Here is the problem with your argument. You are comparing cheap full win8 tablets to nice rt tablets. The cheap tablets all have bad screens and build quality and the only to rt devices left have awesome builds and screens. You can't just say the same things over and over again and make people believe them. If there was a modern rt device that had a bad screen and poor build quality like your beloved t100 then it would be a lot cheaper. But there is not a cheap rt device out there now except for last years surface which was a first attempt by Microsoft.
Why RT?
- Thread starter pseudoware
- Start date
jjmurphy
New member
Here's why I chose RT. I needed all day battery life with LTE and access to Office. My day isn't 9-5, it's typically 7-7 at least. I do sometimes get to plug in, but not always.
I had an ativ500, but the storage they used on it made the atom processor seem even worse.
If I needed much else for day to day, I would have chosen intel, but honestly, if I want intel, I use my desktop since it has a lot more system resources than any of the current win 8.1 laptops.
I had an ativ500, but the storage they used on it made the atom processor seem even worse.
If I needed much else for day to day, I would have chosen intel, but honestly, if I want intel, I use my desktop since it has a lot more system resources than any of the current win 8.1 laptops.
I also had a clover trail Atom powered tablet. Largely an unsatisfying experience. Now, if I need Intel, I just RDC to my desktop from my RT. 
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Citizen X
New member
Agreed. Dad has Nokia 1520 and I bought the Dell Venue 8 Pro for mom. It's nice the Venue 8 Pro can do some things that the 1520 can't but the 1520 is locked down secure. RT ensures my dad will have a virus free life and built in Outlook is nice. Buying outlook on it's own for my mom's Windows 8.1 tablet would cost me more than the tablet!
1520 is Windows Phone 8.1, not RT. Did you mean 2520?
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4
Dude did you even read my reply?! No where in my post did I compare the T100 to the Surface RT! I literally just compared the new T100 to the previous Asus Vivotab RT!
You are the one who keeps saying the same thing over and over "RT would be cheaper" - Guess what? It's not! No RT device has been cheaper than an equivalent power and battery Win8 device Hence why I'm telling you they are pointless!
The only semi-valid response is security, and even then I have never gotten a virus on any of my WIN8 devices, maybe lay off the prons?
You are the one who keeps saying the same thing over and over "RT would be cheaper" - Guess what? It's not! No RT device has been cheaper than an equivalent power and battery Win8 device Hence why I'm telling you they are pointless!
The only semi-valid response is security, and even then I have never gotten a virus on any of my WIN8 devices, maybe lay off the prons?
Reflexx
New member
You act as if security isn't a big deal. It is.
Whether you like it or not, it is.
People don't have to be surfing porn sites. All it takes if for them to be technically challenged, and they can easily be tricked into opening or clicking things that they shouldn't open or click.
Heck, even technically savvy people may end up downloading free software because it is supposed to accomplish a simple task, like renaming files. But they may still end up with a program with a trojan or other malware.
Totally fair! I completely accept that.
You know mac os is even more secure than RT..... so then it is a much better OS than WIN8 or RT?
You know mac os is even more secure than RT..... so then it is a much better OS than WIN8 or RT?
Last edited:
This article exactly voices my sentiments : As Dell drops out, Microsoft still doesn’t give buyers a reason to pick Windows RT | Ars Technica
No OEM's produce RT devices any longer, they all saw them as useless.
No OEM's produce RT devices any longer, they all saw them as useless.
Reflexx
New member
MacOS is NOT more secure than RT. The fact that you would suggest it shows that you don't really understand what makes RT secure.
Citizen X
New member
Citizen X
New member
JaiMento
New member
I love my T100 and all, but the thing is very cheaply made. You can tell just by picking it up. Heck, for some odd reason, whenever you launch the People app, the white balance on the display changes.
If I didn't need the desktop application support, I would gladly pay the extra to get a Surface 2 w/ Type Cover 2. Better build quality with better materials, better Gorilla Glass style screen with higher resolution, rear facing camera, full sized USB 3.0 port on the device, can stand on it's own without need for a dock or case, don't have to detach a dock to use device as a tablet (just fold keyboard back), more secure OS environment, etc etc etc ...
Edit: I'd also take a Bay Trail tablet if it was ~10", 1080p screen, Gorilla Glass (or similar), full sized USB 3.0 on device, HDMI or better video out on device, front and rear facing cameras, used premium materials for body like aluminum/magnesium alloy, had 10+ hours of battery life, and came with an attachable keyboard and Office for $600 or less.
Edit2: And on the discussion about the VivoTab RT. This is a last generation device that just hasn't seen a drastic price cut. I think you can find it now for about $350. Even then, things that the VivoTab RT has over the T100 is a more premium finish (metallic design), better dock with hidden hinge design and built in battery, rear facing 8MP auto-focus camera with 5-element lens, large F/2.2 aperture & back-illuminated CMOS sensor, NFC, Gorilla Glass, etc, etc, etc ..
If I didn't need the desktop application support, I would gladly pay the extra to get a Surface 2 w/ Type Cover 2. Better build quality with better materials, better Gorilla Glass style screen with higher resolution, rear facing camera, full sized USB 3.0 port on the device, can stand on it's own without need for a dock or case, don't have to detach a dock to use device as a tablet (just fold keyboard back), more secure OS environment, etc etc etc ...
Edit: I'd also take a Bay Trail tablet if it was ~10", 1080p screen, Gorilla Glass (or similar), full sized USB 3.0 on device, HDMI or better video out on device, front and rear facing cameras, used premium materials for body like aluminum/magnesium alloy, had 10+ hours of battery life, and came with an attachable keyboard and Office for $600 or less.
Edit2: And on the discussion about the VivoTab RT. This is a last generation device that just hasn't seen a drastic price cut. I think you can find it now for about $350. Even then, things that the VivoTab RT has over the T100 is a more premium finish (metallic design), better dock with hidden hinge design and built in battery, rear facing 8MP auto-focus camera with 5-element lens, large F/2.2 aperture & back-illuminated CMOS sensor, NFC, Gorilla Glass, etc, etc, etc ..
Last edited:
Christopher Senn
New member
I dont think RT should be supported anymore really.
It goes against what MS is doing with tablets. It seems like a waste of time and a lost cause, or at least an uphill battle suffering many many losses.
I was sad to see Nokia built an amazing tablet....with RT.
It goes against what MS is doing with tablets. It seems like a waste of time and a lost cause, or at least an uphill battle suffering many many losses.
I was sad to see Nokia built an amazing tablet....with RT.
hopmedic
Active member
This is the direction that Microsoft is going, and will continue to go, though. There will come a time when there is no more desktop. For now, that has to happen gradually, though, because so many are currently dependent upon Win32 applications, but as time goes on, and the Metro apps grow and mature, eventually the desktop will disappear, at least for consumer versions of Windows.
Christopher Senn
New member
its a disturbing thought though. How can MS compete against the popular well maintained Apple ecosystem or the super open do what you want Android ecosystem? They have soooo much more support over MS apps, even of MS gets more and more apps it will just be to catch up to its competitors. Xbox Music and MS apps are lacking big time. Only reason to pick up a Windows tablet is b/c it offers an x86 OS. I think the best and biggest move ive seen all year was when MS released a fully functional OS onto a tablet, now it seems they want to take that back. Following the path of Android and playing catch up would be MS biggest downfall. Google has too much talent and money to let MS go that direction. Seems Android is evolving and according to you MS is devolving
My two cents.
I have been in IT since 1987 using Unix mainframes and having worked for companies such as Dell and Palm.
I am currently a network engineer working in a large metropolitan hospital.
First, I understand why a lot of people dislike Windows 8 (or RT) but if you have ever used Windows XP or Windows 7 on a
tablet device for any amount of time, you will then completely understand why Microsoft came out with Windows 8.
No more using my fingernail to launch applications from the Start menu.
But, I am on a tangent. Back to point. I have also used (and still have) several UMPC devices. You get in the habit of
installing programs to try and this and that and next thing you know the device is loaded down with programs most of which you
use only once.
Windows RT forces me to run a clean device. I can only download and install apps from the MS Store and these apps have
been approved by Microsoft and will not leak memory like a sieve and they generally behave. Windows RT was not meant to replace
my Windows PC as a primary device. My Windows RT tablet replaced my Android tablet and I have not looked back. IE 11 runs,
for the most part, very smoothly and renders websites better than any Android browser out there. I can do just about anything
on my RT tablet I can on my Android tablet. I like that I have access to the registry in Windows RT and as I am very familiar with
how Windows works I am very comfortable in RT. Android looks and seems more "toy-ish" in comparison to Windows RT.
The platform is very solid and its a dream to use. Battery lasts and what more can you want? Oh, and multi-tasking is most awesome on my RT.
I have been in IT since 1987 using Unix mainframes and having worked for companies such as Dell and Palm.
I am currently a network engineer working in a large metropolitan hospital.
First, I understand why a lot of people dislike Windows 8 (or RT) but if you have ever used Windows XP or Windows 7 on a
tablet device for any amount of time, you will then completely understand why Microsoft came out with Windows 8.
No more using my fingernail to launch applications from the Start menu.
But, I am on a tangent. Back to point. I have also used (and still have) several UMPC devices. You get in the habit of
installing programs to try and this and that and next thing you know the device is loaded down with programs most of which you
use only once.
Windows RT forces me to run a clean device. I can only download and install apps from the MS Store and these apps have
been approved by Microsoft and will not leak memory like a sieve and they generally behave. Windows RT was not meant to replace
my Windows PC as a primary device. My Windows RT tablet replaced my Android tablet and I have not looked back. IE 11 runs,
for the most part, very smoothly and renders websites better than any Android browser out there. I can do just about anything
on my RT tablet I can on my Android tablet. I like that I have access to the registry in Windows RT and as I am very familiar with
how Windows works I am very comfortable in RT. Android looks and seems more "toy-ish" in comparison to Windows RT.
The platform is very solid and its a dream to use. Battery lasts and what more can you want? Oh, and multi-tasking is most awesome on my RT.
To be honest, I don't view Windows RT as something particularly versatile, but that's not a bad thing.
To me, Windows RT is a mark of distinction and focus, i.e. how Microsoft wants Windows to run today and in the future. Devices such as the Surface 2 are luxury items in a sense, i.e. devices you simply add to an existing armada of fully capable machines (in my case a Surface Pro and a desktop PC). Practically I use the Surface 2 as a casual use tablet: It is loaded with all of my Windows Store games, I do most of my couch browsing on it, and I may even tap into Office time to time to check stuff out. However, it is not something I depend upon (for that I have the Pro), it is simply a great device to have, for its own sake.
This is not to say that it isn't a great device, it absolutely is... nor to say that it's useless, for most people and scenarios, it is fantastically useful... but it isn't a machine for you if you're going to spend your time looking for specific apps or drivers. It's a machine that's fun and useful in its own right. You need to appreciate that space in order to truly love the Surface 2 or any other Windows RT device, and in order to love that space, you should have more capable devices available to you beforehand (such as the Surface Pro or a laptop).
I bought the Surface 2 because I felt that my Pro was becoming a pure productivity machine and that I could no longer afford to use it in a casual manner. Not only is my day job largely dependent on the Pro, but so are my wider professional interests (e.g. content creation, programming, learning, etc). Hence, I got a Surface 2 to leave around on my coffee table, for those times when I just need to pick something up in order to browse the web, play games, interact with my Xbox. And for that it does a phenomenal job, and given the casual focus, I'd much rather use RT than to risk any problems associated with x86, however unlikely they are at this point.
To me, Windows RT is a mark of distinction and focus, i.e. how Microsoft wants Windows to run today and in the future. Devices such as the Surface 2 are luxury items in a sense, i.e. devices you simply add to an existing armada of fully capable machines (in my case a Surface Pro and a desktop PC). Practically I use the Surface 2 as a casual use tablet: It is loaded with all of my Windows Store games, I do most of my couch browsing on it, and I may even tap into Office time to time to check stuff out. However, it is not something I depend upon (for that I have the Pro), it is simply a great device to have, for its own sake.
This is not to say that it isn't a great device, it absolutely is... nor to say that it's useless, for most people and scenarios, it is fantastically useful... but it isn't a machine for you if you're going to spend your time looking for specific apps or drivers. It's a machine that's fun and useful in its own right. You need to appreciate that space in order to truly love the Surface 2 or any other Windows RT device, and in order to love that space, you should have more capable devices available to you beforehand (such as the Surface Pro or a laptop).
I bought the Surface 2 because I felt that my Pro was becoming a pure productivity machine and that I could no longer afford to use it in a casual manner. Not only is my day job largely dependent on the Pro, but so are my wider professional interests (e.g. content creation, programming, learning, etc). Hence, I got a Surface 2 to leave around on my coffee table, for those times when I just need to pick something up in order to browse the web, play games, interact with my Xbox. And for that it does a phenomenal job, and given the casual focus, I'd much rather use RT than to risk any problems associated with x86, however unlikely they are at this point.
From my point of view the discussion shouldn't be Windows 8 vs Windows 8 RT. That's comparing apples and oranges.
As we already noticed, that's like comparing iOS vs Mac OS.
I think the main reason (for me at least) why RT will die under the CURRENT circumstances is, that there is something else in the game: Windows Phone.
Windows Phone with the (mini/look-alike) modern design is already around for a while. It has come a long way to reach the current status, which also includes the apps/games.
Coming up with Windows 8.x (which modern ui makes absolutely no sense on a desktop in my opinion) is not a bad thing at all. It's completely different to what we know (and again, for me personally modern ui makes no sense on a desktop computer) but still, it has the advantages of a full blown Windows. What I'm asking myself all the time is: Why the heck did MS come up with the idea of establishing another 3rd OS, Windows RT?
It doesn't have the features of a full blown Windows 8 but it also can't use the things that have already been developed for Windows Phone 8.
What happened with Apple is that they thought "We want ONE universal portable OS" and adjusted iOS to be able to handle higher resolutions and screen-sizes when they introduced the iPad. Existing apps just needed to be updated or adjusted but they were still in the store (low-res). If you wanted you could also use the iPhone apps and scale it to the iPad size (which looked crappy of course).
Turning Windows Phone into a Windows RT would ABSOLUTELY make sense to me. The modern UI is fantastic for a tablet and it's already there for the phone (in a slightly different design).
Isn't it the case that Microsoft recently decided to merge RT + WP? If so, that's the way to go. If not, RT won't be around for too long. My 2 cents
As we already noticed, that's like comparing iOS vs Mac OS.
I think the main reason (for me at least) why RT will die under the CURRENT circumstances is, that there is something else in the game: Windows Phone.
Windows Phone with the (mini/look-alike) modern design is already around for a while. It has come a long way to reach the current status, which also includes the apps/games.
Coming up with Windows 8.x (which modern ui makes absolutely no sense on a desktop in my opinion) is not a bad thing at all. It's completely different to what we know (and again, for me personally modern ui makes no sense on a desktop computer) but still, it has the advantages of a full blown Windows. What I'm asking myself all the time is: Why the heck did MS come up with the idea of establishing another 3rd OS, Windows RT?
It doesn't have the features of a full blown Windows 8 but it also can't use the things that have already been developed for Windows Phone 8.
What happened with Apple is that they thought "We want ONE universal portable OS" and adjusted iOS to be able to handle higher resolutions and screen-sizes when they introduced the iPad. Existing apps just needed to be updated or adjusted but they were still in the store (low-res). If you wanted you could also use the iPhone apps and scale it to the iPad size (which looked crappy of course).
Turning Windows Phone into a Windows RT would ABSOLUTELY make sense to me. The modern UI is fantastic for a tablet and it's already there for the phone (in a slightly different design).
Isn't it the case that Microsoft recently decided to merge RT + WP? If so, that's the way to go. If not, RT won't be around for too long. My 2 cents
Similar threads
Trending Posts
-
PSA: It doesn't matter if your computer runs on ARM, all of your apps will work on Windows 11- Started by Windows Central
- Replies: 7
-
Remnant 2 'The Forgotten Kingdom' gives us yet another reason to play one of the best games of the past year
- Started by Windows Central
- Replies: 0
Members online
No members online now.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram