Nvidia and Qualcomm on Windows RT

[calfee20]

A couple of articles from Zdnet are showing the arm guys are bullish on WinRT.

From this link: Qualcomm COO slams competition; talks future for PCs, Windows 8 | ZDNet

Diving deeper on innovation, Mollenkopf touched on Windows 8, admitting it will take "awhile for it to ramp," but that Qualcomm is trying to "be very transparent" about this "opportunity for us."
To summarize, Mollenkopf explained, Qualcomm is "long-term bullish and "near-term cautious" on Windows 8.
From a long-term view, Mollenkopf said that if you look at Windows 8 from a programming model, it has to embrace touch and cloud-based services, forcing things to be more connected. He continued to say that almost every application made will use those things that are available to us on Windows RT.
"We think there will be a break in the application environment, and the future of Windows will be something we can participate in fully," Mollenkopf predicted.

But for the near-term, Mollenkopf forecasted that it will "be awhile before the consumer embraces such a new computing environment," predicting Microsoft and others will have to experiment with more form factors.

Nevertheless, Mollenkopf was optimistic that Microsoft will be able to do that.

and from this article:

Nvidia CEO: Windows RT is a keeper | ZDNet


I believe in tablets wholeheartedly. And it's an area, it's a segment of the marketplace that we are going to continue to invest in and be quite successful in. Win RT -- I believe it is essential, strategically essential for Microsoft to be on all of the major processors in the world, surely the highest volume processor in the world, as a software company, and an operating system company. It's a market they can't afford to ignore. And so, Win RT is surely going to be an important area for them.
Now, whether people see Win RT as a consumer tablet or as a PC is yet to be determined. But at the very minimum, if you extrapolate it forward by a few years, it's hard to imagine how Win RT can't possibly, won't possibly be a wonderful PC. We know exactly what it feels like on top of a Tegra 4, and it rocks. It's fantastic. And so, Win RT I think will be successful as well. Microsoft will have no choice but to continue to invest in it, and it's a great company. They will do something great with it.

I think Surface RT version two will be fantastic with a 2013 processor. Neither Intel nor arm are going to go away any time soon. Intel will do the heavy lifting and arm has the advantage in the media dept. Intel is competing but they don't like making low cost processors. I think Surface will become a better value the next refresh.

 

[ninjaap]

I believe Window RT is the intentional future for MS. I think Windows 8 Pro is just a stop gap to help introduce everyone to the Modern UI. But it's still up to the consumer and developers to accept it.

 

[Cleavitt76]

I feel the exact opposite. Windows 8 is the ideal solution as it is capable of running both keyboard/mouse optimized (desktop/laptop) devices and touch optimized (tablet) devices as well as hybrid devices. Windows RT is basically touch only. Touch devices are never going to fully replace keyboard/mouse devices for two reasons...

1) There is a ton of custom software built for keyboard/mouse interaction and compiled for x86 processors.
2) Touch will never be an appropriate interface for any precision work. Humans are not going to evolve to have pointy fingertips any time soon.

Windows RT is only needed at the moment because very low power and inexpensive x86 processors are not yet widely available. This is needed to build small cheap tablets. However, they are not far off at all. As soon as x86 gets close enough (in large quantities) to ARM processors it won't make sense to continue the Windows RT branch. RT may still be around for several years, but it won't replace the full x86 windows version.

 

[ninjaap]

What do you mean? Why can't you use a mouse on RT? Why can't you optimize a pen on RT?

 

[Cleavitt76]

You can, but then you are just rebuilding the functionality that already exist in the full windows environment. effectively you are recreating Windows on the ARM processor which sucks for two reasons (all my arguments today come in two reason format)...

1) ARM processors are relatively simple which is good for cheap and low power, but bad for performance. It is much easier for Intel/AMD to scale down the manufacturing process for their x86 CPUs than it is for the ARM architecture to catch up on decades of performance optimizations. ARM is fine for tablets, but useless for workstations, servers, or any computer that requires performance.
2) switching Windows to the ARM architecture would break compatibility with most existing windows software. MS would be abandoning decades of investment in software. This is one of the biggest things MS has going for it.

I have personally written at least a hundred different programs for windows over the years. Most of that is very specific business software. It would not be feasible to port all of these millions of programs over to ARM.

You are thinking from the perspective of a consumer that only cares about a handful of well known apps. Those apps probably will be ported (duplicated) to RT when appropriate for touch. You aren't considering all of the server level software, some custom business software, hardware drivers for every bit of computer hardware out there, and probably other things that I'm not even considering.

 

[ninjaap]

I know exactly what you're trying to saying. But I just feel like MS (as well as Apple) are trying to set us up to move to their alternative OS. iOS price point is close to overlapping OS X price points with the introduction of its 128GB iPad. And $500-$600 for an RT device? You can get a Pro laptop or desktop for that price. So it's really going to be up to the consumer to decide which direction these companies go.

 

[Cleavitt76]

Well one thing is for sure; there is a lot of change coming to the world of mobile computing over the next few years. The price point overlaps that you mention are very interesting.

Now that I think about it one of the other possible reasons that Windows RT was created (other than the lack of enough x86 processors suitable for tablets) is to reach a certain price point to compete with the cheaper iPads. Even if those cheap and low power x86 processors were available in quantity MS would have to sell Windows at a substantial discount to OEMs trying to build a $400 tablet. It would be hard for them to keep OEMs from using those discounted licenses on more capable devices. How would they define the line with hybrid devices now blurring the tablet/laptop boundary? MS needs a "Windows Lite" version that they can sell at a low price for strictly consumer tablet devices so that they can maintain their markup on big Windows.

I suspect in the long run Windows and RT will get merged back into one x86 compatible product with a middle ground price and more frequent updates (MS has already said they plan on cheaper and more frequent updates). In some ways there are already signs of this right out of the gate. Samsung didn't build an RT device because for a little more money they could build a tablet/ultrabook with an Intel ATOM CPU that runs Windows 8. Acer has a tablet that cost the same $499 as the Surface RT, but it runs Windows 8 on Intel ATOM. Intel is working hard to release powerful x86 processors optimized for tablet power constraints.

I don't know what Apple is going to do. They are in an awkward position IMHO. My guess is they will bring the iOS app compatibility layer over to OSX and enhance OSX to allow it to run on mobile hardware. In other words, they will probably copy Microsoft's Windows 8 concept (and then claim it as innovative). However, you could be right and they may push their focus towards iOS. That severely limits them at the desktop/laptop level though (ARM processors are not powerful at all). Then again, they might just stay were they are for a while and maintain two distinct OSs and focus on making them act more like each other. Interesting times for sure.

 

[ninjaap]

I suspect in the long run Windows and RT will get merged back into one x86 compatible product with a middle ground price and more frequent updates (MS has already said they plan on cheaper and more frequent updates). In some ways there are already signs of this right out of the gate. Samsung didn't build an RT device because for a little more money they could build a tablet/ultrabook with an Intel ATOM CPU that runs Windows 8. Acer has a tablet that cost the same $499 as the Surface RT, but it runs Windows 8 on Intel ATOM. Intel is working hard to release powerful x86 processors optimized for tablet power constraints.

You took the words right out of my mouth.

 

[calfee20]

"I don't know what Apple is going to do." A few days a go Zdnet had a blog about Apple lowering the prices of their MacBookAir. I made this comment on the forum.

[h=3]MicroSoft Surface[/h] I think Apple is really concerned about the Surface. Before everyone starts quoting how much of a fail they are consider this. MicroSoft is known to be doggedly determined to promote a product.

Just before Surface RT was released Apple released a new ipad with a faster processor. Would they have done this if there was no Surface?

Just before Surface Pro was released Apple released a 128 gig ipad. Again would they have if there was no Surface?

Now when Surface Pro is being compared to Macbooks and Macbook Airs they cut their prices.

To me this this looks like quick responses to a perceived threat. I don't think Apple has any answer to Microsoft's whole Windows 8's two OS's in one package move. Operating systems are hard to make and deliver and I don't think Apple has a handy counter to Win 8 and Win RT.

 

[calfee20]

One more thing to add. Staples just announced that they will be selling ipads. Now would this have happened if Surface wasn't there?

Article here: Staples to start carrying Apple products in the U.S.? | ZDNet