive Metro environment for the locked-RT.

Also I'm sure they will make it easy to connect to corporate Exchange, and harder for everybody else to connect to corporate Exchange.
Probably a few years ago, Microsoft figured their main competition was Blackberry, but the latter is imploding on its own even without Microsoft's shove.

Microsoft's goal is to have an official Microsoft entry so that large IT departments will have a good excuse to refuse to integrate iPad deeply.

iPad will still take 80% of the profits in the space with 40% of the sales.

Re:Why is this a problem for Microsoft? (1)

UnknownSoldier (67820) | about 2 years ago | (#40500509)

> ... Unless they are willing to take huge losses (as with the Xbox) ...

In case anyone is curious ... that Xbox is one expensive little box!

Article is from 2 years ago ... (I believe the Games Division is showing a profit now...)

Microsoft's MidLife Crisis
http://www.forbes.com/global/2005/1003/036A_4.html [forbes.com] ... The Xbox game console is hot, but its division has lost $4 billion in four years and isn't yet in the black. ...

$1000? (2)

Sloppy (14984) | about 2 years ago | (#40499873)

About a week and a half ago here on Slashdot, ozmanjusri said "Go learn something" [slashdot.org] in reference to 7" Allwinner SoC-based tablets.

So I bought one.

Not because I really wanted a tablet, but because I wanted to know why anyone wants a tablet. I had to admit "go learn something" damn well applied to me. Up to now I've avoided tablets because I haven't been able to tolerate the too-weak-for-a-laptop and too-big-for-a-phone form factor. But 7" diag is just at the limits of what fits in the my pocket, so I figured it wouldn't just collect dust, and I'd actually end up doing some learning.

I've had the device for about a week now, and as I suspected, except for one thing about it, I'm not terribly impressed. I sort of knew it would work out like that. Maybe I'm just not a tablet guy, but I'm trying.

But what's that one thing about it that impressed me? I'll give you a hint: it's the same thing that made buying a thing which I suspected I wouldn't like much, not be a crazy thing to do.

It cost me less than a hundred dollars, that's what. It's hardly an awesome computer, but it's a lot of computer for $89. As far as I'm concerned, Google's new $200 tablet is high end and the companies who want $600 for machines that are less capable than an Atom notebook, and less portable than a phone (i.e. not as good as $200 tablets!), are fucking dreaming. $1000 for a tablet? You're off by an order of magnitude, dude.

Re:$1000? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40500173)

Arghhhh, when I read this very comment I too though "this is a nice gadget I ought to get some way or another";
Now reading your "So I bought one." just made me realize I lost my geek creds...

Under the bus! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40498909)

Microsoft: Hey OEMs! Thanks for all that market research! We've pinched the ideas and IP we need now!
OEMs: ...
Microsoft: Introducing the new zunepa- Err surface! Yeah!

Microscope? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40498915)

Will Windows8 ARM provide support for the Windows Microscope?

The opposite of "The PC is Dead". (2)

stewbacca (1033764) | about 2 years ago | (#40498919)

The robust and established ecosystem of x86 applications provides the best customer experience at this time.

The exact opposite position all the other major players are taking. Well differentiation is ONE market strategy I suppose.

Re:The opposite of "The PC is Dead". (1)

Teresita (982888) | about 2 years ago | (#40499333)

I betcha they're finding out in Redmond right now that Surface can't withstand abuse from flying chairs.

Self fulfilling prophecy (4, Interesting)

Bert64 (520050) | about 2 years ago | (#40498921)

The robust and established ecosystem of x86 applications provides the best customer experience at this time and in the immediate future

Yes, there's no windows apps for arm, and noone will ever write any if there's no hardware or users.

Re:Self fulfilling prophecy (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40499205)

anything written in WinRT will work on both machines without even the need to recompile.. so yes there will be software for the device

Re:Self fulfilling prophecy (0)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 2 years ago | (#40499349)

anything written in WinRT will work on both machines without even the need to recompile..

That's not true (and given that you can write in C++ for WinRT, would be one hell of a trick). You certainly can write a Metro app that's x86-only.

Re:Self fulfilling prophecy (2)

recoiledsnake (879048) | about 2 years ago | (#40499751)

anything written in WinRT will work on both machines without even the need to recompile..

That's not true (and given that you can write in C++ for WinRT, would be one hell of a trick). You certainly can write a Metro app that's x86-only.

Wrong, you will be able to target them with one project, even if C++.

http://blogs.msdn.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/communityserver-blogs-components-weblogfiles/00-00-00-30-15-metablogapi/0121.image111_5F00_thumb_5F00_604BA47B.png [msdn.com]

http://blogs.msdn.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/communityserver-blogs-components-weblogfiles/00-00-00-30-15-metablogapi/2337.image120_5F00_thumb_5F00_38A7B902.png [msdn.com]

Re:Self fulfilling prophecy (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 2 years ago | (#40499935)

First of all, your links do not show a C++ project. They show a .NET project (C++ projects don't have "AnyCPU" - how do you suppose that would even work?). The same dialog for a C++ project looks like this [tinypic.com].

That said, you can target both architectures in one C++ project, yes, same as you always could in VS. But it will separately compile your source code into two distinct binaries, one for x86, one for ARM. They will both be packaged in a single .appx for submission to the store, but the user will get the one for his architecture when installing the app. And you can change package defaults such that you only produce an x86 binary (for example, if you depend on some third-party library that doesn't work on ARM) - that's the whole point of checkboxes in this dialog. And it can be submitted to the Windows Store like that - so your app will simply not show in the store for users browsing it from ARM.

Re:Self fulfilling prophecy (1)

mystikkman (1487801) | about 2 years ago | (#40500003)

Yes, but what good reason will most developers have to uncheck the ARM box and drive down their sales?

This relates to the OP's point about apps.

LOOK, HP HW SUCKS !! AND SHORT-LIVED !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40498925)

Even shorter now !! The fetus is already aborted !! Don't blame MS, HP, blame HP because it is HP !!

If only... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40498957)

If only HP had its own OS it could put on those tablets. They wouldn't be relaint on MicroSoft and possibly could sell dozens of them.

Re:If only... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40499049)

or more at the fire sale they seem to do all the time!

Re:If only... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40499233)

The HP "Going out of business" sale. Their strategy for the next 5 years.

They did used to make nice printers, though.

Re:If only... (4, Funny)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 2 years ago | (#40499077)

If only HP had its own OS it could put on those tablets. They wouldn't be relaint on MicroSoft and possibly could sell dozens of them.

What an amazing idea! For extra bonus points it would be Open Sourced.

Even better if they had a bunch of programmers who were skilled in the software.

Oh. Wait.

HP stands for ... (2)

xs650 (741277) | about 2 years ago | (#40499011)

HP stands for Halted Projects. Hewlett and Packard must be rolling over in their graves every time HP's incompetent management opens it's mouth.

Re:HP stands for ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40499923)

For everyone who's whining about "where did the old HP go", have a look at Agilent. The spirit of the old HP is alive and well at Agilent. HP is just a computer company now.

It is too bad that Agilent didn't take the HP Calculator division with them after the split though. HP's only given their RPN calculators lib-service in recent years.

Not that Dumb... (2)

uzd4ce (1916592) | about 2 years ago | (#40499019)

Why should HP be just another Win Tablet maker, competing not just with Google (and all theirs), Apple, and then Microsoft? I see it as "ok, Microsoft, you didn't give us a heads-up about launching this, so obviously you don't want our help."

Apple? (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40499143)

I wonder if this will continue for Apple.

iOS 6 is a yawner. Yes, what we need -- more facebook integration. Already, there is a backlash against FB. The latest Android announcement had some cool items in it including another method of protecting against piracy that does not depend on if a device is not rooted.

The Retina Display Macbook Pro has a cool screen, but cannot be repaired or upgraded.

Mountain Lion?

Jobs's RDF is gone.

What Apple needs to do is start figuring out how to get themselves enterprise-friendly without losing their consumer market. Enterprises buy stuff in such large chunks that a few good contracts are a lot better than lines around the building of hipsters.

First, redo the Mac Pro. Make a chassis that works like a tower, but can have a rack drawer attached so it can be slammed into a standard enclosure. Offer not just 8Gbs FC cards, but NICs with enough packet offloading power so FCoE is workable.

Second, make something like BES but for managing iPhones. Yes, Exchange can do a lot, but having a dedicated policy management server that can handle data transmissions, perhaps even backups of phone devices would bring a lot of revenue.

Third, the ARM processor supports worlds. In this day of BYOD, offer iPhones and iPads with a "work" partition and a "home" partition. That way, the employee only needs to type in the long password when accessing the "work" side, and the Exchange erase only blows that out. It also allows for apps to only see a subset of data, so the FB app isn't able to access work contacts.

Fourth, make an antipiracy mechanism similar to Google's LVL or new encryption mechanism in Jelly Bean. That way, apps don't have to rely on the fact a device is not jailbroken. As an added bonus, more money can be spent on features, not anti-jailbreak BS.

Fifth, make a business friendly Mac desktop that can push the Dells and Compaqs out of the offices. Take an iMac, toss the camera and mic, and sell that as a business PC with service plans to follow. Lots of cash there to be made, as most companies would switch to Macs if they could, only for the artistic value of the machines.

Re:Apple? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40499461)

And that business plan is why you're in charge of running your mom's basement and not a multi-billion dollar corporation. Wow, what a retard.

tro7l (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40499163)

NIGGER ASSOCIATI'ON accounts for less

Just curious... (1)

gstrickler (920733) | about 2 years ago | (#40499165)

...but if HP can sue Oracle for dropping support for Itanium, shouldn't MS be able to sue HP for dropping it's ARM tablet?

(yes, I know there are other differences, but it would have about as much merit. If you don't understand sarcasm, don't bother responding)

Re:Just curious... (2)

sideslash (1865434) | about 2 years ago | (#40499295)

Not an accurate comparison. If there's a signed contract, there's a basis for a lawsuit. Also, I think you misunderstand what the word "sarcasm" means. And use of the apostrophe.

Re:Just curious... (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | about 2 years ago | (#40499719)

...but if HP can sue Oracle for dropping support for Itanium, shouldn't MS be able to sue HP for dropping it's ARM tablet?

If HP had signed a contract to support Win8RT the way Oracle signed a contract to support Itanium, then, yes, MS could sue HP for breach of contract.

yes, I know there are other differences, but it would have about as much merit.

Legal merit is dependent on legally-relevant facts, of which, in a breach of contract suit, the actual existence of a contract is a prime example.

Re:Just curious... (1)

gstrickler (920733) | about 2 years ago | (#40499827)

Which part of "If you don't understand sarcasm, don't bother responding" did you not understand?

Re:Just curious... (2)

DragonWriter (970822) | about 2 years ago | (#40499869)

Which part of "If you don't understand sarcasm, don't bother responding" did you not understand?

I understand sarcasm quite well, enough, in fact, to understand the difference between it and just posting irrelevancies with "sarcasm" as an excuse.

Gun + Foot = AAAAWWWW (1)

henkvanderlaak (965214) | about 2 years ago | (#40499173)

Gun + Foot = AAAAWWWW

Re:Gun + Foot = AAAAWWWW (2)

Belial6 (794905) | about 2 years ago | (#40499609)

That's the nature of the computer industry form the beginning. It has never been about the best tech. It has been an ongoing drama with the players constantly waving guns at the lower half of their body. Until they pull the trigger, it is hard for us to see if they are going to hit their foot, an artery, or blow something off that will prevent them from producing the next generation.

Naturally (4, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | about 2 years ago | (#40499177)

Even HP is smart enough to know that if they do just a little too well competing with Surface, there will be an update to RT that "mysteriously" tanks the performance of the HP product.

Not to worry, anxious to prove they're not up to their old tricks, MS will fix the issue just in time for the post-Christmas sales slump.

Re:Naturally (1)

bloodhawk (813939) | about 2 years ago | (#40499817)

This is the consumer space, HP can't compete in that space when they don't have decent products to go up against, The Sruface tablet looks quite good and will probably appeal to a large portion of buyers, that is something anything from HP hasn't done in a long LONG time.

Speculative nonsense. (1)

guidryp (702488) | about 2 years ago | (#40499227)

Internet bloggers seems to think companies function, the way they would if Internet bloggers were in charge.

So MS announces a competing product without a price and it is instantly: Abandon project?

That is just silly.

The decision to wait and see on WinRT is probably a sensible one. This product is starting out with essentially no ecosystem. HP recently got burned releasing their own tablet with essentially no ecosystem to back it up (Touchpad).

The x86 version would be the only Windows tablet I would consider. WinRT is going to be barren for some time.

It really costs them nothing to wait this one out. I consider that prudence.

Not that I care, because HP isn't likely to be a tablet leader anyway, Asus/Samsung produce better mobile product.

Re:Speculative nonsense. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40499667)

So MS announces a competing product without a price and it is instantly: Abandon project? That is just silly.

When your supplier starts competing with you, you change to a supplier who doesn't - because you can only be at the losing end if somebody you depend on has a conflict of interests.

Re:Speculative nonsense. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40500093)

So MS announces a competing product without a price and it is instantly: Abandon project?

More likely it was the dismal Surface demo that did it. With hardly any software but a browser, and the browser crashing, it's obvious the environment isn't as good as the one HP already aborted. So called Hands-on media reviews had pictures of reporters typing, hiding the fact that the machines were OFF and the keyboards non-functional. It might as well have been a replayed of what MS showed two years ago. To be taken more seriously, there should have been a bunch of killer apps and OS features very far along in the testing process. What was shown was more of a mock-up. Android or HPs own OS have more apps, and no licensing fees. Why inflate the price by paying MS? As HP learned before, if a machine can beat what an Apple system does, it has to be way cheaper to move.

MS said they weren't even going to start shipping x86 Surface until three months AFTER the next version of Windows is released. I wouldn't believe the x86 battery life claims until something is actually shipping. Even on ARM, others have a hard time trying to get the same performance, smoothness, and power consumption that Apple delivers. Everything has to be optimized to do it.

Ironically it seems that the biggest performance breakthrough for the Apple competitors will be from Adobe dropping Flash for Android 4.1+.
PRO = Pretty Ridiculous Offering.

What signal does this really send? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40499231)

If the OEMs signal this is it showing their displeasure with Microsoft that much more than it continues to emphasize how little effort they are willing to put into developing new markets or taking risks?

These guys are just going to keep losing their pants to Apple if they think this is how to play the game in the 21st Century.
g=

Re:What signal does this really send? (1)

symbolset (646467) | about 2 years ago | (#40499489)

This is only the beginning. It's a hint, an appetizer, a mere suggestion of the glorious future about to unfold. Just wait.

That's what they want! (1)

MetalliQaZ (539913) | about 2 years ago | (#40499391)

It also increases the burden on Surface itself. If other OEMs follow suit, MS could find itself as the only vendor selling ARM-based W8 tablets.

You say that like it's a bad thing for Microsoft. That's exactly what they want... to be like Apple!

Rehousing say that like it's a bad thing for HP (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40499607)

What is the downside? Let Microsoft take on the bleeding edge all on it's own with virtually no sales channel and an unproven design and little software.

Why try again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40499417)

HP is smart for playing the wait and see game. With Apple with a firm foot hold, and the other Android tablets looking for a front runner, and on their heels a spattering of "also ran" like Blackberry or Linux tablets with very little success or dent in the market -- there's no reason to jump on the MS bandwagon, not as a first generation with no proof of market acceptance.

HP should consider what's missing in those devices from other manufacturers, find a gap they could fill, make the product different.
Then if tablets running Win8 are well received, add their own HP innovations. Maybe the only thing HP could add is coming in as the low cost tablet leader, leveraging their already established marketing and distribution channels.

Let's not forget there's the chance that Win8 becomes the next KIN phone. Vivid acclaim, but lackluster acceptance. In that case HP could theoretically do just as well with similarly designed hardware but instead running OpenWebOS (and with zero licensing). This further cuts the investment in a similar device to one running an unproven platform as Win8 that may be just as destined to miss market penetration.

Wait and see how the other manufacturers confuse the tablet hungry population. Let a platform define an identity (or not) and then decide the best move for either OpenWebOS or Windows 8 tablet. Sounds like either way HP is positioning itself as coming in fashionably late to the party, but not missing out on the dance.

Re:Why try again? (1)

mbkennel (97636) | about 2 years ago | (#40500049)

"HP should consider what's missing in those devices from other manufacturers, find a gap they could fill, make the product different."

Is there any evidence they're going to do anything like this? They will make it different with a sticker. It's the Fiorina way.

Sad... (0)

mrjimorg (557309) | about 2 years ago | (#40499481)

"MS could find itself as the only vendor selling ARM-based W8 tablets". Funny enough, their families will be the only ones buying them. I watched the Surface announcement - just plain sad "We're releasing a tablet...... sometime.... for some amount of money.... with some specs to be sure.... we don't really know when or for how much or what the specs are. Perhaps we'll have an announcement. Opps, my prototype crashed. Well, I'm sure you'll buy it because Microsoft has cool image and a strong reputation for stable products, right?"

Typical HP, Alas (1)

Bruce Perens (3872) | about 2 years ago | (#40499507)

HP has a 20-year record of being messed up by other companies, MS and Oracle being two of the top abusers. HP's reaction is usually to come back for more, so I guess they deserve it. In general, MS tells them they will do something by a particular time, like "have an enterprise-quality NT", which led to HP abandoning the workstation market way too soon. Or MS messes up some product line by doing something that HP didn't expect and wasn't informed of, like Surface as a product rather than R&D.

And then there's Itanium. I guess we can mainly blame HP for that.

Re:Typical HP, Alas (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about 2 years ago | (#40499823)

HP has a 20-year record of being messed up by other companies, MS and Oracle being two of the top abusers.

HP itself seems to be its own top abuser.

Who cares, IMO..... (4, Insightful)

King_TJ (85913) | about 2 years ago | (#40499511)

HP already utterly and completely blew it with tablet computing when they made the boneheaded move of cancelling the TouchPad. I bought a new 32GB model on sale for $149 as part of a closeout promotion Micro Center was running. (Basically, if you bought some other HP computer, you qualified for the $149 TouchPad too, and I had to get an HP desktop for my work.)

Despite being an Apple iPad user since day 1, I gained a lot of respect for the product HP had. They copied off a lot of the little things that made Apple successful, while managing to retain their own uniqueness. The TouchStone wireless charging dock was brilliant, for example, and was FAR more elegant than any of Apple's iPad dock solutions. The integrated login of webOS was a great concept as well. (Just create an HP user account and configure all of the online services you want to use with the TouchPad through that master account. Then you're signed in to all of them, or can select the ones you want on and off at any time with virtual switches to slide on or off. Go to the email client and all of your configured mailboxes are pulled up right there. Same for the calendars.) Even their online store had what I thought was an excellent layout -- where you browsed it like a magazine. The home page of the store would welcome you with suggestions of relevant apps you might wish to look at, based on the next holiday coming up or time of year, and there were pages of several featured apps described in more detail as you turned the pages and browsed.

If HP had any sense, they should have realized that the rush to grab up all of these discontinued tablets at blowout prices gave them a window of opportunity. All of a sudden, they had a decent-sized market out there of active users interested in the product! They needed to strike while that iron was still hot, rushing back to look at ways to improve the tablet and re-release a version 2 (hopefully at a reduced price that would keep it competitive -- but one still high enough so the sales would be profitable). From what I heard, there was actually a second TouchPad product almost completed when HP canned the project anyway.

The Palm guys who did webOS were really talented people ... just the type HP needed to actually do something innovative. But in the musical CEO madness, they got thrown under the bus.

HP can spin this any way they like, pretending they're sending Microsoft a message by cancelling support for a new ARM based Win 8 tablet. But come on! I see right through that B.S. Reality is, such a product would lack any real appeal compared to what Microsoft themselves announced. It'd be yet another boring wanna-be tablet in a black plastic case, with too high of a sticker price. Honestly, I can't see why any talented engineers or designers would even make more than a minimal effort working on anything new for HP these days? They just crap all over most of it and cancel project after project without giving them enough time to mature and gain popularity.

Good (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about 2 years ago | (#40499571)

I hope EVERYONE does this, leaving Microsoft sitting all alone.

They really aren't needed at this point in the game, and should tread lightly.

Re:Good (1)

Tough Love (215404) | about 2 years ago | (#40500463)

I hope EVERYONE does this, leaving Microsoft sitting all alone. They really aren't needed at this point in the game, and should tread lightly.

That would be Steve "Twinkletoes" Ballmer you are referring to?

Quid-pro most likely (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40499631)

the quid-pro is for intel to stick to the itanium story to gain support on the Orcale-HP Itanium litigation

not necessary because of surface (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 2 years ago | (#40499737)

Maybe HP finally realized that if you're going to run Windows, you're probably going to want to run Windows apps. So yeah, x86 it is. I think Windows on ARM is stupid because it'd be Windows but with less software written for it than Android, iOS, Linux, probably Solaris too lol. They'd be starting from scratch basically so there goes the Windows "run anything" benefit. I don't think surface had a whole lot to do with it.

HP hates non-x86 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40500043)

When I was HP working on a project using ARM my team and I went through hell. There are alot of people in HP who only want to use x86(Intel specifically) and think any other arch is a waste of time.

Makes the most sense (1)

Tridus (79566) | about 2 years ago | (#40500053)

If the rumors of WinRT licenses costing $90/tablet are true, then this is the best thing to do. With licensing costs that high HP can't hope to be competitive with Android on the low end. They'll be going up against the iPad and Surface. Why would you want to buy the OS from Microsoft and then have to compete directly against Microsoft, when both of them also have to figure out how to pull the market away from the iPad?

It's insanity to even try.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...