Our Surface 2's future

[a5cent]

Do you have a link to such statement. I cannot remember Microsoft mentioning anything close into this direction. I don't talk about rumours spread by some 3rd class blog.

You're new here I see. :wink: I don't base my opinions on such blogs.

There have been many hidden references from Microsoft officials, going all the way back to Julie Larson Green who said MS has three major versions of Windows (Windows, Windows Phone, and Windows RT) and that is one too many. Windows Phone isn't going away, and neither is Windows, so that leaves only RT. However, in this particular instance I was thinking of a statement by MJF:

In fact, I've heard from one of my trusted sources that Microsoft's Surface strategy, going forward, will be to focus on Intel and to cease production of any future ARM-based Surfaces. But that's only from one source, I'd note.

Individually these and other references aren't entirely convincing, but as a group I think they paint a pretty clear picture depicting how Windows RT is at the end of its rope.

By the way a) is the only viable upgrade option. No one wants to have Windows Phone/Mobile on the tablet, in particular no Surface owners and loosing literally hundreds of features.

But isn't that judgement a little premature? You have not seen W10 mobile, nor has anyone else. Depending on how W10 mobile turns out, I might agree with you, but I might not. I fully expect W10 mobile to:

1. run all WP apps
2. run all Windows Store Apps
3. include Touch Office (which would have to be an almost complete port of MS Office for touch based devices).
4. include all the features currently available to RT but not supported by WP (like snapping, printer support, etc.)

If that isn't yet a viable upgrade option, I'd say it's at least very close to being one. However, I do understand those who'd say it's still not enough without the desktop. What I don't understand is dismissing it outright before we know more, particularly since MS has repeatedly mentioned the merging of their existing OSes (RT and WP).

In addition a) is the least effort route, as it does not create a 3rd OS branch in between Windows and Windows Phone.

W10 mobile will literally be the exact same OS on phones, phablets and tablets. There will be no third branch.

However, if RT devices are to receive an update, I think you're right that W10 RT would involve the least amount of effort. That is the only reason I'm not dismissing that option outright. I'd still consider it a dead OS however, as I wouldn't expect it to ever be installed on anything except existing ARM Surface devices.

Further Microsoft vision for Windows RT has been always Windows for ARM and not any dumbed down experience like Windows Phone.

If by Windows you mean "Desktop Windows", rather than just the kernel and the WinRT APIs, then I believe that to be incorrect.

I don't think the desktop was ever a deliberate part of what MS envisioned for tablets. It's really just an artefact left over from requiring Win32 based Office to run on ARM/WinRT devices. I don't think the desktop would ever have been accessible on ARM tablets, if WinRT based Office had already existed back then (which still doesn't exist today).

 

[a5cent]

Obviously we don't know this for sure, but from the hints they showed of Office Touch in the web video a week or so ago, it's going to be more akin to the iPad's version of Office. And the one WinRT Office app that we do have already (OneNote) is garbage compared to its desktop counterpart. So I'm not holding my breath on that. I do think that your scenario of ARM Surface (Windows 8.1) devices having an update to a desktop-less Windows 10 is what's most likely to happen though.

Yup. That is complete speculation on my part, just because that's what I think Office needs to be. Particularly for Windows RT users!

If MS is providing only a set of iOS like Office apps, then I think W10 mobile as an upgrade option is off the table. Surely not even MS is so shrewd as to think that would be acceptable to Windows RT owners. Failing that, I'd tend most towards Windows RT owners not getting any update at all, but like I said, I still wouldn't rule out the W10 RT option entirely. I just feel that's also more based on my hopes, rather than me believing it to be realistic.

 

[Ed Boland]

Well, I'm glad to see my thread turn into such a hot topic of discussion. For what it's worth, I sold my Surface 2 with the purple Type 2 keyboard for $250. I'm either going to get an S3 Pro, or wait it out for the next gen Windows 10 devices to come out. (Surface 4 Pro?)

 

[frimar21]

... I sold my Surface 2 with the purple Type 2 keyboard for $250. I'm either going to get an S3 Pro, or wait it out for the next gen Windows 10 devices to come out. (Surface 4 Pro?)

so you should change your signature ;-)
for that price I would have purchased from you... (even if I suppose that the shipment to Italy could have been a problem)

About the discussion, it seems that the major concern is about the desktop, if it will be present or not, considering only an option the fact that there will be no upgrade at all.
To be honest, I hope that we will have at least one upgrade, desktop or not, that will bring us more apps!
this is the limit today, no more apps developed for RT till there is no a clear path for its future... at least this is my opinion...

 

[Cruncher04]

There have been many hidden references from Microsoft officials, going all the way back to Julie Larson Green who said MS has three major versions of Windows (Windows, Windows Phone, and Windows RT) and that is one too many. Windows Phone isn't going away, and neither is Windows, so that leaves only RT.

That is exactly my point. That's exactly what Julie Larson Green _NOT_ said. Misquotations and interpretations by the blogs and so called experts. Julie Larson Green never said, that there are 3 version of Windows. In fact there are only 2. If you count Xbox as Windows version, that would make it 3. You should know by now that Windows RT is just Windows compiled for ARM.
If they eventually decide to compile Windows Phone for x86, that would not make it another version either.

W10 mobile will literally be the exact same OS on phones, phablets and tablets. There will be no third branch.

It is still the Windows Phone development branch. Only MS changing the name and unifying the runtime (e.g. app cross compatibility) does not make it a viable OS for tablets. In particular since Microsoft already has a nice OS for tablets, which is called Windows including the ARM variant Windows RT.
Remember with Windows RT they were the first time ahead in features compared to iOS and Android in the ARM based tablets space. It would be incredibly stupid giving this advantage away in favor of something dumbed down.

 

[Ed Boland]

so you should change your signature ;-)
...

Oh yeah, my sig... I hardly ever see it as 99.9% of my time on this site is via their app. I'll change it next time I access the site from one of my PCs.

 

[Andrew Fratkin]

Everything I've heard (mostly from Windows Weekly on TWIT) says the RT will receive a version of the WP 10, no desktop.

 

[acerace113]

Everything I've heard (mostly from Windows Weekly on TWIT) says the RT will receive a version of the WP 10, no desktop.

If that is true then I'm not updating

Sent from my Surface 2 using Tapatalk

 

[frimar21]

Don't know... I suppose at the end I will upgrade to W10, if available, despite the presence or not of the desktop.
At this stage, it will depend from office, that today requires the desktop, and from the numbers of applications we will gain (IF we will have the universal app on the new WP10RT I don't se any reason not to upgrade!)

I should admit that on my surface 2, the desktop is used only by my Girlfriend that saves her documents there, instead of using a folder.
In case, I should only teach her how to manage the files in the proper way, but again she uses it for webmail (desktop or not does not change, even if the ie opened from the desktop has a more familiar look for her) and for office (mainly word.. so again, if there will be a touch version...)

 

[fatclue_98]

Is it just me or is everybody missing the most important aspect of the desktop? The main reason I got the Surface2 with RT was because of the full IE on desktop. I don't need apps if I have full web capability in my browser. I picked up a refurb from Microsoft for a buck ninety-nine and you can't tell it from new. Losing access to Autodesk's online CAD editing tools would be a major loss for me, so count me in for wanting to keep the desktop.

 

[a5cent]

You should know by now that Windows RT is just Windows compiled for ARM. If they eventually decide to compile Windows Phone for x86, that would not make it another version either.

Seriously, you're not telling me anything new. I've said the same thing for years here at Windows Central. You might want to make yourself familiar with my post history before deciding what you think I should "know by now". It's a bit arrogant.

It is still the Windows Phone development branch. Only MS changing the name and unifying the runtime (e.g. app cross compatibility) does not make it [Windows Phone 10] a viable OS for tablets.

True. You just ignored the important part. In addition to the name change and unifying the runtime, MS is also extracting most (if not all) of the tablet related features from Windows (RT) and merging them into WP. I don't know what this entails, but I imagine it will include virtually everything people are familiar with from Windows RT, except the desktop. It should be obvious that the whole point is to make WP a viable OS for tablets.

There have been many hidden references from Microsoft officials, going all the way back to Julie Larson Green who said MS has three major versions of Windows (Windows, Windows Phone, and Windows RT) and that is one too many.

That is exactly my point. That's exactly what Julie Larson Green _NOT_ said. Misquotations and interpretations by the blogs and so called experts. Julie Larson Green never said, that there are 3 version of Windows. In fact there are only 2

You apparently have no idea what Julie Larson-Green did or did not say. Here's the quote:

"We have the phone OS, we have Windows RT, and we have full Windows," Larson-Green said. "We are not going to have three."
source (one of many)

With that I think you've sacrificed your credibility on this issue, despite the fact that I agree with your technical assessment. That's just completely missing the point. Despite not really having three separate OSes, MS does have three separate OS brands, which is what Green and I are referring to. For over a year now I've repeatedly explained why Windows RT is dead (as a brand/separate SKU), and recently tech blogs have started hinting at exactly that.

As far as updates to Windows RT devices are concerned, there may only be one choice that satisfies you, but based on your posts, I think you're needlessly worried, due to failing to recognize where MS is taking WP. I'm in no way guaranteeing that you'll be happy with the final results, but you are definitely seeing problems where there aren't any. Yes. Losing the desktop will be a problem for some. I'm personally more concerned over how Touch-Office will compare to desktop Office, as those two would have to be roughly equivalent, feature-wise, for W10 mobile to be a viable upgrade. Excluding those two areas of uncertainty, I'm sure W10 mobile will be better than Windows RT in every conceivable way.

Anyway, as for now, I'm sticking to my assessment that a Windows 10 RT is very unlikely.

 

[frimar21]

Is it just me or is everybody missing the most important aspect of the desktop? The main reason I got the Surface2 with RT was because of the full IE on desktop. I don't need apps if I have full web capability in my browser. I picked up a refurb from Microsoft for a buck ninety-nine and you can't tell it from new. Losing access to Autodesk's online CAD editing tools would be a major loss for me, so count me in for wanting to keep the desktop.

.. and what if the new IE will be "full" even without desktop? ;-)

 

[fatclue_98]

.. and what if the new IE will be "full" even without desktop? ;-)

I could live with that, but I would still like to have control panel, Windows Explorer, etc.

 

[WillysJeepMan]

Is it just me or is everybody missing the most important aspect of the desktop? The main reason I got the Surface2 with RT was because of the full IE on desktop. I don't need apps if I have full web capability in my browser. I picked up a refurb from Microsoft for a buck ninety-nine and you can't tell it from new. Losing access to Autodesk's online CAD editing tools would be a major loss for me, so count me in for wanting to keep the desktop.

I think it's just you.

You DON'T get full IE on the desktop on the Surface 2 and RT. No Java. No plug-ins. That is a serious deficiency for students who need to access their institution's online resources.

And while you don't need apps if you have a web browser, app-ified websites are only a small portion of the type of apps many of us need. If it was as simple as that, then a Chromebook would fit the needs as well.

 

[Ed Boland]

That's an odd statement. Everyone that I've interacted with dislikes the desktop. I'm the lone oddball who believes that the Desktop is a BENEFIT of the RT devices. Look at the comments on this forum over the past year and you'll find that I'm virtually the only defender of the desktop on Windows RT.
:

I guess I caught this a little late there Jeepman, but I'm a big defender of the desktop on RT as well! Used it quite often, for a variety of things... So I reckon that makes two of us!

 

[a5cent]

I guess I caught this a little late there Jeepman, but I'm a big defender of the desktop on RT as well! Used it quite often, for a variety of things... So I reckon that makes two of us!

I think I've read from at least from six or seven people who appreciate the desktop on RT. You're not alone, but you definitely are in the minority.

 

[Grodelj]

I think that desktop mode separates surface from other tablets. If they remove desktop (and don't somehow make up with other functions), the surface will become just another tablet or maybe a big WP device. There will be quite few reasons left to stick with it over other tablets.

 

[Cruncher04]

Despite not really having three separate OSes, MS does have three separate OS brands, which is what Green and I are referring to. For over a year now I've repeatedly explained why Windows RT is dead (as a brand/separate SKU), and recently tech blogs have started hinting at exactly that.

And still you are missing my point. I am not concerned about missing a brand. They can call Windows RT just Windows for ARM or whatever they like. I am concerned about not having a ARM device option running Windows. Also Microsoft should be concerned as well in particular since offering Windows targeting ARM is a low hanging fruit compared to upgrading Windows Phone to be a viable OS for tablets.
This comes in addition to the fact, that you would lose the feature of plugging your Surface into a multi-monitor environment and happly work on your office files with mouse/keyboard.

Excluding those two areas of uncertainty, I'm sure W10 mobile will be better than Windows RT in every conceivable way.

Given Microsoft track-record with Windows Phone lacking the most basic features even 4 years after release, I consider this highly unlikely. This comes on top of the fact that Windows does have all those missing features today. And I am not even talking about advanced features like sharing your file system over the network, joining workgroups/domains, scripting services etc. which are offered by Windows (including RT of course) today.

I think I've read from at least from six or seven people who appreciate the desktop on RT. You're not alone, but you definitely are in the minority.

Where is this supposed majority of Surface owners, who would like to get rid of the desktop? If anything, this very thread proves, that the contrary is the case.

 

[WillysJeepMan]

Where is this supposed majority of Surface owners, who would like to get rid of the desktop? If anything, this very thread proves, that the contrary is the case.

Not everyone who owns a Windows RT/2 tablet has weighed in on this thread. So you'll need to look beyond this thread (that is only 1 month old) to the general consensus over the past 15 months.

​Has the general opinion changed over that time? Perhaps. But it was clearly anti-desktop at some point in the past... and may still be.

 

[etphoto]

Without sounding dumb, what's the big deal with desktop? I mean, if Office ran in Metro mode, why is desktop needed? For those that "use it" all the time, just what is needed in desktop other than Office?

ET