Microsoft is committed to Windows RT
0. phoneArena 03 Aug 2013, 13:22 posted on
Following the write-down of $900 million due to poor sales of the Surface RT, it begged the question as to whether...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
1. fouadqr (Posts: 322; Member since: 21 Nov 2012)
When Nokia Release a Windows RT Tab ..then this OS will grow up !
8. Tsepz_GP (Posts: 880; Member since: 12 Apr 2012)
Lol, I'm sure MS have the same pipe dream.
11. fanboy1974 (Posts: 1313; Member since: 12 Nov 2011)
What the heck can Nokia do differently with Windows RT? The Surface had many problems but Windows RT was the biggest. And judging from the price of the Nokia 1020 I doubt Nokia wants to lose money on a tablet. Apple will kill a Nokia RT tablet at the $300 plus mark with the iPad mini.
Only a full blown Windows 8 Nokia tab between $400 to $500 will make any sense. They have to aim for the 9.7" iPad price point. Google has the low price tablet market locked up with the Nexus 7 (2013). Apple can't even touch the Nexus at the $229 price point.
19. icyrock1 (Posts: 307; Member since: 25 Mar 2013)
Not likely. Nokia can't do everything, and they can't stop the OS from being pointless.
Seriously, there's literally no point for it to exist, when Windows Phone already exists. Why do they need two ARM based platforms? They should cut there losses and merge the two (adding the functionality of RT to Windows Phone). Surely that would be less work than maintaining two ARM OS's?
23. TheLolGuy (Posts: 483; Member since: 05 Mar 2013)
And that is exactly what is happening with Mr. Ballmer's reorganization plan.
24. Suo.Eno (Posts: 337; Member since: 17 Feb 2013)
"Seriously, there's literally no point for it to exist, when Windows Phone already exists. Why do they need two ARM based platforms? They should cut there losses and merge the two (adding the functionality of RT to Windows Phone). Surely that would be less work than maintaining two ARM OS's?"
Finally! You sir seem to be of those rare few who actually get the memo!
I've long argued the same.. It's not apps (per se) and it's not devs (I'm getting there to elaborate..). It's the BASIC PREMISE that's the problem. iOS and Android goes back and forth phone and tab spaces w/ no apparent problem and this presents a huge advantage developmental wise.
RT was a huge facepalm the minute it got out because it got even some of the most staunch WP supporters scratching their collective heads and asked "Wait a minute? WP itself can probably scale up? Why the hell is this thing "t3h tabletz version" again???".
33. zdprince (Posts: 24; Member since: 10 May 2013)
it is very funny how some guys like yourself are MS haters and just blog or comments on what you fail to understand or maybe do not know. Could you please give me an example of a version of iPad which can run a full fledge desktop version of Adobe illustrator? The difference between Win RT and Win Pro is that Win RT is just like iPad IOS version and Android for tablets where as Win Pro is like the full IOS version running on MacBook Pro or Mac Air or Ubuntu or debian Linux where we currently do not have an Android version.
Another difference you could not figure out is also a smart phone and a tablet. Wikipedia should help you on this one...
2. fsnas (Posts: 100; Member since: 18 Jun 2012)
I'm using it (Microsoft Surface) and loooving it.
People compare it to Windows Pro, and sure it'll look bad. But if you compare it to an iPad, it's fascinating!
I finish all my work on it like emails, documents (Office Apps) and play games.
you people have to give it a fair trial.
12. Credo (Posts: 702; Member since: 19 Apr 2012)
True ! i can't wait to update my Dutch Windows RT (8) to Windows 8.1 on my Surface RT tablet and compare it to my friends ipad who can only run 1 app on 1 screen and i can open up 3 apps at the same time hahaha .... So excited :)
20. icyrock1 (Posts: 307; Member since: 25 Mar 2013)
The pricing is what's off on the tablet, and sadly that's why it failed to gain mainstream traction (before the price cut). At the price they had it at, it was more expensive than the iPad and had less storage available (there's only 14 GB's available on the 32GB model, while the iPad has around 15 on the 15 GB's model). And, if you bought the type cover they marketed as necessary to the experience, that's an extra $100 added to the bill.
Had they included the cover, and lowered the price by $50-$100 it would have had a better chance to catch on.
3. darkvadervip (Posts: 358; Member since: 08 Dec 2010)
I agree my son uses the surface tablet for high school with no problems and the only thing he misses is the apps from his galaxy tablet but like the windows tablet better plus I'm tired of people and the screen resolution because the eye can only see so much anyway.
13. Credo (Posts: 702; Member since: 19 Apr 2012)
My Surface RT is the best tablet i've ever used, i never liked the iPad .... and a tablet with Android is not what i want neither, my little brother has one with a quadcore and 2 GB ram and it still laggs ... Not that i hate iOS or Android but i really like Windows RT better than any other OS :)
14. Shatter (Posts: 2036; Member since: 29 May 2013)
That "quadcore" is a tegra 3 which is old and slow.
If you got the good windows tablets that have i7s and 4gb ram and SSD they are fast with no lag and can run some PC games + most PC applications.
15. HASHTAG (unregistered)
True, Tegra 3 is old, but it runs a lot better on Windows RT than on Android due to its lighter package. But still, it would be nice to see something a little better.
22. icyrock1 (Posts: 307; Member since: 25 Mar 2013)
"True, Tegra 3 is old, but it runs a lot better on Windows RT than on Android due to its lighter package."
You do know that Windows RT is the heavier system, right? Nearly half of the storage on the 32GB model is taken up by the OS.
25. -box- (Posts: 3944; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
It runs cleaner though, requiring fewer resources, mostly because it's not an OS running a JVM for the user to interact with. Android needs a foundation-up revamp, which may happen for version 5, which may be called Chrome Mobile OS instead of android.
4. Birds (Posts: 1086; Member since: 21 Nov 2011)
I don't think it is a bad operating system I just see no point in it anymore ever since the creation of the Has well chipsets. I mean ARM has great endurance and all but unless RT can be aimed at the crowd of people who need a cheap and productive operating system... And I mean a damn price of less than 300 bucks... I don't care for a "premium" design as long as it performs well and gets rid of desktop for the build.
5. sprockkets (Posts: 1465; Member since: 16 Jan 2012)
Microsoft is of course committed to WinRT, just as they are committed to throwing billions upon billions on WP, and in the past Xbox, Plays For Sure, Bing, MSN, Live, old Surface and barely getting anything in return.
They might as well just keep patent trolling Android since their ROI is much better there.
6. TheLolGuy (Posts: 483; Member since: 05 Mar 2013)
Really -- Windows RT is the future, and despite a lot of people trying to talk it down, the only problem I saw was that it was too early. Just like how Chrome OS is too early. (the only reason it is selling well is price)
ARM chips are only just beginning to creep up to Intels' lower end Ultrabook performance. Since phones and more cost-friendly/smaller footprint mobile devices are more pervasive than the PC will be, it won't take long before all the old developers will recreate their products and software for the new chips. When they do, x86 will lose one of it's huge key advantages.
Intel has been super greedy about licensing it's x86 architecture to others, and the only reason AMD has it is to keep antitrust watchers off their backs. The only reason nVidia went ARM is because Intel refused to license it to nVidia. Now AMD refuses to enter the smartphone chip market and Intel is the only player against a sea of ARM chip makers. They are now paying for their greed and Microsoft is making the safe decision.
Microsoft had too high of expectations for the first RT, but the subsequent ones with 64 bit support for 4-8gb ram configurations, and laptop performance for sub-10 watt tdp will make it a product truly worth having. Tegra 3 and 2gb of ram just couldn't give the needed performance.
7. Birds (Posts: 1086; Member since: 21 Nov 2011)
My question is this. Do you think it is possible to hyperthread an arm based a15 CPU? I mean a quad core snapdragon with hyper threading in the future could be the perfect platform for RT. I'm a novice here and I know that there is an upcoming architecture from ARM based off of a die size of 22 nm but....eh.
10. TheLolGuy (Posts: 483; Member since: 05 Mar 2013)
Hyperthreading is just a name for the technology. AMD's design with Bulldozer and modules is supposed to be their unique take on what Hyperthreading was designed to do.
ARM is obviously trying to implement their own kind, and MIPS too I'm sure, now that Imagination Tech is going for the gold.
It's going to be very interesting... Later next year we will see Cortex A-57 cores with the supposed strength of peak Jaguar core performance (Kabini & Temash) yet with better power consumption. I'd guess that it won't show up on consumer products a good half a year after. Probably 1H 2015.
16. Shatter (Posts: 2036; Member since: 29 May 2013)
AMDs isn't the same as intels hyperthreading.
Amd used 4 groups of 2 cores. A real octa would of been 1 group of 8 cores. The i7s are 4 physical cores on the $300 ones + 4 logical. The more expensive socket 2011 i7s are 6 cores + 6 logcal cores. The first real octachips are expected to be intel Haswell-E with 8 logical cores + 8 real ones, which is also the first chipset that will probably use DDR4. 8 logical cores + 8 real cores is 16 threads, it will be between 3-4x the power of an fx 8350. A logical core is ~50% the power of a physical core.
18. TheLolGuy (Posts: 483; Member since: 05 Mar 2013)
I never said AMD's idea of using modules was the same thing.
9. fanboy1974 (Posts: 1313; Member since: 12 Nov 2011)
"There was no shortage of armchair quarterbacking amongst our loyal readership"
Just call me the Tom Brady of tablets because I predicted that this would happen the moment RT became official.
17. haikallp (Posts: 120; Member since: 10 Feb 2012)
I'm pretty positive on the growth of Windows RT. If Android and iOS tablets can sell well, I don't see why Windows RT can't. I mean, except for the app quantity issue, it can do more things than the iPad. Microsoft just needs to get more devs on board and educate the consumers more so that they know the difference from the Windows 8.
21. roscuthiii (Posts: 1887; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
I completely misread the title... I thought it said, "Microsoft is committed for Windows RT".
32. 7thspaceman (Posts: 1271; Member since: 14 Feb 2011)
you are out of line remember when the Android tablets first came out People said the touch screen response Stunk and it did not have any APPS so stay with the Good old IPAD.
well the Apps came to Android in time. The same Will happen with Windows RT
27. breathlesstao (Posts: 78; Member since: 16 Apr 2010)
Why why WHY is Microsoft committing itself to it when manufacturers are ditching it left, right and center??? Seriously...
28. haseebzahid (Posts: 1844; Member since: 22 Feb 2012)
if they learned from first RT then yes by all means continue to go with it
29. Antonyjoseph (Posts: 216; Member since: 06 Apr 2013)
Why is Microsoft so stubborn? Just Merge WP and RT and make it one OS. Bring out Tablets with both WP OS and Windows 8 at different price points. Android is selling a lot of tablets in the $200 price range and thats what WIndows need to do with the new WP OS. For premium tablets go for the Windows 8XX OS.
30. 7thspaceman (Posts: 1271; Member since: 14 Feb 2011)
Folks forgive me for mentioning Past rumors but The leaks said that Microsoft would put Windows RT on a SMALLER Tablet than the 10.1 it uses today and that The better selling "Surface Pro running Windows 8.1 would get a bigger screen going from 10.1 to 11.5.
as I said before "Windows RT" is a great OS for E-book and E- Magazine readers, internet net based movie and TV show viewing. and for Educational text books and school learning tool software and surfing the web for information and e-commerce. Folks you do not need a desktop Operating system which Windows 8 or 8.1 are to do these things. Microsoft should have the Windows Phone 8 touch screen team redo the Windows "RT" touch screen interface because they have more experience and make windows smart phones touch screen response as smooth as butter!
31. 7thspaceman (Posts: 1271; Member since: 14 Feb 2011)
Frankly folks Microsoft should kill the Windows RT brand name and rename it Windows tablet OS or something else because the general Public thinks it's a bad product. Lately this is not new to Microsoft. MS had to kill the Metro branding. and Kill it's SkyDrive cloud service brand name because of Copyright name infringements.