Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 35 of 35
Like Tree23Likes
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by Vity Traff View Post
    And the question is why bother to make windows run on ARM if the result is a windows unable to run windows apps?
    Honestly, the first time I ever heard that Windows was making an ARM version, I thought to myself "wow, they've found a way to get x86 apps running on ARM." I was (in hindsight, naively) SHOCKED when I read that it wouldn't run normal Windows apps. To me, there seems no point to create a new Windows that doesn't run all the other Windows apps -- that's what makes Windows Windows.
    Neo Enyo 2.0 Twitter App: NOW AVAILABLE | WON REVIEW
    clearview - clear card app for HP TOUCHPAD
    Wild'n Video Poker - AVAILABLE FOR ALL WEBOS DEVICES! | follow for latest updates - @fxspec06

    Remy X and xandros9 like this.
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by Remy X View Post
    IIRC, Microsoft is the only one still making WindowsRT devices, and those are gaining almost no traction, even with the recent discounts. RT was fulfilled its purpose in forcing Intel to produce more energy-efficient x86 designs, so i suspect i'll just be another "cardboard cutout", decoy of a product that's only maintained for the sake of vanity, only to be killed off 3 years later...
    I just cannot imagine creating a product that you had to know was going to fail. The time, money, and personnel investment. I guess that's why I'm not in big business. Creating essentially a crippled OS is like creating a crippled processor...Oh, nevermind.
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by joeytino View Post
    I just cannot imagine creating a product that you had to know was going to fail. The time, money, and personnel investment. I guess that's why I'm not in big business. Creating essentially a crippled OS is like creating a crippled processor...Oh, nevermind.
    Original
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by joeytino View Post
    I just cannot imagine creating a product that you had to know was going to fail. The time, money, and personnel investment. I guess that's why I'm not in big business. Creating essentially a crippled OS is like creating a crippled processor...Oh, nevermind.
    Well...

    Microsoft and Intel always did everything together as integral members of the so-called "Wintel Monopoly", but this unbreakable bond is what allowed *NIX+ARM to take them by surprise and grab significant marketshare, creating satisfied customers who no longer wanted to buy anything Microsoft and Intel.

    Microsoft stumbled for several years in the mobile arena and managed to create WindowsRT, which is an ARM-compiled version of Windows running off of the NT kernel (like Win2000, XP, Vista/7 and WP8). With the majority of Windows software tied up in x86 and launching late, it couldn't even hope to have a competitive number of apps, but seeing this, Intel got the message and continued to improve its Atom and Core i*-lines to match ARM's energy efficiency on x86.

    So RT is disposable like toilet paper, customers get stuck with an obsolete product and Microsoft with its $1B+ writedown, but in the end, it's business as usual for Intel...
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by joeytino View Post
    I just cannot imagine creating a product that you had to know was going to fail. The time, money, and personnel investment. I guess that's why I'm not in big business. Creating essentially a crippled OS is like creating a crippled processor...Oh, nevermind.
    Most likely they did it to satisfy the ARM processor makers. I bet they were all begging MS to bring Windows to their hardware. MS then started the project, and eventually after having a working port they decided it was feasible to move forward with the project. Things are different when you've got running software that you've invested time and resources in, to axe the whole ordeal would mean admitting failure on ARM and a waste of time, money, and resources... not to mention upsetting hardware partners.


    But, I don't know for certain -- that could all be a bogus lie =)
    Neo Enyo 2.0 Twitter App: NOW AVAILABLE | WON REVIEW
    clearview - clear card app for HP TOUCHPAD
    Wild'n Video Poker - AVAILABLE FOR ALL WEBOS DEVICES! | follow for latest updates - @fxspec06

    Mutoidi likes this.
  6. #26  
    "..But, I don't know for certain -- that could all be a bogus lie =).."

    If a lie is 'bogus' - it is probably the Truth!


    TP 32Gb 4G. 3.0.5 / CM10. ~ Pre3 16Gb GSM. 2.2.4. ~ TS2 BT Audio-Dock ~ HP iPaq. hx-2790b.
    TP 32Gb Wifi. 3.0.5 / CM10. ~ Veer (Wht.) 8Gb GSM. 2.2.4. ~ HP Omen-15-5206tx. 256Gb SSD. i7-O/C@3.39Ghz. Win10.
    sledge007 likes this.
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by fxspec06 View Post
    Most likely they did it to satisfy the ARM processor makers. I bet they were all begging MS to bring Windows to their hardware. MS then started the project, and eventually after having a working port they decided it was feasible to move forward with the project. Things are different when you've got running software that you've invested time and resources in, to axe the whole ordeal would mean admitting failure on ARM and a waste of time, money, and resources... not to mention upsetting hardware partners.


    But, I don't know for certain -- that could all be a bogus lie =)
    Well, they had to have ARM-powered Windows phones to "compete" with Apple, and the ARM tablets are essentially oversized phones. Microsoft needed to stick its nose in yet another market to establish its (ineffective) presence and they did that by selling WindowsRT tablets.

    By the time Surface came to market, it was "game over", but with the new x86 chips they have a chance to bring back the millions of legacy Windows apps, making a Windows tablet worthwhile and competitive with ARM tablets.

    Time investment was minimal, with the NT kernel already being ported/updated for ARM phones. All they did was make a few tablet-specific changes to the UI...
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by Remy X View Post
    Well, they had to have ARM-powered Windows phones to "compete" with Apple, and the ARM tablets are essentially oversized phones. Microsoft needed to stick its nose in yet another market to establish its (ineffective) presence and they did that by selling WindowsRT tablets.
    Yeah, but they waited so long to do it. They should have started a few years ago.

    Also, they should try to figure out how to emulate x86 apps. That's the only way RT will survive, I believe.

    Lastly, it doesn't appear to me that MS cares very much about whether their tablets fail or succeed at this point in time. Right now their current lineups seem to me as trials for the future, where they're backing on normal Windows sales and the next Xbox to keep their revenue streams high.
    Neo Enyo 2.0 Twitter App: NOW AVAILABLE | WON REVIEW
    clearview - clear card app for HP TOUCHPAD
    Wild'n Video Poker - AVAILABLE FOR ALL WEBOS DEVICES! | follow for latest updates - @fxspec06

  9. #29  
    @fxspec06,

    RT is dead.... 99% dead.

    To finish up on this subject, Microsoft has the marketing skills of a toilet seat, and they don't even really have a sense of what's needed, in terms of a new, groundbreaking, innovative product. Their corporate culture doesn't allow for that, even though their workforce is just as capable as anyone else's.

    The key to their success is being in the right place at the right time. First, in the early '80s it was pairing IBM's cheap and substandard PC (a stopgap measure to fight Apple, while the "real" IBM PC with OS-2 was supposed to be developed) with MS-DOS, which wasn't even their own, since they had no time to write their own OS and had to buy one to satisfy requirements.

    The time was right, with the business world wanting to go beyond paper documents (typewriters and carbon paper :/ ) and the dumb terminals hooked up to IBM mainframes. Personal workstations were dismissed as a "fad" by IBM, but not for long. "Something " had to fill that new market niche, otherwise Apple would have it all.

    Those IBM PCs sold, and sold well. Charles Simonyi laid the groundwork for Microsoft's success by creating Microsoft Office's virtual machine/(bytecode)-based "build once, run everywhere" system.

    In the late '80s/early '90s, Microsoft promised to license IBM's OS-2, but turned around and released its own OS (Windows). Compaq reverse-engineered the IBM BIOS chip, paving the way for an endless supply of IBM-compatible x86 clones. By then Microsoft was using its money and influence to build a monopoly, by buying and shutting down software companies that catered to Apple, and forcing hardware manufacturers to sell Windows as the only option of pre-installed OS, locking Unix and BeOS out of the market. The Netscape browser was another casualty of the time,


    There was a need, and they fulfilled it. The only thing left was to sustain a monopoly, to be the one and only viable choice. Innovation was not at the top of the list, but rather incremental improvement. But time ran out, open source projects backed by Apple and Google formed the backbone of viable non-Microsoft ecosystems and the old playbook of showing up in every market category with a buggy Microsoft product no longer worked for them.

    They tried to kill Palm by filling old Windows-powered PDAs with extra features, but Palm won out with its elegance and usability. In '07 this was repeated by the iPhone, this time making WinMo obsolete and taking Palm down with it, which by then depended on WinMo to survive.

    The iPhone forked into the iPhone-"iTouch"-iPad lineup. Other ARM-powered competitors followed, killing off the netbooks as Windows PCs were no longer the only portal to internet-based entertainment. The ARM-powered devices are cooler, lighter, easier to clean and less prone to malware. Battery life is incomparable. And Microsoft is late to the party.

    The end.
    RumoredNow likes this.
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by fxspec06 View Post
    Yeah, but they waited so long to do it. They should have started a few years ago.
    Definitely.

    WP7 was based on the CE kernel (of old WinMo). The CE kernel is too old, but NT wasn't ready for ARM until later.

    WP7 was starting from scratch in terms of app support, but so was WP8, which is ridiculous, because they should have taken the .NET/Silverlight/XNA hybrid VM of WP7 and transplanted it on top of WP8 and RT. The bytecode apps would have ran flawlessly, but they abandoned that, wanting developers to start over and write native C++ apps, which is a step backwards.

    Oh and don't forget their first post WinMo phone, the Kin. Epic fail, they landed flat on their face with that one, when they sold what was essentially a feature phone (non-extensible and lacking many "social" features) with Verizon's "smartphone tax". What a joke
    Mutoidi likes this.
  11. #31  
    Actually I'm tempted by the RT. The $350 price makes it pretty tempting, and I'm considering taking my laptop and splitting the duties between an RT (Why RT, what does that even mean?!) and a desktop. I shouldn't be playing games in school anyway

    But I think RT has more of a PRPRPR/$confusion$ $problem$ $than$ $functionality$ $problem$. $The$ $ARM$-$based$ $iPad$ $doesn$'$t$ $run$ $OSX$ $apps$, $but$ $then$ $again$, $Windows$ $RT$ $is$ $practically$ $a$ $x86$ $port$ $and$ $iOS$ $was$ $established$ $to$ $be$ $completely$ $different$. $The$ $Windows$ $Store$ $is$ $still$ $below$ $bragging$-$rights$ $level$, $but$ $it$'$ll$ $grow$ $eventually$.
    As for RT, I think it'll stick around until x86 meet the low-heat/low-power bar set by ARM. Haswell is one big step for X86, but I don't know if its right-up there. Guess we'll find out soon.

    IMHO, I wouldn't touch a webOS Slate7. Beggars cant be choosers though.
    m505 > Z|71 > T|C > T|T3 > LifeDrive > iPod touch 4 >
    Pre 2 > Treo Pro > Aria > Treo 650 > Lumia 920 > BB Z10 > BB Q10
    Lumia 830 > 635 > iPhone 5s > Galaxy Alpha > Lumia 640 >
    iPhone 5c > Nexus 5 > Nexus 5X > Blackberry Priv
    My Palm OS Archive
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by xandros9 View Post
    Actually I'm tempted by the RT. The $350 price makes it pretty tempting, and I'm considering taking my laptop and splitting the duties between an RT (Why RT, what does that even mean?!) and a desktop. I shouldn't be playing games in school anyway

    But I think RT has more of a PRPRPR/$confusion$ $problem$ $than$ $functionality$ $problem$. $The$ $ARM$-$based$ $iPad$ $doesn$'$t$ $run$ $OSX$ $apps$, $but$ $then$ $again$, $Windows$ $RT$ $is$ $practically$ $a$ $x86$ $port$ $and$ $iOS$ $was$ $established$ $to$ $be$ $completely$ $different$. $The$ $Windows$ $Store$ $is$ $still$ $below$ $bragging$-$rights$ $level$, $but$ $it$'$ll$ $grow$ $eventually$.
    As for RT, I think it'll stick around until x86 meet the low-heat/low-power bar set by ARM. Haswell is one big step for X86, but I don't know if its right-up there. Guess we'll find out soon.

    IMHO, I wouldn't touch a webOS Slate7. Beggars cant be choosers though.
    I'm pretty sure I just saw an ad last night, advertising $299 for the Surface. (It was one of those "Why buy an iPad for $599 when you can get a Surface for $299" type of ads)
    Due to the cancellation of the penny, I no longer give 2 about anything. I may however, give a nickel
  13. mdram's Avatar
    Posts
    218 Posts
    Global Posts
    329 Global Posts
       #33  
    HP Announces A Handful Of New Android-Powered Tablets: The Slate7 HD, Slate10 HD, Slate8 Pro, And Tegra Note-Designed Slate7 Extreme

    Ugh!

    Sorry, this is the only place where I can vent about HP and people can understand why...
    geekpeter likes this.
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by mdram View Post
    HP Announces A Handful Of New Android-Powered Tablets: The Slate7 HD, Slate10 HD, Slate8 Pro, And Tegra Note-Designed Slate7 Extreme

    Ugh!

    Sorry, this is the only place where I can vent about HP and people can understand why...
    so confident in these they even dare brandish their logo on the front of the devices for all to see as opposed to on the back where it belongs.
    Touchpad Keyboard Themes - >> Click Me <<
  15. mdram's Avatar
    Posts
    218 Posts
    Global Posts
    329 Global Posts
       #35  
    BTW...I think Slate8 Pro is so misleading. Sounds to me like a Windows 8 Pro tablet.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. HP Slate 2 Tablet PC
    By Davey123 in forum Other webOS Tablets
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11/15/2011, 08:35 PM
  2. VIDEO: HP introduces the new Slate 500 Tablet PC for business
    By akitayo in forum The 'Off Topic' Lounge
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10/22/2010, 01:30 AM
  3. HP Slate?! Now that's a Tablet
    By 05typesdc5 in forum Other OS's and Devices
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: 06/18/2010, 11:01 AM
  4. WebOS tablet from HP confirmed, launch alongside Win7 Slate?
    By ilovedessert in forum General News & Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05/25/2010, 07:41 AM

Posting Permissions