×

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!

Leak Hints Windows 8 Tablets May Be Dearer Than Makes Sense

timothy posted about a year and a half ago | from the boutique-prices dept.

Handhelds 365

MrSeb writes "If, like me, you thought Microsoft would price Windows RT competitively, you were wrong: A leaked slide from Asus says that its Vivo Tab RT, due to be released alongside Windows RT at the end of October, will start at $600. Unbelievably, this is $100 more than the iPad 3, and a full $200 more than the iPad 2 or Galaxy Tab 2 10.1. For $600, you would expect some sensational hardware specs — but alas, that's sadly not the case. The Vivo Tab RT has a low-res 10.1-inch 1366×768 IPS display, quad-core Tegra 3 SoC, 2GB of RAM, NFC, 8-megapixel camera and that's about it. Like its Androidesque cousin, the Transformer, the Vivo Tab RT can be plugged into a keyboard/battery dock — but it'll cost you another $200 for the pleasure. (Curiously, the Transformer's docking station only costs $150 — go figure.)"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

365 comments

Windows RT + Office (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376061)

Windows RT will come in Office 2013 Preview which would also be up-gradable to the final version when it launches.

Re:Windows RT + Office (0, Redundant)

SJHillman (1966756) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376219)

Trialware is great and all, but I'd hardly call it a feature if you have to pay for the 'upgrade'

Re:Windows RT + Office (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376447)

Upgrade of Office is Free with Windows RT

The update is free. (4, Informative)

westlake (615356) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376687)

Trialware is great and all, but I'd hardly call it a feature if you have to pay for the 'upgrade'

From the MS "Office Next" blog:

Getting Office Home & Student 2013 RT

Office Home & Student 2013 RT is only available on Windows RT devices and is not sold standalone. The Windows RT devices available at Windows RT General Availability will include preview editions of Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and OneNote. After the final edition of Office Home & Student 2013 RT is released in a customer's language, their Windows RT device will be automatically updated with the final edition for free via Windows Update (Wi-Fi connection required). Customers can expect to get these updates starting in early November through January depending on their language. We'll publish the specific update schedule on October 26 on the Office blog.

Office Next [office.com]

Re:Windows RT + Office (4, Insightful)

Joce640k (829181) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376299)

"Dearer"? You mean more expensive?

Re:Windows RT + Office (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376405)

British English! Dearer = more expensive.

Re:Windows RT + Office (1)

Joce640k (829181) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376523)

Maybe it meant that in the 1950s...

I think MrSeb is showing his age as well as his location.

Re:Windows RT + Office (4, Funny)

Gilmoure (18428) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376743)

'dearer' = 'more expensive' in real Engrish as well.

Re:Windows RT + Office (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376835)

I'm pretty sure 'dearer' means someone who hunts deer in the Khan's standard Engrish.

Re:Windows RT + Office (1)

Exitar (809068) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376861)

In Italian, both "expensive" and "dear" are translated with the same word, "caro".
So, "more expensive" -> "piu' caro" -> "dearer".

I had no idea that /. titles were written by Italians anyway.

Re:Windows RT + Office (3, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376573)

Windows RT will come in Office 2013 Preview which would also be up-gradable to the final version when it launches.

Inconveniently, though, Office 2013 matters somewhat less to home users and Windows RT(since it can't be bound to a domain or controlled by standard group policy for any price) is of somewhat less interest to business users...

I'm not saying that they won't sell any; but by gimping AD in favor of some goofy 'Yeah, sure, go ahead and pretend its a smartphone or something, I hate you.' management 'app', they've substantially spoiled the appeal for the IT-heavy we-cannot-use-any-software-not-feature-identical-to-Office-and-ideally-compatible-with-IE6-so-we-can-still-get-to-our-cutting-edge-'intranet portal' segment, and at $600 for mediocre specs(2 GB of RAM is high by tablet standards; but cheap shit by Windows-machine standards) they'll need a pretty compelling argument that I need 100% Office, rather than the Office-compatibleish offerings on iDevices or Android things, since the same $600 will get me a shiny new 32GB iPad or a Transformer prime infinity from Asus' android side...

Re:Windows RT + Office (4, Funny)

0123456 (636235) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376771)

I'm totally looking forward to creating Excel spreadsheets on a touch screen.

Leaked? (1)

Wovel (964431) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376071)

Wasn't this an announcement from the manufacturer?

Re:Leaked? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376347)

Another leak? New ad plan?

"Can't wait?"
"For your Win8?"

(Try saying that out loud properly.)

Re:Leaked? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376483)

"Can't wait?"
"For your Win8?"
"Get ready then."
"To meet your.. destiny"

Burma fuckin' shave!

Margins (2)

pubwvj (1045960) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376073)

Perhaps Microsoft has decided they need to make money instead of doing loss leaders.

Re:Margins (5, Insightful)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376105)

Perhaps Microsoft has decided they need to make money instead of doing loss leaders.

To make money, you have to sell product.

Re:Margins (1)

morcego (260031) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376177)

Microsoft have been selling expensive products for years now. They were never a price oriented company.

Re:Margins (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376261)

I would assume a price sheet from ASUS would contain prices decided on by ASUS. Why are people blaming MS when it's the vendor's choice to go with these price points?

Re:Margins (4, Interesting)

Tridus (79566) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376345)

Because Microsoft is charging Asus a lot of money for Windows RT, and that's why the tablet is so expensive? Should Asus maybe sell these things at a loss so that Microsoft can compete against Android?

Re:Margins (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376659)

I would assume a price sheet from ASUS would contain prices decided on by ASUS. Why are people blaming MS when it's the vendor's choice to go with these price points?

Probably because Microsoft is the sole provider of one of the more expensive items on the BoM, and the one over which there was the greatest price uncertainty and the greatest room for a decision between lower prices or higher margins. A few of the hardware bits are probably more expensive in absolute terms(a good IPS panel with a capacitive sensor isn't cheap, not that 1366x768 is 'good'); but the component vendors have comparatively little margin and less room to move on pricing.

Re:Margins (3, Insightful)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376269)

Ok, I'll give you that. But now they're competing in a commodity market. Microsoft doesn't really understand competitive, commodity markets.

Re:Margins (1, Insightful)

morcego (260031) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376379)

They will be pushing Microsoft Office and other "solutions" as a reason to buy their more expensive tablets, as well as integration with Exchange and whatever other crappy product they can think of.

We all seen it before. How many people continue using IIS ?

Re:Margins (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376473)

IIS is about 13% of the web server market.

Re:Margins (5, Insightful)

Captain Hook (923766) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376451)

Microsoft have been selling expensive products for years now. They were never a price oriented company.

MS never had to be price oriented, they held a monopoly on consumer and enterprise desktops, and had a pretty good market share of servers. To the point where competitors effectively had to be free to compete, not because of technical superiority but because of how the market was stacked against them.

The trouble for MS is it doesn't have that lead in the mobile space. Its now forced, whether it acknowledges it or not to compete on:

  • Cost
  • UI
  • Technical Merit

Cost and UI matter to regular consumers, Cost and Technical Merit (maybe including a bit of UI as it relates to funcationality rather than prettiness/bragging rights) matter to techies.

MS's problem is the first group aren't going to be impressed with Notro compared to Apple or Android, especially if the devices are going to cost significantly more. The second group remember enough about MS's business practices from the 90's and 00's as to be warey of accepting them.

There is another possibility, maybe it's not the MS license knocking up the price, ASUS might not be expecting big sales from these devices and so are hoping to cover R&D costs with a smaller number of sales by bumping up the unit price?

Re:Margins (4, Insightful)

mcgrew (92797) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376825)

I don't know, I paid $40 for DOS 6 when games were $50, I'd say that's cheap, especially since it came with DoubleSpace. Most people aren't Microsoft's customers, they're Asus and Dell and HP customers. I doubt that more than $10 went to MS when you bought a computer. Enterprise customers are their customers, not you. Now, Office seems expensive unless you put it next to Photoshop are worse, SAS.

You're confusing them with Apple. Apple computers are way more expensive than Windows computers, but Apples are percieved to be higher quality. I just don't see how MS can sell a tablet at a higher price than an iPad and expect anyone to buy them. Folks buy Apple to be kewl and show off how much money they have, you can't say that about MS.

Look how the Zune flopped, and it wasn't as expensive as an iPod. There's no way anyone is going to be willing to pay more for a Windows computer than an Apple computer.

Meanwhile, when I get a tablet it will be a cheap Android. Apples cost too much and Windows has too few features compared to kubuntu.

Re:Margins (2)

Joce640k (829181) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376333)

Perhaps Microsoft has decided they need to make money instead of doing loss leaders.

Have you seen the price of a full retail copy of Windows? It's almost as much an iPad...

Re:Margins (1)

king neckbeard (1801738) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376415)

How can it be a loss leader, though? It's software, and ASUS probably does the actual copying of images onto those machines. The cost to MS is limited to the paltry sum they pay for codec patent licenses and such.

Re:Margins (1)

Nethemas the Great (909900) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376567)

You have to recoup R & D, maintenance, sales and marketing, etc.

Re:Margins (1)

king neckbeard (1801738) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376781)

Yes, but whether or not that leads to a per-unit loss is a function of the number of sales times the profit per sale. It can't be a true loss leader because it's not a loss at a high enough volume, and it doesn't really lead to sales of another product that is more profitable for MS.

Winning (5, Funny)

binarylarry (1338699) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376075)

I like this plan.

Bye Bye, Microsoft.

Re:Winning (1)

rasmusbr (2186518) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376245)

Don't start bolting your chairs to the floor just yet. It's probably just an early tantalizer that they release while they work out the kinks. I would be surprised if you couldn't get a 7" Windows 8 tablet in Q4 2013. The real question is whether they'll be able to release a tablet that can compete with the iPad in the $500-$600 range.

Re:Winning (1)

Joce640k (829181) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376363)

I would be surprised if you couldn't get a 7" Windows 8 tablet in Q4 2013.

By then it will be up against an iPad3 mini. It would have to be seriously cheap to win that battle.

Re:Winning (1)

rasmusbr (2186518) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376761)

Yeah, they'll probably have to ship Windows for free on the low-end 7" tablets.

I wonder if Microsoft has failed to realize that in terms of profit the OS is essentially a front-end for the app store and plans to make money on both the OS and on app sales, analogous to a mall owner charging entrance.

Re:Winning (5, Funny)

Mister Whirly (964219) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376615)

Bye Bye, Microsoft.

Now there is a prediction never made on Slashdot before. Why don't you go all the way out on the limb and declare next year to be "The Year Of Linux on Desktops"?

Re:Winning (2, Informative)

binarylarry (1338699) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376769)

No, you have it all wrong.

Now it will be annoying Microsoft fanbois talking about how 2013 will be "The Year of The Windows Mobile Device."

Which we know will never happen, Apple and Android/Linux own that market.

The perfect blend (5, Funny)

cynop (2023642) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376079)

So you get software no one likes in hardware no one would pay for. That sounds like a recipe for success.

Re:The perfect blend (4, Insightful)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376383)

So you get software no one likes in hardware no one would pay for. That sounds like a recipe for success.

The hardware isn't THAT bad. It's just not particularly great. People would probably pay for the hardware if it had a more reasonable price point.. I'm thinking around $300. You can't fix windows RT without replacing it, though.

I'm not sure how MS expects to compete here. Every competitor in this field charges $0 for the OS. MS is selling ONLY an OS. I guess they expect hardware manufacturers to eat the cost? It would be a little intriguing if RT and Windows 8 were binary level compatible, but they're not - they just look similar.

Re:The perfect blend (3, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376617)

Every competitor in this field charges $0 for the OS

Well, kinda. Most Android manufacturers are already paying MS $15/device for a promise not to sue. Paying $15/device to actually get an OS might be worth it. And, sure, you can get the Android software after release for free, but to have access to the under-development versions you need to pay Google. You also need to pay Google if you want to ship their apps. Plus you need to pay your developers to get Android ported to your device, and to keep drivers up to date as kernel interfaces change if you want to allow users to upgrade. Customisation also costs money if you want to differentiate your product at all.

Nothing wrong here (5, Funny)

Grishnakh (216268) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376087)

If you really want to use Windows, you need to pay up for the privilege. I think it's too cheap; they should start these Windows tablets at $2000. I'm sure millions of people will be lining up to buy these things.

(Hopefully Steve is reading this.)

Re:Nothing wrong here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376189)

I would be willing to pay $10,000 for the privilege of owning one of these fine devices.

Mr. Ballmer, this is an outrage!

Re:Nothing wrong here (3, Funny)

Alter_3d (948458) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376335)

(Hopefully Steve is reading this.)

Nope, he is dead.

Oh, you meant the other Steve.

Nope, he is a zombie.

MS OFfice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376431)

If you really want to use Windows, you need to pay up for the privilege.

If this works seamlessly with MS Office, then it does warrant its premium. And if it offers app installation without something LIKE iTunes - I am SO there.

wait until it's officially announced.. (2)

DaWhilly (2555136) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376089)

Otherwise, I might have an iPad Mini you might be interested in....

Dearer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376101)

With a $600 price tag it will be dearer to my heart because I couldn't imagine losing such an expensive piece of #@&

Dearer? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376107)

Who uses dearer in that context? Just say "may be more expensive" or "may be costlier." Much easier to understand.

Re:Dearer? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376211)

Agreed. I've never heard "dearer" used like this. It must be a UK thing.

Re:Dearer? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376251)

Or maybe a typo? Nearer?

Re:Dearer? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376317)

Excuse me, but you're blocking my shopping trolley and I shan't be late to tea and crumpets with the Queen.

Re:Dearer? (3, Informative)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376667)

I just checked two US English dictionaries and they both listed that use. I don't think we can blame the original poster for your poor command of the language...

Re:Dearer? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376425)

I'll tell you who...

PLEASE DO THE NEEDFUL.

Posted anonymously, so I am not fired for being "racist".

Re:Dearer? (1)

Hatta (162192) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376657)

This must be a tech support thing. I wonder if it's on their scripts. I work with a large number of Indian immigrants in academia and have never heard this phrase.

Re:Dearer? (1)

WeatherServo9 (1393327) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376741)

I've heard this phrase a lot, but from one of our guys in Amsterdam. Never heard any of our India guys use it though.

Re:Dearer? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376625)

Agreed. I had to re-read the title about 5 times before I actually understood the general idea. Trust me, editors: that is NOT what a headline is for.

The correct headline: "Leak suggests price of Windows 8 tablets unjustified". Simple, to the point, and most importantly, standard English.

MS vs OEMs (3, Interesting)

bkaul01 (619795) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376119)

Perhaps this approach by OEMs is why Microsoft felt the need to produce its own Surface line. It'll be interesting to see how the pricing compares once they announce it.

My god, slashdot editors are retarded (-1, Troll)

not already in use (972294) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376131)

First of all, Windows RT is a runtime. Secondly, this is the pricing for a *device*, not an operating system. Thirdly, Microsoft's own Win8 tablet is retailing for $200. Who let this idiot put this up?

Re:My god, slashdot editors are retarded (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376173)

Where is Microsoft's Windows 8 tablet retailing for $200? As far as I know they haven't announced pricing or availability.

Re:My god, slashdot editors are retarded (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376179)

Is there a confirmed source for the Surface retailing for $200?

Re:My god, slashdot editors are retarded (1)

HaeMaker (221642) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376209)

Do see how the article compares this tablet to another tablet from the same manufacturer with the same specs but running Android instead of Windows RT? How else do you explain the price difference?

Re:My god, slashdot editors are retarded (3, Informative)

WolfgangPG (827468) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376295)

Windows RT is the name Microsoft gave Windows 8 when it is running on ARM chips. WinRT is the name of the new Metro framework.

Re:My god, slashdot editors are retarded (-1, Redundant)

not already in use (972294) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376417)

No, WinRT is the name of the runtime that runs on both ARM and X86. What do you think the RT stands for?

Re:My god, slashdot editors are retarded (1)

Anon-Admin (443764) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376607)

Real Trash?
Reused Technology?
Redundant technology?
Ring Token?
Rubbish Tin?
Rubber Tit?
Rectal Thermometer?

Re:My god, slashdot editors are retarded (0)

Tridus (79566) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376377)

I like how you're whining about the article when you don't know that Windows RT is also the name of the ARM version of the OS and there's no announced pricing for the Surface yet.

0/10. Next time put some effort in.

Re:My god, slashdot editors are retarded (0, Troll)

not already in use (972294) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376467)

WinRT is the name of the runtime you fucking moron. It runs on ARM and x86. What do you think RT stands for? Hint: It rhymes with fun time.

Re:My god, slashdot editors are retarded (0)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376433)

First of all, Windows RT is a runtime. Secondly, this is the pricing for a *device*, not an operating system. Thirdly, Microsoft's own Win8 tablet is retailing for $200. Who let this idiot put this up?

they maybe idiots with their choice of words but you're an idiot too.
first off, win8 tablet pricing at 200 bucks is purely a rumor. 450 to 800 is the only official line we have.

windows 8 RT is what the arm version is called, the article speaks of what it costs to get to use win8 rt - you'll need a device for that since that's the only way to get your hands on it.. it's not like you can just buy it and install it on your arm device.

Re:My god, slashdot editors are retarded (2, Informative)

not already in use (972294) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376535)

"Windows Runtime, or WinRT, is a cross-platform application architecture on the Windows 8 operating system. WinRT supports development in C++/CX (Component Extensions, a language based on C++) and the managed languages C# and VB.NET, as well as JavaScript. WinRT applications natively support both the x86 and ARM architectures, and also run inside a sandboxed environment to allow for greater security and stability."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Runtime [wikipedia.org]

I've never met a group of people so boastful with their ignorance. No wonder Rob Malda jumped ship, I'd be ashamed too.

Re:My god, slashdot editors are retarded (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376445)

Ballmer said $299 to $899. So, the low end RT tablet will be $299. The high end Pro tablet/laptop should be $899.

Re:My god, slashdot editors are retarded (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376557)

First of all, so what.
Secondly, the article is claiming that the device is expensive because of Licensing the windows RT runtime.
Thirdly, bullshit the Surface will be $200. You are the idiot.

Pre-loaded Office 2013 (1)

gtirloni (1531285) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376151)

I think that explains it.

Re:Pre-loaded Office 2013 (1)

asmkm22 (1902712) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376205)

Interestingly, the cheapest of the three models is the only one that comes with Office 2013 preloaded. The middle one has a trial, and the expensive one doesn't even mention that.

Re:Pre-loaded Office 2013 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376719)

It sounds like they asked a bunch of Linux users about what they wanted to start using Windows. I would also pay extra to avoid having to use Office.

What is this? I don't even... (1)

sinij (911942) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376159)

Well, hopefully, the premium comes from not having completely locked-down system. Oh wait, it runs Win8, never mind...

MS Still doesn't get it... (2)

HaeMaker (221642) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376169)

The price difference is probably in the MS software license. IIRC, the OEM license cost for Windows CE in the late 90s was $50. I imagine Windows RT is around $100.

Compare that with Google who pays YOU to run Android.

In some universe, this makes sense (5, Funny)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376217)

This all pencils out. Everyone wants Microsoft Windows on a tablet. They're already lining up for it. It's Windows -- the same interface, the same applications, compatibility with all the Microsoft back end processes, and all documents of any type made by Microsoft products will open on it. Regular security releases and bug fixes will keep it in great shape, and Internet Explorer is a joy to use. For all that, of course people will be willing to pay a premium price for the product. This isn't arrogance, it's due recognition of our own excellence. We've owned the desktop for decades; this obviously means we have a superior product.

Additionally, charging a higher price creates a mindset of a premium product. Charging a price competitive with those made-in-China boxes running not-Windows will make us seem as useless as them. People are willing to pay for excellence.

(Please mod this funny so I don't lose all faith in humanity...)

Re:In some universe, this makes sense (1)

TheSwift (2714953) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376469)

We've owned the desktop for decades

Yes, but no one turns on a tablet and expects to see a windows desktop. Microsoft is too late in the game to keep their OS a major player in the new field of hardware.

The next generation will laugh at our cursors, "my computers" and "recycling bins". We have apple to thank for that.

Re:In some universe, this makes sense (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376609)

We have lots of different sources to thank for that. We perhaps have Apple to thank for the marketing, although that has its upsides and downsides.

More than just spec list (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376237)

A lot more than goes in to a premium product than just a list of parts. Fit, finish, design, QA. (Ex. And andriod tablet may have better specs, but the ipad comes in a milled aluminum chassis instead of a squeaky screwed together plastic frame)

The Microsoft surface tablets seemed like premium products with lots of these intangible (or less flashy) extras that make a good product.. This Asus tablet seems like their normal android hardware with winRT slapped on to it. Who would buy this? If I was going to by an winRT tablet, I'd wait for the surface.

Target market? (1)

ilsaloving (1534307) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376259)

I'm wondering about the target market. Compared to other tablets, the prices are ridiculous. But if this is being aimed at windows-specialized businesses who want to issue tablets to employees, then they can get away with that price because such targets typically prefer 'reassuringly expensive' devices.

Re:Target market? (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376711)

Unless they've backed down on Active Directory on Windows RT, Team corporate IT is going to avoid these things like the plague unless specifically forced by user demand...

Looked good on an MBAs spreadsheet (4, Insightful)

EmperorOfCanada (1332175) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376289)

Some MBA did up a presentation where they could make an absurd profit on each unit and then success will happen at only 10% of iPad sales.

In order to switch from an iPad to a Windows unit it would have to be so much better, so way much better, way way better. So unless it unfolds into a private jet that then flies me to my private island that comes with it I will predict that they will jig the stats on sales (force people to warehouse them and then prebook the sales) and in the end it will be Zune 2.

Right now there are two ways to sell a tablet to consumers, sell them an iPad or sell them something that looks exactly like an iPad for way less. The only possible third way would be something way better; thus MS will have had to vastly improve upon technologies that are near the leading edge of what is possible. So better than retina? Better battery life without making it an inch thick? Thinner/lighter electronics? Vastly better GUI? Vastly better Processor? Better Apps?

If MS were really lucky and had the best engineers on the planet and could get their first effort perfect I could see slight improvements on all of the above but not enough to touch Apple's marketing or enough to justify a monster price.

My prediction is that MS is going to make this all enterprisey. It will tie into office and other MS crap in a horribly incestuous way. They will provide white papers to the CTO types saying how this can improve data security and fine grain control over the user experience. What they are forgetting here is that one of the reasons for Apple's ability to break into the Enterprise market is that they don't cater to the enterprise market's OCD about ruining the user experience. I am sure that this is what killed the BlackBerry; those phones are actually pretty good. But RIM gave the telcos and sys admins too much say over what could be turned off on the phones. Many a corporate user had a complete dud of a phone after all the good bits were turned off in the name of security and productivity. Apple looks at this and just asks "Why would we allow you to ruin our phones?" Over the last few years the better companies have had a policy of BYOD that is a real winner among the employees who are the reason the company exists and a real pain among old school admins.

So basically crappy companies are going to buy a handful of these new tablets and their employees are going to put them into the microwave hoping that if they ruin enough of them they will get an iPad; or at least not have to suffer the Metro UI.

Capacity? (1)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376341)

If you can't list the full specs, you can't talk about any prices and compare across devices. iPad *starts* at $500 for 16GB, but it gets as expensive as $830. But this still neglects the facts that many manufacturers will be making Windows 8 tablets. If you don't like the specs or price of one manufacturer's tablets, then there's a market void that *will* be filled by a different manufacturer.

Re:Capacity? (1)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376577)

Well, here's the thing: Nobody I know buys anything but the cheapest iPad. So for the majority of those customers would compare any tablet against that price and fearure set.

Re:Capacity? (1)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376763)

It's probably true that the 16 gb sells more than the 32 gb, but the 32 gb still sells, and sells well.

So let's go out on a limb and say the $600 Asus tablet is 32 gb. So that leaves a void for a $500 tablet that again, *someone* in the market will produce. This is the joy of not relying on a single hardware vendor.

Apple Haters Will Still Buy It... (1)

TheSwift (2714953) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376367)

A statement against mainstream will be worth $200 to some people. I'll just wait until this tech lets me do word processing as fast as a keyboard without making me pay as much as a good gaming laptop is worth.

DOA (0)

kf4lhp (461232) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376391)

Sounds like stillborn hardware for a stillborn OS. This one won't even make a footnote in computing history.

Still hoping for a $199 Surface (1)

elabs (2539572) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376427)

I'm still holding out hope that Microsoft will set the example by pricing the Surface RT (not the Pro) at $200.

Announced pricing = MSRP, however... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376539)

Apple pricing is never marked down. Everyone else's MSRP is.

16:9 10.1" screen is useless for any serious work (3, Interesting)

dell623 (2021586) | about a year and a half ago | (#41376679)

A 15.6" 1080p 16:9 screen is nice. 14" is pushing it. 13.3 gets annoying. 10.1 is fucking ridiculous, aren't Windows 8 tablets meant to be productivity devices? Why the hell do they all (including the MS surface) have stretched out 16:9 screens that are awful for doing any real work in landscape mode with a keyboard attached?

Apple are the only ones who understand this, which is why all Apple laptops except the 11.6" Macbook Air (I guess it needed to be wide enough for the keyboard to fit, and even 11.6" 16:9 is nowhere as ridiculous as 10.1" 16:9) come with 16:10 screens, the ONLY manufacturer that I know of who still sell 16:10 laptops.

Take these prices with a grain of salt though, OEMs have a habit of pricing products rather hopefully before cutting prices to the point where stuff sells. I guess a Windows license costs a bit more than Google apps/Google Play license + Microsoft tax on Android devices (ALL major Android tablet and phone makers except Motorola and Sony pay Microsoft for every Android device they sell). But Android tablets with similar specs from Lenovo etc. are selling for $300 and even less with cash backs etc. A mid range Win RT tablet should be available for $400-450 in the market.

Strangely high (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41376799)

I suspect MS is hoping people will assuming the expensive tablet is worth more. People see a $200 Android tablet and think "cheap", they see the $600 and think "high quality". In other words, MS appears to be betting people are dumb, which is usually a safe business decision.
For the price of a RT tablet and docking station I could just buy a low end laptop and a new desktop computer to cover my bases. Why would anyone want a tablet that expensive? I mean without the brain-washing Apple logo stamped on it, obviously.

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...