Surface 3/RT Moving Forward

Matt J

New member
Jul 25, 2013
38
0
0
Visit site
So long as it's a Metro app, then yes as those are the only applications you can install on RT. If you want something like iTunes, or Visual Studio, then no it won't work as they aren't Metro apps.

So in order to get iTunes or Visual Studio to work, a recompile would be needed and the app placed in the Windows Store?
 

Michael Alan Goff

New member
Jan 15, 2012
1,073
0
0
Visit site
Thanks! Learned a lot today.

No problem.

The best advice I can give, in regards to Windows RT and the Surface RT, is to buy one knowing what it can and can't do. It won't be able to do all of the things that an x86 tablet can do. You'll have a more limited app selection. The upside, of course, comes from a chance to optimize more and a greater security than that of an x86 device. ARM also does connected standby better than x86 at this point.
 

Matt J

New member
Jul 25, 2013
38
0
0
Visit site
No problem.

The best advice I can give, in regards to Windows RT and the Surface RT, is to buy one knowing what it can and can't do. It won't be able to do all of the things that an x86 tablet can do. You'll have a more limited app selection. The upside, of course, comes from a chance to optimize more and a greater security than that of an x86 device. ARM also does connected standby better than x86 at this point.

Yeah, I owned a Surface RT, then upgraded to a Surface 2, knowing full well the capabilities and limitations of Windows RT. Quite frankly, the Surface 2 is 100% capable for what I need on a daily basis. I have not encountered a situation where my Surface 2 couldn't do something I needed, Office 2013 being the primary facilitator. I love IE 11 for the web. The Windows Store has a good selection of apps now (170,000+), so it's getting better every day.

I no longer travel with my Lenovo Yoga laptop.
 

Michael Alan Goff

New member
Jan 15, 2012
1,073
0
0
Visit site
Yeah, I owned a Surface RT, then upgraded to a Surface 2, knowing full well the capabilities and limitations of Windows RT. Quite frankly, the Surface 2 is 100% capable for what I need on a daily basis. I have not encountered a situation where my Surface 2 couldn't do something I needed, Office 2013 being the primary facilitator. I love IE 11 for the web. The Windows Store has a good selection of apps now (170,000+), so it's getting better every day.

I no longer travel with my Lenovo Yoga laptop.

Yep, I can easily recommend a Surface RT or 2 or 3 when it comes out to most people.
 

DoctorSaline

New member
Jul 9, 2014
425
0
0
Visit site
I'm a noob so help me here. Will ARM processors be ever powerful enough than x86 processors to run desktop(x86) apps and games? Secondly, why would anyone want to run desktop(x86) apps to run on ARM tablets which aren't even optimized for touch?

What I think(or rather hope) is that Microsoft will bring full driver support, USB OTG etc with touched optimized version of Office suite coupled with Modern UI(similar to Modern UI of windows x86 sans desktop UI) with shared platform/store with other versions of window so that developers can bring universal apps to all four (x86, ARM, WP and XBOX) version of windows.
 
Last edited:

Michael Alan Goff

New member
Jan 15, 2012
1,073
0
0
Visit site
I'm a noob so help me here. Will ARM processors be ever powerful enough than x86 processors to run desktop(x86) apps and games? Secondly, why would anyone want to run desktop(x86) apps to run on ARM tablets which aren't even optimized for touch?

What I think(or rather hope) is that Microsoft will bring full driver support, USB OTG etc with touched optimized version of Office suite coupled with Modern UI(similar to Modern UI of windows x86 sans desktop UI) with shared platform/store with other versions of window so that developers can bring universal apps to all four (x86, ARM, WP and XBOX) version of windows.

A) I don't know why people would want to tun non-touch apps on a Surface RT.
B) The K1 is on basically on-par with the atom processor, so yes it is as powerful. The problem would be emulation, not that I would recommend it anyway. It's much better to have an optimized ARM app.
C) Touch-first Office is expected Spring 2015 for Windows RT.
 

Matt J

New member
Jul 25, 2013
38
0
0
Visit site
I'm a noob so help me here. Will ARM processor be ever powerful enough than x86 processors to run desktop(x86) apps and games? Secondly, why would anyone want to run desktop(x86) apps to run on ARM tablets which aren't even optimized for touch?

What I think(or rather hope) is that Microsoft will bring full driver support, USB OTG etc with touched optimized version of Office suite coupled with Modern UI(similar to touch UI of windows x86) with shared platform/store with other versions of window so that developers can bring universal apps to all four (x86, ARM, WP and XBOX) version of windows.

I don't know the technical details, but the Nvidia Tegra 4 processor in my Surface 2 is impressive. Games are slick and multitasking is the best I've ever seen in ANY device. It runs Office 2013 as good as my Lenovo Yoga laptop. The Surface 2 has accepted any peripheral I have attached. Printers, scanners, mice, pointers. HDMI output is great on the big screen. I'm sure there are some devices that are not compatible, but I haven't come across them yet. I hate comparing the Surface to an iPad or Android device, but it's not even close... the Surface blows them away for productivity and holds its own for fun and games.
 

DoctorSaline

New member
Jul 9, 2014
425
0
0
Visit site
A) I don't know why people would want to tun non-touch apps on a Surface RT.
B) The K1 is on basically on-par with the atom processor, so yes it is as powerful. The problem would be emulation, not that I would recommend it anyway. It's much better to have an optimized ARM app.

Alright! So basically, ARM can potentially kill x86 in future but before that Microsoft wants to build its ecosystem for ARM based Windows/WP and their dominant x86 market share is the bait for developers which will help build ecosystem of Windows tablets(ARM), Windows Phone and XBox? Right?
 

DoctorSaline

New member
Jul 9, 2014
425
0
0
Visit site
I don't know the technical details, but the Nvidia Tegra 4 processor in my Surface 2 is impressive. Games are slick and multitasking is the best I've ever seen in ANY device. It runs Office 2013 as good as my Lenovo Yoga laptop. The Surface 2 has accepted any peripheral I have attached. Printers, scanners, mice, pointers. HDMI output is great on the big screen. I'm sure there are some devices that are not compatible, but I haven't come across them yet. I hate comparing the Surface to an iPad or Android device, but it's not even close... the Surface blows them away for productivity and holds its own for fun and games.


Wow! That is pretty awesome. I can't imagine why didn't it get popular support from consumers. Perhaps the general public got confused. I'm sure next Surface with dedicated touch optimized office suite sans desktop UI will do pretty great. Just hope Microsoft don't take away it's driver support options for USBs, printers and everything else.
Also, here's to hoping that Microsoft brings devices support to Windows Phone too with Threshold.
 
Last edited:

DoctorSaline

New member
Jul 9, 2014
425
0
0
Visit site
Also, it would be pretty great if Surface 3 also comes with Pen input support and Adobe Suite either through ARM compiler or touch version for ARM.
Also, it would be pretty awesome if similar set of features can debut with Windows Phone Threshold too. I'm raising my hopes.
 
Last edited:

Michael Alan Goff

New member
Jan 15, 2012
1,073
0
0
Visit site
Alright! So basically, ARM can potentially kill x86 in future but before that Microsoft wants to build its ecosystem for ARM based Windows/WP and their dominant x86 market share is the bait for developers which will help build ecosystem of Windows tablets(ARM), Windows Phone and XBox? Right?

That could very well be the case. I do know that Microsoft wants to use ARM to, at the very least, light a fire under Intel's rear to get them to start working harder.
 

onlysublime

New member
Jun 24, 2013
1,077
0
0
Visit site
I agree with you. I guess my point was simply that RT has the power and potential to run all Windows apps, on ARM. Sure, hacks and recompiles are needed, but it is possible for MS to allow it.

recompiling is not that easy. if it was so easy, the entire Android software ecosystem and iOS ecosystem could be done in Windows Phone and Windows RT instantly. Heck, it should even be easier since they're both ARM. Whole companies have spawned because they have solutions to using shared code. Xamarin was almost bought by Microsoft because their software allows you to use common C# code and then from that, make iOS, Android, and Windows apps.

You don't realize that the Office team is probably the biggest team at Microsoft and they spent a tremendous amount of energy creating the Windows RT version. I can't wait for their true Metro version of Office (though I'm very happy with the touch capabilities of the current Office 2013 (why they didn't enable Touch by default still makes me shake my head).
 

Cruncher04

New member
Jan 26, 2014
227
0
0
Visit site
recompiling is not that easy. if it was so easy, the entire Android software ecosystem and iOS ecosystem could be done in Windows Phone and Windows RT instantly.

Recompiling _IS_ that easy. Note that the OP explicitly mentioned Windows (Win32) apps to be recompiled for RT. He was not talking about iOS or Android Apps, which of course do not use Win32 API and thus cannot be recompiled.
I also do not understand why you bring Windows Phone into the equation here. Windows Phone is lacking the Win32 subsystem (aka desktop) and many other Windows components - so it is only possible with Windows RT.
 

RajeevT

New member
May 3, 2014
319
0
0
Visit site
The best advice I can give, in regards to Windows RT and the Surface RT, is to buy one knowing what it can and can't do. It won't be able to do all of the things that an x86 tablet can do. You'll have a more limited app selection. The upside, of course, comes from a chance to optimize more and a greater security than that of an x86 device. ARM also does connected standby better than x86 at this point.

I fully understand the security advantages of a locked down OS such as Windows RT, but how I wish Microsoft would allow pro users to purchase a "business/expert" type license for RT that would disable the OS' certificate checking for executables and allow third party ARM apps to run. There's no dearth of open source software that can be recompiled to run on ARM (as the jailbreak guys have shown), and unlike what someone else in this thread said there are lots of people who'd be willing to recompile apps provided the source is freely available. I know some will say why even bother recompiling - just buy an x86 device and be happy, but ARM devices do offer advantages and it would be wonderful if MS lifted its restrictions as long as we agree to assume all the risks (and rewards) of doing so.
 

Michael Alan Goff

New member
Jan 15, 2012
1,073
0
0
Visit site
I fully understand the security advantages of a locked down OS such as Windows RT, but how I wish Microsoft would allow pro users to purchase a "business/expert" type license for RT that would disable the OS' certificate checking for executables and allow third party ARM apps to run. There's no dearth of open source software that can be recompiled to run on ARM (as the jailbreak guys have shown), and unlike what someone else in this thread said there are lots of people who'd be willing to recompile apps provided the source is freely available. I know some will say why even bother recompiling - just buy an x86 device and be happy, but ARM devices do offer advantages and it would be wonderful if MS lifted its restrictions as long as we agree to assume all the risks (and rewards) of doing so.

Just recompiling would be a horrible idea.

Edit: And obviously not simple if VLC is any indication.
 

Cruncher04

New member
Jan 26, 2014
227
0
0
Visit site
: And obviously not simple if VLC is any indication.

Unfortunately it is not an indication of the difficulties of compilation. It is an indication of the stupidity of the (VLC) developers though. They planned to compile using an open source tool-chain (MinGW), which is just not available for ARM. So they had to adapt the tool-chain first but failed. Significant modifications to the toolchain is just not as trivial as writing a video player app. They apparently underestimated the effort and skill required for such an endeavor.
 

RajeevT

New member
May 3, 2014
319
0
0
Visit site
Just recompiling would be a horrible idea.

Because...? If you mean the recompiled apps won't be optimised for ARM then you may be right, but at least they'll work and that's a start, and they can always be improved over time. Just look at the amount of stuff those guys over at xda-devs got working on jailbroken RT 8.0 devices.

Edit: And obviously not simple if VLC is any indication.
VLC is a completely different kettle of fish. Instead of starting afresh they tried to reuse most of their code and it contains so much legacy/hacky stuff that simply can't be ported across easily, plus they have problems with C99 support in VS2013 and gcc can't target WOA yet. Again, just look at the relevant xda-devs thread for the complete list of apps already ported by enthusiast developers to jailbroken Windows RT 8.0. A removal of the certificate requirement would certain make things a whole lot easier for people who know what they're doing and are willing to trade the "secure" locked-down approach for better desktop app support.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
322,915
Messages
2,242,889
Members
428,004
Latest member
hetb