Beta
×

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!

Now That It's Here, Is There a Place For Windows RT?

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the stand-over-in-the-corner dept.

Windows 287

concealment sends this quote from Ars: "The argument back then was this: Windows on ARM would mean discarding the thing that makes Windows entrenched and important: Windows applications. Tablets need all-new applications, and if you're going to run all-new applications then you don't really need Windows. ... In the time it has taken Microsoft to bring Windows on ARM to market, ARM's once overwhelming battery life advantage has been erased. The ARM CPUs may still have a slight power use edge, but the difference will typically be dwarfed by the power consumption of the screen. The Intel processors, in turn, bring CPU performance that is probably best in class (or close to it), and most importantly of all the ability to run the full version of Windows 8 and existing Windows applications. The hardware could look identical to the user, but if it has Intel inside, the user experience will be quite different. ... With these constraints and limitations, it's hard to see who exactly Windows RT is for. I acknowledge that there are certainly some users who will be content to use the browser, mail app, and perhaps type the occasional letter in Word or balance their checkbook in Excel: people for whom the Windows Store's current gaps do not matter. But I think a much wider selection of users will be ill-served by Windows RT."

cancel ×

287 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Fucking shill. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758267)

Whoever posted this article is a dyed in the cloth, Micro$oft turd. I can't believe how many people Microsoft are hiring just to shill on this single website!

Re:Fucking shill. (2, Informative)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#41758675)

Did you even read it? The submitter was questioning the rationale for Windows RT to exist in the first place. If he was an MS shill, why wouldn't he instead make bloated claims about how great Windows on ARM is?

Re:Fucking shill. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758705)

you are a fucking moron.

The Magic 8 ball says ... (1)

AbhiTheOne (2717543) | about 2 years ago | (#41758269)

Yes

Re:The Magic 8 ball says ... (4, Funny)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 2 years ago | (#41758607)

a system error has occurred

Re:The Magic 8 ball says ... (5, Insightful)

Tough Love (215404) | about 2 years ago | (#41758749)

Let's be specific about it. The place for Windows RT is to occupy the void formerly filled by Windows CE, with similar success. A Windows that isn't really Windows. Just the thing to irritate the same sheeple who once raised Microsoft up to the dizzying heights of world's most valuable company.

Just a historical note apropo to nothing in particular: when Alaric I marched into Rome to sack it in 410 AD, much of the city had already reverted to swampland. The aquaducts had long since silted up and the sewers weren't working. What Romans remained were living in squalor. So much for former glory.

Re:The Magic 8 ball says ... (1)

Penguinisto (415985) | about 2 years ago | (#41759047)

Damn ...*now* I see a post worthy of mod points!

Where the hell were you earlier today? :)

Re:The Magic 8 ball says ... (1)

Froboz23 (690392) | about 2 years ago | (#41758879)

Based on historical data, the correct answer is 'no'.
Source: Betteridge's law of headlines

WIN/RT SHOOTS !! SCORES !! WINS !! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758283)

And we all lose because of it !!

Windows 8 (4, Insightful)

CajunArson (465943) | about 2 years ago | (#41758323)

As a tablet OS, Windows 8 is actually pretty nice. It's just that it's being crammed down our throats outside of tablets that makes it a PITA.

As for RT vs. x86, I'd lean toward x86 unless there's a major price advantage to ARM. The Clovertrail chip looks to have good performance and battery life, so there's no massive technological reason to pick one over the other. Application compatibility is a nice win for x86 BUT.. the truth is you'll likely not want to run desktop applications on a tablet anyway.

Re:Windows 8 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758363)

i am waiting for the windows 8 pro tablet specifically because there are windows apps i want to run on a tablet. our companys ERP software, powerpoint, artemis, even a photo editor would be nice.

Re:Windows 8 (2)

poetmatt (793785) | about 2 years ago | (#41758409)

RT is "Asking to be sued" by the EC. It'll be entertaining when they get fucked for trying to pull the same browser restrictions a second time.

Re:Windows 8 (2)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 2 years ago | (#41758567)

But WinRT is a minority player, they have no monopoly to abuse

Re:Windows 8 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758891)

Should EC ask money, excuse me "sue", from Apple then? Because there is no Internet Explorer on iPads?

Re:Windows 8 (3, Informative)

larry bagina (561269) | about 2 years ago | (#41759131)

The MS/EC agreement was for computers only. Tablets and phones (WinCE at the time) weren't included.

Re:Windows 8 (4, Funny)

jonbryce (703250) | about 2 years ago | (#41759141)

They currently have a 0% market share, behind the market leaders Apple, Android and even Blackberry.

Re:Windows 8 (5, Insightful)

bananaquackmoo (1204116) | about 2 years ago | (#41758423)

"unless there's a major price advantage to ARM"

Hint: there is.

Re:Windows 8 (3, Insightful)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 2 years ago | (#41758581)

Hint: A couple of dollars, since Intel are pricing their new Atom's to directly compete with ARM SoC's

Re:Windows 8 (1)

ClaraBow (212734) | about 2 years ago | (#41758729)

I"m expecting a couple hundred dollars difference. It really two completely different products. Why did MS decide to muddle the waters, I haven't a clue!

Re:Windows 8 (4, Informative)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 2 years ago | (#41759045)

Atom CPU's have already sold as low as $19 a piece.

Re:Windows 8 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758761)

Do you have a source for the unit price of an Intel Atom SOC?

Raspberry PI (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41759489)

The Raspberry PI - $25 for an entire system without keyboard/display/powersupply...

And can run a full Linux distribution, including LibrOffice.

Might get a bit slow then, but still - it runs. The RT version of office is a subset, not the full thing.

It's too bad tablets are pretty much useless. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758545)

It's great that Windows 8 might be a good tablet OS, but that doesn't change the fact that tablets have proven themselves to be over-hyped fad devices with no practical use for most people.

Yeah, yeah, I know, I know. There'll be a few people who'll respond to this describing their niche usage of a tablet, but they're in the minority. Most tablet purchasers got caught up in the hype, bought a tablet without thinking, and now they have yet another pointless device that they don't use. It sits there collecting dust.

For most people, it doesn't even take a month before the novelty wears off. I think this is exactly why, aside from Apple, we see basically no other company successfully selling tablets. Apple is a unique case. I suspect that many of its buyers are buying iPads as status symbols, rather than as a usable device. I'm not even sure if they should be considered tablet purchases. It's more akin to buying jewelry than it is to buying a computing device.

Re:It's too bad tablets are pretty much useless. (3, Insightful)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 2 years ago | (#41758735)

As you said, the tablet is a niche device, but I don't think it's entirely a fad. Sure, $600+ tablets are a fad, but the lower end tablets (such as my own Nook Color) fill a nice gap where my smartphone isn't capable enough, but my laptop is overkill. It has replaced my laptop for day or weekend trips when I don't plan on doing more than some web browsing and typing emails. The $150-$300 is a nice price point for tablets... much more than that and you might as well just get a laptop.

Re:It's too bad tablets are pretty much useless. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41759173)

My cock fills a nice gap.

Re:It's too bad tablets are pretty much useless. (0)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | about 2 years ago | (#41759381)

I look at the average person and think, now here is a guy with more money than sense. Yeah nice to have some overpriced gadget to sit between a more expensive gadget that can actually do stuff, and time spent actually enjoying life and not surfing the web and writing emails. Most people with less or no money to waste have no choice but to do the correct thing in down time and enjoy life and not surf the web and write emails. Maybe it is true in an odd way that the best things in life are free.

Re:It's too bad tablets are pretty much useless. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41759263)

Ah, people like you are such putzes. Just because you're not imaginative enough to figure out a use for something, then no one else must be smart enough either.

My initial use for a tablet was as a PDF reader. I tried the Nook, then I tried the Kindle, but neither of them really read complex PDFs well at all, so that was wasted money. The iPad works perfectly. I imagine some of the Android tablets now may as well, but this was a couple of years ago, and they did not exist. Why a tablet? Instant boot, awesome battery life, and the ability to carry all of my work documentation with me wherever I went. Thousands of documents, from one page to over a hundred. A laptop worked, but was incredibly unwieldy, and the battery life sucked, so the tablet, even at the same price, was the perfect solution. Especially the iPad, because it natively uses PostScript, just as OSX does - why is that important? Because that's basically what a PDF is, so I knew it would work.

Re:Windows 8 (3, Interesting)

Sir_Sri (199544) | about 2 years ago | (#41758769)

And the thing is, MS is thinking long term. They don't want to be caught pants down 3 or 4 years from now if some ARM maker produces a chip that is serious competition to Intel.

The only way that future windows applications will work on both ARM and x86 is if people start developing for that now. They need just enough marketshare to warrant the added development time* for developers to make both an ARM and x86 version so that windows 9 or windows 10 on both will actually be appealing

*Supposedly it's just a simple recompile in visual studio. How well that will actually work in practice on applications that need optimization I don't know. I know where I am isn't worried about ARM versions of what we do atm, so I haven't had any justification for working on it.

Re:Windows 8 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41759015)

I have a Vista PC and a Windows 7 phone. I don't need Windows 8 nor Windows RT.

Sorry Micro$oft, I am not your customer anymore.

Re:Windows 8 (1)

JohnFen (1641097) | about 2 years ago | (#41759261)

Application compatibility is a nice win for x86 BUT.. the truth is you'll likely not want to run desktop applications on a tablet anyway.

But you might want to be able to run apps that Microsoft hasn't given specific approval to. For that, you'll need the x86 version.

The only place for win 8 (2)

santax (1541065) | about 2 years ago | (#41758325)

is it's rt distribution. Haven't tried it on a tablet but I am sure it's great for it. However, keep that crap away from my desktop where I need to get work done!

I think it is aimed at businesses and academia (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758371)

It has an active surface and digitizer, and it runs MS Office, which puts it light years ahead of the iPad in terms of productivity. Plus, it is an MS OS, which means that it probably comes with a lot of tools for IT managers to make it easier to deploy within an organization.

Sure, android might be better for nerds who want to hack their OS and the iOS might be better for the average Joe who wants to surf the web, but Windows RT and the MS Surface offer a much better choice than the iPad for corporations and people in academia. The superior keyboard dock, One Note, and Active digitizer put it light years ahead of the iPad for people who want to use it for note-taking.

Re:I think it is aimed at businesses and academia (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 2 years ago | (#41758493)

If I want to work on spreadsheets and documents I have a net book, a notebook and a desktop. Why would I need Office on a tablet or a phone?

Re:I think it is aimed at businesses and academia (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 2 years ago | (#41758773)

To replace the net book. You drop into a keyboard, office. Going someplace and want to use it for music, or vids, or games? Take it with you and leave the keyboard on your desk.

Re:I think it is aimed at businesses and academia (4, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 2 years ago | (#41758851)

But my netbook is still far more functional than a tablet or a phone. For what I use those devices for, I don't actually need to do much in the way of actual office app work. In fact, even a netbook is too cramped for that, which is why I still have my PC and my notebook, because they have full sized keyboards and bigger displays (the latter is absolutely key to spreadsheets, many of the ones I have I normally work with on dual monitors).

I'll be honest. If my tablet or phone can just display the powerpoint presentation or Word document, that's good enough for me. I cannot imagine anyone seriously want to use a tablet as some sort of out-of-office workhorse. For a touch typist like myself, I doubt I can get much beyond 20-30WPM with considerable errors on a touch screen. A real keyboard, even a crappy neo-chiclet keyboard, is infinitely superior.

Re:I think it is aimed at businesses and academia (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41759133)

Hence the physical keyboard cover for the surface.

Re:I think it is aimed at businesses and academia (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 2 years ago | (#41759559)

And I'm sure by notebook keyboard will still be superior.

Re:I think it is aimed at businesses and academia (0)

peragrin (659227) | about 2 years ago | (#41758557)

The question is do you want a tablet or do you want a laptop? It makes a difference. There is places for them both. Windows RT is a laptop os with a laptop keyboard using a tablet interface.

Android and iOS are tablet OS's being used for Tablets.

The days of one device doing everything well are long gone. With prices fallen and devices lasting longer as they have even the poor can have multiple devices.

Also read the reviews the keyboard dock connector, and power connector on Surface are poorly designed and take a couple of tries to fit right. Every review I have read said it wasn't a bad device but it is an alpha first generation product and those you always stay away from.

Re:I think it is aimed at businesses and academia (1)

gravyface (592485) | about 2 years ago | (#41758561)

This. We can't wait for the Surface so we can deploy RemoteApp (Remote Desktop Services, i.e. Terminal Server) versions of our legacy applications.

All the Executive types see these Apple iPad ads where Doctors are manipulating ultrasounds, or sales guys showing off an amazing PowerPoint deck and we're the ones who have to bring them back down to earth with, "well, it doesn't really work like that because your ERP system doesn't have a native iPhone app".

I remember (4, Funny)

wbr1 (2538558) | about 2 years ago | (#41758377)

I remember WindowsNT. What happened to WindowsOT, WindowsPT, and WindowsQT?

Re:I remember (3, Insightful)

tekrat (242117) | about 2 years ago | (#41758433)

I remember Windows NT for Alpha.... Yeah, the DEC Alpha.

Re:I remember (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41759327)

EV4 would have been very competitive with Pentium II. Pity they bolted on an enormous FPU that no business or residential customer needed instead of licensing the architecture to third parties like Apple, allowing third party chipsets and getting the cost down.

Re:I remember (2)

Bing Tsher E (943915) | about 2 years ago | (#41759539)

I once installed Windows NT on PPC. I had this old IBM ppc machine I had bought at a surplus auction and itwas the PREP architecture that NT would run on. Every old NT 3.51 disk, even an oem CD from Compaq (the kind I had) includes the ppc/alpha/mips install binaries on it in addition to x86.

It was pretty pointless. There is absolutely nothing else you can install. Even the IE on NT was 2.0.

Re:I remember (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758943)

HAL+1=>IBM, WindowsNT..OU..PV..QW..RX, should be WindowsRX. That would be cool.

Re:I remember (1)

Miamicanes (730264) | about 2 years ago | (#41759353)

WinNT => WNT == VMS++

Re:I remember (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41759077)

Windows Qt is known as KDE.

Oh do shut up (4, Insightful)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 2 years ago | (#41758379)

Another in the seemingly endless torrent of stories about how Windows RT is imminently about to fail. Get back to me after xmas at the earliest. It is too soon too tell, all we know now is that a bunch of big name manufacturers are at least willing to give it a try.

Re:Oh do shut up (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41759079)

Windows RT has already failed. Windows 8 is its own competition.

No (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758383)

Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states, "Any headline which ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines

Windows RT == Zune (4, Interesting)

tekrat (242117) | about 2 years ago | (#41758411)

in other words, supported for a few years and then dropped when there's zero financial incentive to keep it going. It will be treated by developers as a dead-end, so there will never be compelling apps, which will sign the death-warrant.

Re:Windows RT == Zune (1)

cynop (2023642) | about 2 years ago | (#41758603)

Keep in mind though, that apps made for windows 8 "metro-style" will be compatible with windows RT. So the ecosystem will build up anyway. I see them changing the marketing direction after a couple of versions down the road. "Bussiness" for those needing old x86 compatibility and "Home User" for those who just use the latest version of an app

Re:Windows RT == Zune (3, Interesting)

tftp (111690) | about 2 years ago | (#41759449)

Keep in mind though, that apps made for windows 8 "metro-style" will be compatible with windows RT. So the ecosystem will build up anyway.

Now you need to answer a different question. Why would anyone develop for Metro? What is the advantage of having one or several huge monitors dedicated to one application? Even the IE in Metro mode looks ugly as sin, to the point of being useless. Who would want a browser that uses "magic spots" to reveal menus and that would hide every control in existence at the first opportunity? Can you imagine Photoshop in Metro mode? Or SolidWorks? PC software is not for playing around, it's for doing work, and Metro is not helping there at all.

Metro applications, necessarily simplistic, make sense on a tablet. However tablets do not benefit from x86 - to the point that hardly any of them use x86 today. A Metro developer would be burdened with supporting his software on platforms that generate no sales.

Short answer, I hope not. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758425)

I can't imagine ANYONE using a microsoft device when they aren't forced to. I'm not saying that Apple should be named a Saint, (although it would be a fun thing to do with the concept of a Legal Person), but MS should be considered a crime against humanity.

Re:Short answer, I hope not. (0)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | about 2 years ago | (#41758619)

Agreed. I haven't used windows since 98SE.

Re:Short answer, I hope not. (1)

Tarlus (1000874) | about 2 years ago | (#41758905)

AC, meet Xbox.

Re:Short answer, I hope not. (2, Insightful)

atlasdropperofworlds (888683) | about 2 years ago | (#41759207)

Their loss. The devices are actually fine. I use android myself. Wouldn't touch that horseshit created by apple though (iTunes to copy music to my device? Seriously?).

Win 8 RT (4, Insightful)

erp_consultant (2614861) | about 2 years ago | (#41758475)

For me it's a non starter because you can't run existing Windows applications on it. Microsoft delivers a scaled down version of Office on it but it doesn't include Outlook. Apparently there is some sort of other email client on it. Why would I buy one of these things if I have to go out and buy new software for it? If I'm going to do that I might as well get an iPad or Android tablet. Those two also have a much, much bigger selection of titles in their respective app stores compared to MicroSoft.

I don't understand why the RT was released before the x86 model since RT seems to have a much more limited audience. Maybe there were some manufacturing delays with the x86 model? If I were going to buy one of the Surface tablets (and I'm not) I would go for the x86 model.

Re:Win 8 RT (1)

Nyder (754090) | about 2 years ago | (#41758549)

For me it's a non starter because you can't run existing Windows applications on it. Microsoft delivers a scaled down version of Office on it but it doesn't include Outlook...

Outlook blows, sounds like a good thing then...

Re:Win 8 RT (4, Informative)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | about 2 years ago | (#41758577)

Outlook is needed for legacy reasons. I'd really like to know if MSIE 6.0 will be supported on these devices.

Re:Win 8 RT (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#41758727)

Windows Mail on Vista was good - wonder why they dropped it in Windows 7. They could have brought it back in Windows 8 and RT.

Re:Win 8 RT (2)

cbhacking (979169) | about 2 years ago | (#41759361)

They sot of have. It has a new, touch-friendly UI, but Windows Mail and Windows Calendar are included as pre-installed "Metro"-style apps on Win8 and Windows RT. However, the feature sets are different (improved, for the most part). For example, the new Windows Mail can use ActiveSync (i.e. it can connect to Exchange servers) and can connect to Hotmail/Windows Live, in addition to POP3 & IMAP. It also includes templates for connecting to Gmail and Yahoo. I don't believe it offers as good of filtering capabilities as the Vista version had, though, and the touch-centric UI isn't quite as nice to use with a mouse.

Re:Win 8 RT (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 2 years ago | (#41758807)

Outlook-Exchange is pervasive in the enterprise. If all MS is delivering is their ActiveSync-capable app, how exactly is that an improvement on what I can get out of an out-of-the-box Android or iOS device?

As to the rest of Office, I'm dubious. On a pure tablet, heavy duty word processing, desktop publishing and spreadsheet work is going to be abysmal, and if the device has a keyboard, well I can pick up a pretty cheap netbook that's likely to have as much, if not more horsepower and a helluva lot more storage.

Re:Win 8 RT (3, Insightful)

Microlith (54737) | about 2 years ago | (#41758587)

I don't understand why the RT was released before the x86 model since RT seems to have a much more limited audience.

My guess is to push the adoption of formerly-Metro. Microsoft gets a platform out there that only supports that API (and only their store) and you force developers to start using it. Then when Windows 8 is released and x86 tablets come out they can simply release builds for it and go. There's no end-run to be had by simply using Win32.

Microsoft is really, really aching to get their own lock-in centric walled garden going, and Windows RT is the only way they can do it without getting strung up by every regulatory agency on both sides of the Atlantic.

Re:Win 8 RT (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758655)

I don't understand why the RT was released before the x86 model since RT seems to have a much more limited audience.

More profit. Most people won't know RT isn't real Windows, so they'll buy Surface and learn the hard way that it doesn't run their software. Just as they're throwing the Surface tablet into the trash, Surface Pro will come out, and they'll buy all over again. 2x profit per customer.

Re:Win 8 RT (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#41758707)

For me it's a non starter because you can't run existing Windows applications on it. Microsoft delivers a scaled down version of Office on it but it doesn't include Outlook. Apparently there is some sort of other email client on it. Why would I buy one of these things if I have to go out and buy new software for it? If I'm going to do that I might as well get an iPad or Android tablet. Those two also have a much, much bigger selection of titles in their respective app stores compared to MicroSoft.

I don't understand why the RT was released before the x86 model since RT seems to have a much more limited audience. Maybe there were some manufacturing delays with the x86 model? If I were going to buy one of the Surface tablets (and I'm not) I would go for the x86 model.

I fully agree. What's more - I don't see why RT exists in the first place. Whatever power advantage ARM had is by now miniscule, while x86 has far superior performance per watt than ARM. And as pointed out above, x86 based tablets won't have to leave their Wintel apps behind, unlike ARM tablets. Although the current apps do need to be updated to recognize touch inputs.

Re:Win 8 RT (2)

Jaktar (975138) | about 2 years ago | (#41758717)

What applications, if any, would you want to port to a tablet. It wouldn't support any of the games that I play. I'm lot likely to attempt to encode/re-encode anything. It won't be used as a TV server.

It's already capable of doing as much office type work that you will need right out of the box. It supports MP4, AVI, 3GP, MP3, AAC, WMA. Sure, it doesn't support .ogg or .ogv, but if you've encoded into those formats you're probably already on Android and you're not their target.

I've owned a Playbook and a Kindle Fire. The main problem with both has been integration with my existing devices. Seems to me that either RT or an 8 tablet would work equally well for what I might use it for. I still don't want one though.

Re:Win 8 RT (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41759191)

Because Surface is a reference design, like the Nexus for Android. It's not supposed to be the ultimate Windows tablet, just a benchmark. You want an Intel tablet on Friday? Get a Thinkpad Tablet 2 or a Latitude 10.

Re:Win 8 RT (3, Insightful)

mevets (322601) | about 2 years ago | (#41759235)

I think that the common factor behind the long string of failures in the pre-iPad tablets was the appropriateness of the software. Simply throwing PC software on it with some bigger buttons didnâ(TM)t work very well. They were awkward to use, and were quickly binned as irrelevant.

While Windows 8, itself, is said to be better presented on tablets, that doesnâ(TM)t mean that off the shelf PC software is. The software will require a lot more of a rework to be usable than the rework required for an ARM port.

Re:Win 8 RT (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41759367)

> I don't understand why the RT was released before the x86 model

Because the x86 model has to wait until Intel can make a CPU that won't turn the magnesium case into an incendiary device.

Also the x86 pricing would get laughed at if it came out first. The RT has similar pricing to iPad3 even though it is not as good as that (it should be priced with iPad2). x86 pricing will be much more like Ultrabook pricing.

Re:Win 8 RT (1)

DeathToBill (601486) | about 2 years ago | (#41759411)

Microsoft delivers a scaled down version of Office on it but it doesn't include Outlook. Apparently there is some sort of other email client on it.

Really??? Where can I get one? This sounds the best development in Office since Clippy went to the big stationary drawer in the sky.

yea its pretty bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758505)

bye slashsoft microdot er shalshdot

Headline with a question mark means ... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758533)

No.

Re:Headline with a question mark means ... (3)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 2 years ago | (#41759399)

Worse yet, it's the third such near-identical headline in a week. And that's before the devices have been released. It's at least understandable (if still idiotic) when it's about Apple products, but here? What is there to talk about until the reviews come in?

It's in the brand. (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 2 years ago | (#41758553)

The success of Windows RT won't be about technology. It's going to come down almost entirely to how well Microsoft can leverage the power of their brand - a name known not just in technology, but to ordinary users. Without that, they are dead in the consumer space. Most they might achieve is some success in business, if they can sell based on superior AD integration and easier administration.

Another angle... (1)

Shag (3737) | about 2 years ago | (#41758563)

Windows 7 is undoubtedly mature, Windows 8 is arriving, and Windows Phone is getting to the point where it no longer blows (whole herds of syphilitic) goats. And surely all those smartphones running WP aren't Intel inside. Is Windows RT a tacit admission that Windows Phone doesn't, won't, or can't scale to devices with larger screens?

How many more Windows RT posts this week? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758651)

The market will be the judge...any way we can move back to stuff that matters?

Window RT (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758659)

The point to Window RT is a stop gap. Microsoft believes it has to get something into the market or the iPad will take over the enterprise, but the pro isn't ready yet. Of course the other problem is MS doesn't understand the tablet market and they're really just shipping an overpriced netbook.

Congratulations you fell for Microsoft's marketing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758661)

Microsoft's marketing goal is to blur the line between full desktop Windows and tablet Windows. Microsoft is betting on the the fact that name recognition, a familiar looking interface, and some (even if limited) cross compatible versions of software will be enough to make desktop users migrate to MS tablets instead of jumping ship to Apple.

Nonsense (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 2 years ago | (#41758755)

Tablets need all-new applications, and if you're going to run all-new applications then you don't really need Windows.
What about integration? If what I create on the tablet is also usable on the PC, then that's why you would need windows.

WTF @ "Tablets need all-new applications..." (1)

eepok (545733) | about 2 years ago | (#41758779)

No... Tablets do NOT need all-new applications. What tablets need is a non-phone/device OS environment based on existing, established OSes (Windows, Linux, etc.) that is low-resource-intensive (scratch Windows), but still has the expectation of *multiple* users and each user being a content producer.

I understand the corporate rush to get in on the smart-device bandwagon, but where the evolution of the USER is going is towards scalable portability.

Desktops led to laptops which led to ultra portables (high-cost) and netbooks (low-cost). The next step is the net-vertible (like the ASUS Transformer) that can be a highly portable tablet or a portable workstation like a laptop. What we need to continue the honing of this next step in the evolution of the PC is for a genuine personal computer OS to work on low-power tablets.

Yes, Windows 8 is hoping to be that option, but the weight and power requirements of that OS will be prohibitive for net-vertibles.

Microsoft can give away OS for free (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41758835)

I was recently in Shenzhen, China and saw a plethora of Allwinner A10 tablets all running Android OS. Now, they were ok (some qualities much better than others) but pricing was ridiculously cheap (think sub-$100 for nice 7" tablets with IPS screens). Android is good, but some believe it is not as great as iOS and is very fragmented. Now, imaging Windows 8 running on A10 CPU! You get one ring to bind them all! Windows XP was to the desktop PC builders what Windows 8 can be to the tablet manufacturers. It will also give Microsoft the ability to bundle Bing, and Office, and a Windows app store under a platform they can control. Microsoft's Windows 8 RT on arm will like Apple's iOS and Google's Android. Have you paid for iOS updates? Did you pay for Android? Do you think you should have to "pay" for Windows 8 RT? I believe what Microsoft will gain from W8 on arm will be greater than any money they would have to charge ... but like Windows XP ... most of their installs and revenue will be from OEM.

Its niche (4, Insightful)

Tarlus (1000874) | about 2 years ago | (#41758869)

Windows RT will be right at home with people who have, until now, been okay with the fact that their Android and iOS tablets are not running a desktop class operating system. They just want the basic web and multimedia functionality.

The bigger question is this: How will Microsoft educate consumers about the difference between RT and 8; ARM and x86?

Who is it for? That's easy. (2)

BumpyCarrot (775949) | about 2 years ago | (#41758917)

Microsoft. It's for Microsoft.

In a Windows shop, sure. (1)

sdavid (556770) | about 2 years ago | (#41758957)

To the extent it integrates well in an all-Windows shop, I could see it being very attractive. As a consumer, maybe not so much.

Windows RT for Kiosk, POS, Control systems? (4, Insightful)

Jonah Hex (651948) | about 2 years ago | (#41758973)

What struck me when I first heard that Windows RT will look like Windows 8 but won't run the same apps was that it'd be perfect for systems that traditionally run special purpose software on top of Windows. So as the title says, Kiosks, Point of Sale, and Control systems where they can trade on the fact that standard Windows vulnerabilities like viruses won't run on the ARM. - HEX

Re:Windows RT for Kiosk, POS, Control systems? (2)

jonbryce (703250) | about 2 years ago | (#41759181)

Except that those sorts of people aren't going to want to deploy their software via the Windows Marketplace. If you want a tablet for that sort of thing, Android is really the only game in town.

Re:Windows RT for Kiosk, POS, Control systems? (2)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | about 2 years ago | (#41759303)

Don't be so sure about that. I've seen more than a few POS systems running on iPads.

It has a place, but its no Holy Grail. (1)

Kreegalor (2751567) | about 2 years ago | (#41759025)

Windows RT will have a place, but its the same place that is filled by other tablets, smartphones and netbooks. It is going into a crowded market to offer web surfing, app games, email, web apps and light duty documents. Casual users will probably love it, especially if they have Windows 8.

The real crowd MS might have been aiming for, the business community, is going to avoid this product thus limiting its lifespan. The biggest draw of Windows 8 is the ability to use the metro apps between all devices, this is greatest weakness also. To get the full functionality of Windows 8 cross platform features requires all new hardware on the mobile side, at least. Companies have already shelled out for Iphones/iPads or Andriod devices and adjusted their IT infrastructure to work with these devices, then add that Enterprise customers not jumping on the WIndows 8 bandwagon right away, it really puts a crimp in the user base of Windows 8 RT.

Windows 8 RT and its assoicated hardware products will enjoy a moderate sales number. Its inter-connectivity could make it a major force, but its hit the market a day late and a dollar short to knock off iOS and Andriod based products.

Re:It has a place, but its no Holy Grail. (1)

tftp (111690) | about 2 years ago | (#41759537)

Casual users will probably love it, especially if they have Windows 8.

Metro start screen is just like Android's application pages, only with ugly colors. Why would a Win8 sufferer pick the same malady for his tablet? Would you, an Android user, launch your frequently used applications from application pages - and not from the icon strip, the start screen, or the "Start" menu in ICS? Win8 takes away all these methods of simple customization, so that you have all your essential software (email, chat, news, browser, books, etc.) where you want them, and not among hundreds of other "tiles".

iPads and Android tablets already perfectly integrate into a Windows ecosystem. Most importantly, they support MS Exchange to the point that you can schedule meetings from them. For most people that's all they need.

The answer is NO (3, Insightful)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | about 2 years ago | (#41759065)

This isn't something that requires technical knowledge of, nor does it require a like or dislike for microsoft. The LAW says the answer is no: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines [wikipedia.org]

Re:The answer is NO (1)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | about 2 years ago | (#41759125)

Oh yea, and not to mention in two months MS is releasing windows 8 tablets with intel cpu's. That gets you the same UI experience with some actual application compatibility. Personally I see RT dying at that point.

So... (2)

roc97007 (608802) | about 2 years ago | (#41759083)

p. ...if you're going to run an OS on a device with a completely different input method that won't run your desktop applications, why does it need to look like your desktop?

On The Phone (3, Interesting)

zanderz (813270) | about 2 years ago | (#41759213)

Windows 8 Phone is supposed to have the same kernel as WinRT devices on ARM. If they can pull this off they will have it both ways: a huge desktop user base with tons of messy legacy and a sparkly new "walled garden" where they will have lots more control over the whole experience and what is allowed in. Writing for Metro mode is supposed to yield an app that will pretty much run on phones and tablets, without the fragmentation of Android devices/environments. Even if nobody else wants it on their tablets or desktops, at least one batch of Nokia phones will need it.

Apple is now on the global 100 (0)

onebeaumond (1230624) | about 2 years ago | (#41759217)

And MSFT isn't. The last few years have been a humiliating time for Windows corporate, and they really had to do something to show some vestige of due diligence to shareholders. The mess formerly called Metro was their first answer, which at least can be fixed with SP1. But, the ipad-beating ARM reference design (Surface) was such an obviously pointless laughing stock, that they had to build it themselves to keep the fiduciary duty lawyers at bay. At this rate, private equity will be circling overhead for some time to come...

Let me make this perfectly clear... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41759415)

NO.

Tired of Windows 8 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41759429)

I'm sick of hearing about how about Windows 8 is going to be. We all know it's going to be terrible, some of us have tried it in virtual machines and know that it *is* terrible. This is not news any more. It is time to move on!

Simple (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41759431)

Slashdot reader? = X86
Non-Slashdot reader? = RT

aweso8\e fp (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41759443)

No Worries (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41759469)

I'm not really sure why so many are getting bent out of shape about the new interface for Windows 8. I was concerned myself until it grew on me after a while I get the reason why the change makes since. Change is hard for those who don't have an open mind, MS knows it's taking a big chance with this release. But I feel it's making a very good decision for it's place in the future of computing. This operating system will undoubtedly have a strong foot hold and people will adapt fairly quickly.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?