Really, how so? I'm just recognizing that I'm odd in that I'm willing to spend a lot of time researching computers, tweaking/hacking them, working around limitations, and generally just geeking around with them as an end in and of itself. Most people I know want their computers to just work and let them get on with their lives. If they do, great. If they don't, regardless of the reason and underlying issues, they suck. Similar to cars. I love playing around with old cars. If one won't start or has some performance issue, it's a great challenge to me. Most people I know just want their cars to work and get them from point A to point B reliably. Do you disagree?
Let's see, about 6 or so tabs open, xbox music snapped to the side, an exel doc open, typing this while out putting to my 1080p TV. Yup, you're right, performance is terrible.
Impressive, good for you. I think you're misunderstanding, though. I'm not saying performance is horrible. Generally, it's OK, and I find the 8.1 preview even better. (Actually, other than the inevitable bugs in a beta version, it's great.) The thing is, though, this thread is about "Why so much hate for RT?" and one aspect of that isn't really hate, but a question. What does an ARM-based tablet offer compared with an x86 based one? The thought was that ARM tablets should offer a better "performance/watt" or "performance/battery life" metric; ARM devices could offer a better combination of battery life and performance than those using traditional Intel processors. And if you compare the Surface to the Surface Pro, that's arguably true. At least you can say the Surface gets like 2x the battery life of the Surface Pro, while potentially offering adequate performance for most common tasks. The Clovertrail tablets throw a wrinkle in this calculation, however. They came out about the same time as the Windows RT (ARM) tablets, and seem to offer about the same or better performance and battery life. So it's a legitimate question in my mind: What does Windows RT bring to the table if I can get similar battery life/performance with a Clovertrail processor plus the OPTION of using legacy desktop apps and x86 drivers to fill in the gaps with Windows 8? You can look in some of the other threads I've posted in talking about whether Microsoft is leaving ARM (specifically Tegra 3) performance on the table.
There's one other aspect that's related, however. You can't deny that the original units sent to reviewers back in 2012 had some performance issues with the software, particularly with the Office 2013 preview software. For better or worse, reviews come out when a new product is released, not months later. It's trite but true that "you never get a second chance to make a first impression."
Apps are not an issue, you do know what a browser's for, right?
Huh? Has this suddenly turned into a Chromebook debate?:smile:
Look, I know the browser is cool, OK? I even realized right away that I could run hulu.com from the browser and went crazy when I saw none of the reviews mentioning this. (Really, 'everyone' seemed to complain about hulu+ with it's associated subscription being required on a tablet, and there I was running hulu with no extra fee on a tablet?) But the browser isn't the end all be all of apps either. Unless you'd truly like to get into a Chromebook debate....
Liked Zune and don't like xbox music? There are many other alternatives. Personally, I thought Zune was a piece of crap. BTW, not liking xbox music makes Surface RT bad because...........?!?!?
No Surface isn't bad because Xbox music is bad. The problem is that with full Windows 8 you can use pretty much any alternative. With Windows RT, you're limited to "Windows Store apps" (aka formerly known as Metro apps) and the browser, so your alternatives are.....? (And given the reviews are written at launch, the alternatives then were???) (Really, the issue is that the geniuses behind Windows appear to have decided that essentially everything should be "brand new" and not really evolve or build on the past at all. "Start over from scratch!" looks to have been the mantra. Well, when you do that you get a v1.0 system at every level. I can't wait until Microsoft decides to do it all again in 2015 or so. What, you think they won't? Why not? Because WinRT has been ubelievably successful with consumers and developers, and used more than .Net/XNA/Silverlight? Answer in detail please....)
Edit: Just to clarify, I was being sarcastic about Microsoft changing APIs again in 2015, not because I think WinRT is so great. (It may or may not be, I really can't say.) But MS has pretty much used up their last do-over in this round. This is it for better or worse.
Completely and utterly false. 'You' don't need anything.
To use Office RT for business purposes?!? Perhaps you need to tell Microsoft that they don't understand the licensing for their own systems. From their FAQ:
Office 2013 RT FAQs - Office.com
Can I use Office 2013 RT for work or business?
As sold, Office 2013 RT is not designed for commercial, nonprofit, or revenue-generating activities. However, organizations who purchase commercial use rights or have a commercial license to Office 2013 suites that include Outlook can use Office 2013 RT for commercial, nonprofit, or revenue-generating activities.
A very passive aggressive post. I commend you on your eloquence, however, I don't believe you when you say you truly like the product, which is OK by me. Thank goodness for choice!
Sent from our Surface RT
Look, you can believe whatever you want. But I'll tell you this: I don't bother discussing things I fundametally don't like. There are probably essentially an infinite number of things in this world that I dislike. I don't waste my time arguing or debating those, or I'd never get anything done.