I think MS needs to unlock RT platform and publish a native ARM compiler for Windows. Surface RT is a great tablet IMO, but it does not bring USP that would really make people pay attention. Also calling it Windows causes expectations that are not true and people are disappointed. But having a full Windows ARM that is energy consumption aware and can function as a tablet, too, that could be quite interesting, IMO. I know that's what MS intends with Surface pro, but I don't think ARM would hurt it. It would take time before the ARM versions of programmes would be available (recompiling, testing, etc) and I think they could co-exist. Intel might not like it though
What brought this, just today I connected an external HDD and bluray rewriter to my Surface RT and it recognised them, could use them in data mode, I just did not find any apps that could play CDs and DVDs.I guess there's not enough power to try to play bluray discs. And it's a pity that this is not possible only because somebody said so and not because it's a technical impossibility.
I think MS needs to unlock RT platform and publish a native ARM compiler for Windows. Surface RT is a great tablet IMO, but it does not bring USP that would really make people pay attention. Also calling it Windows causes expectations that are not true and people are disappointed. But having a full Windows ARM that is energy consumption aware and can function as a tablet, too, that could be quite interesting, IMO. I know that's what MS intends with Surface pro, but I don't think ARM would hurt it. It would take time before the ARM versions of programmes would be available (recompiling, testing, etc) and I think they could co-exist. Intel might not like it though
What brought this, just today I connected an external HDD and bluray rewriter to my Surface RT and it recognised them, could use them in data mode, I just did not find any apps that could play CDs and DVDs.I guess there's not enough power to try to play bluray discs. And it's a pity that this is not possible only because somebody said so and not because it's a technical impossibility.
Your argument is summarised along the lines of we have the desktop in RT, we have Office, let's open it up to the likes of Adobe too. But...most people believe the desktop is going away in RT as soon as Office can make good WinRT apps.
The other thing is that while WinRT was designed for secure apps (sandboxing, using contracts and brokers etc), designed for automatic resource management (e.g. tombstoning, recovering RAM etc) and mobility. Win32-based apps ported to RT will not have any of those benefits. What you end up with is a full PC running on underpowered ARM hardware with the loss in battery life that is important in a tablet.
There is a far easier away for you to get what you want Ivan which is a device that's like the Surface RT hardware and price wise but like the Surface Pro in terms of software flexibility. It's making a Surface with an Intel SOC like Clover Trail. I think there is a good likelihood of seeing a Surface with a Bay Trail processor at the end of this year.
It's just they went and ported Windows to ARM and then disabled half of it. Yes, it does not make sense to have any power hungry application on a tablet, but I really would not mind something like Total Commander for ARM. I grew up on Norton Commander and having a file manager with a source and destination windows is essential for me. Or an ability to play CDs or DVDs. Give me an app, I do not mind. It just seems a waste to be able to work with external drives, but not completely.
There was a way with the whitelist, there probably will be a way to change the blacklist as well Doesn't matter, I guess I hardly get to a blacklisted site, what with my browsing habits of ~20 websites
That's fair enough IMHO, it's a very different product to the Surface RT.
The Surface Pro is essentially a full laptop but tablet sized. Even a self confessed Machead like me thinks the Surface Pro is cool My dad said he'd buy himself one if he wins the lotto.
The pro seems to be doing well, they always sell out the next batch in a couple of days over at US MS shop. I wonder when they will be available outside US. I think the RT is a great tablet, but not for the price they are selling it. They need to price them in the same area as Samsung tablets and they will see more interest.
It's not a nice OS and the tablets are just not well placed.
From day one MS should have done a brand new PC/touch OS and used a advanced form of Windows phone for a tablet that integrates .
Not a full bloat of Windows, re hashed.
It's not a nice OS and the tablets are just not well placed.
From day one MS should have done a brand new PC/touch OS and used a advanced form of Windows phone for a tablet that integrates .
Not a full bloat of Windows, re hashed.
I'm not sure if you've contradicted yourself there, cause Microsoft have indeed built the whole windows 8 os touch screen and integration?
Anyway, the reason Imo why its hasn't taken off yet is the lack of availability. I'm just hoping there not too late to the party.
I would like to see them take Windows 3.1 as the basis for a tablet and add a new modern interface and bolt on the essential factors such as dvd etc that people use now. This would give a complete Windows operating system which would work without needing to have the bloat factors removed.
I would like to see them take Windows 3.1 as the basis for a tablet and add a new modern interface and bolt on the essential factors such as dvd etc that people use now. This would give a complete Windows operating system which would work without needing to have the bloat factors removed.
You sound like you've been asleep for twenty years, and only just woke up? :eek:
Microsoft missed the boat really. If you don't want Apple, you get Android. Both tried and tested platforms.
It is getting harder to understand the sheer pig-headed stupidity of Microsoft. I've been using Windows since 3.1, and have finally given up with Windows 8. I detest the look, and the way they've tried to force this down people's throats, claiming it's such a cool, wonderful thing, the way of the future. When the truth is it looks horrible, and is a pain to use for those used to - and preferring - another way.
Most unforgivable, is that MS has had years to observe what Apple and Android are doing right, and to hoover up all the small independent apps for Windows that other do so much better. They could and should have produced something incredibly slick, absolutely beautiful and with hundreds of killer apps available from day one.
I never thought I'd see the day, but my next PC is very likely to be an iMac.
It is getting harder to understand the sheer pig-headed stupidity of Microsoft.
I have a theory about that: greed. By removing the Start button, Microsoft hoped that users would instead use the Metro home screen to select programs. That would have increased the chances of Metro apps being run, rather than Windows EXE programs. Microsoft get a small rake-off from selling Metro apps, but I suspect their real motive was to sell the advertising space that some Metro apps contain.
I rather think they wanted it to be a gateway to Windows RT devices, having the same user experience everywhere. But, while RT touch devices are nice to use, probably not more or less than Apple or Android devices, using Metro with mouse feels clumsy. Also OEMs decided that RT devices will be on the high end price range which isn't helping.
It's not a nice OS and the tablets are just not well placed.
From day one MS should have done a brand new PC/touch OS and used a advanced form of Windows phone for a tablet that integrates .
Not a full bloat of Windows, re hashed.
99 percent of users might agree with this statement I would imagine.
It's a poorly thought out operating system that will be forgotten along with the likes of Vista.
I rather think they wanted it to be a gateway to Windows RT devices, having the same user experience everywhere. But, while RT touch devices are nice to use, probably not more or less than Apple or Android devices, using Metro with mouse feels clumsy. Also OEMs decided that RT devices will be on the high end price range which isn't helping.
The RT suffers the same problems that Android and Ipad have, the ARM processor is just too underpowered to do anything useful with.
Even the web browsers are slow and clunky on tablets compared to a full intel processor powered devices and that's an app that's hardly pushing the boundaries.
The Surface PRO though is a cool device that can run the millions of Windows Apps at full power, and it has stylus (which is big plus for people like me who hate touchscreens).
The facility to link to a dvd would enable games to be installed to the tablet so you wern't stuck with app type games and you could play real games.
The most important factors that control which programs can be run are the processor, the video processor and the operating system. That's why the vast majority of tablets can't run Windows EXE programs. Where the program is physically obtained from doesn't matter.
Surface pro will do that. RT devices use an ARM processor making it impossible to run programmes compiled for x86 processors. Without emulator, but there is none. Windows on RT is actually at a similar level as Windows 8 (non pro), but MS made it impossible/difficult to run native ARM programmes on it. So we have native programmes that are a part of Windows and Office. ARM is not meant to do all that x86 has to, but I really would not mind to get some of the programmes for ARM natively. I find Windows RT APIs too restrictive. But that's what they get when they call it Windows.
It's not a nice OS and the tablets are just not well placed.
From day one MS should have done a brand new PC/touch OS and used a advanced form of Windows phone for a tablet that integrates .
Not a full bloat of Windows, re hashed.
I think what MS should have done was make two versions of Windows 8. The mobile/tablet version would have had the new Metro (or Duplo as I prefer to call it) interface and the desktop PC version would have been an updated Windows 7 and would have had a Windows 7 interface but without Aero. You then would have had Windows 8 Desktop, Windows 8 Tablet and Windows Phone 8.
They should have launched both Surface tabs at the same time IMO. I'm waiting and waiting for the Pro release but I am getting a bit peeded off now hanging around waiting.
I'm very happy with W8, I like the metro interface, works fine on my desktop and I'm sure its great on a touch screen but I'm not happy with the way MS have handled the launch world wide.
Comments
What brought this, just today I connected an external HDD and bluray rewriter to my Surface RT and it recognised them, could use them in data mode, I just did not find any apps that could play CDs and DVDs.I guess there's not enough power to try to play bluray discs. And it's a pity that this is not possible only because somebody said so and not because it's a technical impossibility.
Your argument is summarised along the lines of we have the desktop in RT, we have Office, let's open it up to the likes of Adobe too. But...most people believe the desktop is going away in RT as soon as Office can make good WinRT apps.
The other thing is that while WinRT was designed for secure apps (sandboxing, using contracts and brokers etc), designed for automatic resource management (e.g. tombstoning, recovering RAM etc) and mobility. Win32-based apps ported to RT will not have any of those benefits. What you end up with is a full PC running on underpowered ARM hardware with the loss in battery life that is important in a tablet.
There is a far easier away for you to get what you want Ivan which is a device that's like the Surface RT hardware and price wise but like the Surface Pro in terms of software flexibility. It's making a Surface with an Intel SOC like Clover Trail. I think there is a good likelihood of seeing a Surface with a Bay Trail processor at the end of this year.
http://www.windowsitpro.com/article/paul-thurrotts-wininfo/microsoft-flipflop-fixes-flash-145367
Anyway, I got across this article with some nice photos A look at Microsoft's top-secret Surface prototypes
It fascinates me in general to see how an idea started and evolved into a reality, one does not get to see it often.
The Surface Pro is essentially a full laptop but tablet sized. Even a self confessed Machead like me thinks the Surface Pro is cool
Of particular interest is this:
It's not a nice OS and the tablets are just not well placed.
From day one MS should have done a brand new PC/touch OS and used a advanced form of Windows phone for a tablet that integrates .
Not a full bloat of Windows, re hashed.
I'm not sure if you've contradicted yourself there, cause Microsoft have indeed built the whole windows 8 os touch screen and integration?
Anyway, the reason Imo why its hasn't taken off yet is the lack of availability. I'm just hoping there not too late to the party.
You sound like you've been asleep for twenty years, and only just woke up? :eek:
(DVD?....On a tablet?
It is getting harder to understand the sheer pig-headed stupidity of Microsoft. I've been using Windows since 3.1, and have finally given up with Windows 8. I detest the look, and the way they've tried to force this down people's throats, claiming it's such a cool, wonderful thing, the way of the future. When the truth is it looks horrible, and is a pain to use for those used to - and preferring - another way.
Most unforgivable, is that MS has had years to observe what Apple and Android are doing right, and to hoover up all the small independent apps for Windows that other do so much better. They could and should have produced something incredibly slick, absolutely beautiful and with hundreds of killer apps available from day one.
I never thought I'd see the day, but my next PC is very likely to be an iMac.
99 percent of users might agree with this statement I would imagine.
It's a poorly thought out operating system that will be forgotten along with the likes of Vista.
No dear. I just wanted a clean interface with no bells and whistles that actually works. Windows 3.1 does those things and doesn't hog memory.
The facility to link to a dvd would enable games to be installed to the tablet so you wern't stuck with app type games and you could play real games.
In effect I want the tablet to be a real substitute for a desktop or laptop and not just a toy.
The RT suffers the same problems that Android and Ipad have, the ARM processor is just too underpowered to do anything useful with.
Even the web browsers are slow and clunky on tablets compared to a full intel processor powered devices and that's an app that's hardly pushing the boundaries.
The Surface PRO though is a cool device that can run the millions of Windows Apps at full power, and it has stylus (which is big plus for people like me who hate touchscreens).
Windows 3.1 did those things to the standards of twenty years ago.
But it is not up to the standards of today.
I think what MS should have done was make two versions of Windows 8. The mobile/tablet version would have had the new Metro (or Duplo as I prefer to call it) interface and the desktop PC version would have been an updated Windows 7 and would have had a Windows 7 interface but without Aero. You then would have had Windows 8 Desktop, Windows 8 Tablet and Windows Phone 8.
I'm very happy with W8, I like the metro interface, works fine on my desktop and I'm sure its great on a touch screen but I'm not happy with the way MS have handled the launch world wide.