10-01-2014 12:16 AM
69 123
tools
  1. neo158's Avatar
    I disagree, you would not create a tablet that can use a full functioning keyboard (touch or type), include office, if it was not meant to have a desktop experience?
    The iPad can use a full functioning Bluetooth keyboard and has a touch based version of Office, does that have a desktop?

    I don't understand the insistence on having a desktop on an ARM tablet. It simply isn't needed, as demonstrated by the iPad and the fact that Surface 2 doesn't ship with a keyboard included. Your requirements are different to others, so why go for an ARM based device instead of a full Windows device like Surface Pro 3.

    I think that a lot of this is mind-set i.e. It's Windows so it MUST have a desktop.
    a5cent likes this.
    09-21-2014 11:03 AM
  2. fatclue_98's Avatar
    I disagree, you would not create a tablet that can use a full functioning keyboard (touch or type), include office, if it was not meant to have a desktop experience?

    I understand you have a right to your opinion, but this is my understanding watch the original surface rt keynote ( ) seems they are showing both in their design...



    I agree to disagree, if you watch the keynote, they included office, they included a keyboard/mouse input, they talk about connecting to printers, they talk about long flights with watching movies and producing content. If it was just for a consumption device they would have never allowed a keyboard/mouse to interact, they created a hybrid device that can be a tablet and a laptop... I wanted a laptop/tablet replacement for my old Windows XP laptop, the surface RT 64G has surpassed my expectations, (came with office), I did not want to get a surface pro (run IE and get malware and viruses), I get the best of both worlds...
    I got your back John. I was under the impression that RT would be a scaled down version of Windows minus the .exe functions. Without any apps to offer, what's there to dissuade customers from getting an iPad or Android tablet?
    09-21-2014 12:23 PM
  3. a5cent's Avatar
    I agree to disagree, if you watch the keynote, they included office, they included a keyboard/mouse input, they talk about connecting to printers, they talk about long flights with watching movies and producing content. If it was just for a consumption device they would have never allowed a keyboard/mouse to interact, they created a hybrid device that can be a tablet and a laptop... I wanted a laptop/tablet replacement for my old Windows XP laptop, the surface RT 64G has surpassed my expectations, (came with office), I did not want to get a surface pro (run IE and get malware and viruses), I get the best of both worlds...
    I have no idea why you think you are disagreeing with me.

    I'm fully aware of what RT is and how it was built. I'm aware of everything mentioned in the keynote you linked to. That was two years ago however. We're past that. Like I said, the design MS arrived at for RT was more a result of technical and economical limitations than anything else. At one point, MS probably even hoped/thought that the pseudo-hybrid approach RT used would be their official and final take on their tablet OS. It just didn't turn out that way. That was then. Tomorrow is different.

    I am talking about the future (and I think Neo is too), which is why I feel that your post doesn't address any of the points I made. I do occasionally refer to RT, but I'm using it only as a basis with which to explain how MS' tablet OS will change going forward. MS' future tablet OS won't have a desktop, but the resulting user experience won't be as different as you likely imagine it would be. To me it seems as if you and a few others are incapable of imagining that Office could ever run on anything other than the desktop, or that it's entirely unthinkable that we may plug a keyboard and mouse into a device without a desktop. I know none of you are that unimaginative, but that is how it comes across, at least to me.

    I got your back John. I was under the impression that RT would be a scaled down version of Windows minus the .exe functions. Without any apps to offer, what's there to dissuade customers from getting an iPad or Android tablet?
    Yeah, it's likely you're in the same boat as John. Your impression is correct of course. Yes, RT is a scaled down version of Windows, or more precisely, it's exactly Windows with an added restriction that prevents it from running 3rd party desktop software (3rd party exe files). Neither I nor Neo have said otherwise, but it sounds like you think we did.
    DoctorSaline likes this.
    09-21-2014 02:57 PM
  4. fatclue_98's Avatar
    I have no idea why you think you are disagreeing with me.

    I'm fully aware of what RT is and how it was built. I'm aware of everything mentioned in the keynote you linked to. That was two years ago however. We're past that. Like I said, the design MS arrived at for RT was more a result of technical and economical limitations than anything else. At one point, MS probably even hoped/thought that the pseudo-hybrid approach RT used would be their official and final take on their tablet OS. It just didn't turn out that way. That was then. Tomorrow is different.

    I am talking about the future (and I think Neo is too), which is why I feel that your post doesn't address any of the points I made. I do occasionally refer to RT, but I'm using it only as a basis with which to explain how MS' tablet OS will change going forward. MS' future tablet OS won't have a desktop, but the resulting user experience won't be as different as you likely imagine it would be. To me it seems as if you and a few others are incapable of imagining that Office could ever run on anything other than the desktop, or that it's entirely unthinkable that we may plug a keyboard and mouse into a device without a desktop. I know none of you are that unimaginative, but that is how it comes across, at least to me.



    Yeah, it's likely you're in the same boat as John. Your impression is correct of course. Yes, RT is a scaled down version of Windows, or more precisely, it's exactly Windows with an added restriction that prevents it from running 3rd party desktop software (3rd party exe files). Neither I nor Neo have said otherwise, but it sounds like you think we did.
    Neo suggested why have an ARM based tablet if desktop is a need. That's the point. Without the desktop, what does RT offer besides a dearth of apps?

    Sent from my LG G3 via Tapatalk
    Guytronic likes this.
    09-21-2014 04:29 PM
  5. a5cent's Avatar
    Neo suggested why have an ARM based tablet if desktop is a need. That's the point. Without the desktop, what does RT offer besides a dearth of apps?
    Wouldn't it be more precise to ask:

    "Without the RT versions of Office, Notepad and File Manager, what does RT offer besides a dearth of apps?"

    I suspect that is your point, which I agree with. I just don't agree with the way you are making it. Why? Because your statement makes it sound like the desktop is the core value proposition of RT, when it just isn't. The desktop on RT exists for compatibility reasons only, and it's not an intrinsic part of what makes Office or the File Manager function. The desktop is a Window Manager and Program Launcher. Nothing more. IMHO the correct way to think about the desktop is as a tool that addresses a set of needs. Nobody needs the desktop itself. Any such statement is really just a shorthand way of saying that one has needs that the desktop addresses, but that doesn't really say what your needs actually are.

    If what you need is a fully functional version of Office, then you don't need the desktop for that. Yes, as metro/touch Office doesn't yet exist, Windows RT does require Win32 and the desktop for Office compatibility, but that is just the current situation. Metro/touch Office will not require the desktop. I don't know if metro/touch Office will be just as powerful as the current desktop version, but there is nothing technical that would prevent it.

    If what you need is a fully functional file manager, then you don't need the desktop for that either. Threshold is rumoured to include a fully functional metro/touch file manger that will be just as powerful was the current desktop version.

    I'd say that 90% of the time, those two things are the reasons why people say they need the desktop, when that isn't correct.

    John Steffes mentioned that he finds the metro snapping feature too limited, and that (at least in some situations) he prefers the window based desktop paradigm, but that is not where the next version of Microsoft's tablet OS is headed. That is why he'll likely be better served with a computing device where both metro and the desktop environments are fully available. On the other hand, if MS' next tablet OS includes fully functional versions of touch/metro Office and the file manager, and also upgrades the snapping feature, that may also be a viable option. It depends on many things! What it really doesn't depend on is whether the desktop remains part of the tablet OS or not, and that is my point.

    If I'm still not explaining this well enough, then I give up
    DoctorSaline and Guytronic like this.
    09-21-2014 06:31 PM
  6. fatclue_98's Avatar
    As I mentioned in an earlier post, desktop IE is a vital component that makes up for a lot of missing apps. You're right, you don't need desktop to have Office or file managers. But you can't have Outlook without it. Mail is a fine client but it is very rudimentary and not exactly enterprise-grade.

    Without apps, RT doesn't have anything to compete against iOS or Android. The tipping point, what keeps them in the ball game, is desktop IE and Outlook. N-Trig or Wacom support would be a real game changer for the platform.
    Guytronic likes this.
    09-21-2014 07:34 PM
  7. John Steffes's Avatar
    The bigger issues is the unknowns, yes, I use the Surface RT 64G like a laptop (using the Desktop), I use the same device as a tablet, I understand windows threshold might change that, I think that is a mistake, I understand they had a marketing issue, but they want one Windows not fifty (I understand Windows RT is just Windows complied on ARM [WOA]), just in case I need to mention I have been working on Windows since version 3 (being my Zenith SuperSport, running DOS 6.22 [it started with Zenith DOS and Windows 2.x]). My first tablet was a HP (Palm) Touchpad, and it had a Bluetooth keyboard and QuickOffice and Picel Office, I have Android devices (got my kids NEXTBOOKS), I have Windows devices from Compaq Aero 4/33c's to Compaq Armada, to Acer Aspires to Lenovo Thinkpad (my work device). For a living I work on Server devices (Windows/Linux/VMWare) etc...

    I understand Windows very well, Microsoft is in a pickle I know they want to change yet again the Windows Interface [from DOS Executive, to Program Manager, to Start Menu, to Metro/Modern], Metro/Modern UI did not work just like the ribbon bar did not work in Office 2007, so they combined the ribbon bar and the file menu system in Office 2010. Now Windows threshold wants to combine Windows 7 UI with Windows 8 UI and like the office counter part see if it will run and be accepted by the masses.

    The issue is Windows is known as a fancy Window Manager, that is what it was, that is what it should be, I understand WOA is to be stripped down and not run x86, that does not mean others can't re-compile their apps for ARM (that is a Microsoft requirement that it has to be a metro/modern app), it is not because ARM can not run other apps.

    Microsoft might want to change and create a tablet only experience, I am fine with that, just do not change what we use today to what some want, and others don't, otherwise you will have people like me who want the desktop stay with Windows RT 8.1 just like there are tons who are staying with Windows 7 because they do not want to re-train their employees on Windows 8/8.1 [I am not debating on if one is better then another]. The issue is I want a desktop, you and others do not want a desktop, I am fine with you not wanting a desktop, but I do. Windows as a Windows Manager is what I want, nothing more, nothing less. Microsoft can do what they want with new devices, but some of us got used to using Windows like Windows, they have suggested they should have not called it Windows RT, they have suggested they do not want three OSes, I want my Windows RT to stay the way it is/was designed...
    Last edited by John Steffes; 09-21-2014 at 08:22 PM.
    aximtreo likes this.
    09-21-2014 07:42 PM
  8. Philip Hamm's Avatar
    The iPad can use a full functioning Bluetooth keyboard and has a touch based version of Office, does that have a desktop?

    I don't understand the insistence on having a desktop on an ARM tablet. It simply isn't needed, as demonstrated by the iPad and the fact that Surface 2 doesn't ship with a keyboard included. Your requirements are different to others, so why go for an ARM based device instead of a full Windows device like Surface Pro 3.

    I think that a lot of this is mind-set i.e. It's Windows so it MUST have a desktop.
    Until very recently, Intel based tablets with full Win32 capabilities were much more expensive and with significantly worse battery life than ARM based Windows tablet.
    09-21-2014 07:44 PM
  9. godse573's Avatar
    In its current form, desktop mode for windows rt is undoubtedly what keeps it afloat and what made Microsoft make a surface 2 and not kill it at one. Sure, it may be gone here in a year or two, but not forgotten necessarily. I have a surface 2 rt, for which I do all of my daily tasks on and use for leisure. I purchased it because there is no need to get a full windows devise that is much more open to viruses and malware than the rt platform. If I have no NEED to go off the beaten path, then there is no NEED to get a devise that will do that. I use my S2 for browsing the internet, typing word documents, listening to Spotify; just simple basic tasks, everything else is leisure.

    My next topic is about why desktop mode is on rt, and how useful it actually is. What I want to stress is why Microsoft is selling this, and who it is aimed for. The majority of their original advertising campaign was focused completely on the average student user, of whom I am. They made it for students to easily take notes via OneNote or word, which is obviously evident. Secondly, the average "take notes and write essays" kind of student would find this devise extremely useful when up against big and heavy laptop equivalents which in most cases cost more and are more vulnerable to viruses etc. What I'm really trying to get at is that the desktop mode for the Windows rt platform was made to simulate having a real PC, with the added bonus of its size, weight, battery life, and price. Now you can argue that the RT platformed tablets are still kinda pricey, but in reality you get what you pay for. What I payed for was a devise that will help me in my educational endeavors, for a small amount of money, in a small package, simulating the big idea of a full blown windows devise. Take this as a grain of salt, but desktop mode is way more than meets the eye, especially when you use it as your daily driver. Sure, I would like to have x64/x86 .exe capabilities and be able to run my own programs, that would be nice. But do I need it, not at all. For the mass majority of people that use a computer for its basic functions, rt is what should be running the show. Come to think of it, the only .exe programs I used before and would maybe like to have are Photoshop and Movie Maker. But even then, I don't NEED to use them, which renders them useless. I have an email client, a web browser, a document writer, and a file manager, all in the convenience of one central location: The old familiar Windows desktop.
    The tipping point, what keeps them in the ball game, is desktop IE and Outlook
    aximtreo likes this.
    09-21-2014 08:08 PM
  10. a5cent's Avatar
    I understand WOA is to be stripped down and not run x86, that does not mean others can't re-compile their apps for ARM (that is a Microsoft requirement that it has to be a metro/modern app), it is not because ARM can not run other apps.
    Absolutely. I don't think the ARM vs x86 debate really belongs here. It just ads to the confusion. MS could just as well compile Windows RT for x86 to allow for Atom based RT tablets. That wouldn't change anything about the abilities and restrictions of Windows RT itself. It still wouldn't run desktop software.

    Microsoft might want to change and create a tablet only experience, I am fine with that, just do not change what we use today to what some want, and others don't, otherwise you will have people like me who want the desktop stay with Windows RT 8.1 just like there are tons who are staying with Windows 7 because they do not want to re-train their employees on Windows 8/8.1 [I am not debating on if one is better then another]. The issue is I want a desktop, you and others do not want a desktop, I am fine with you not wanting a desktop, but I do.
    I'm not sure if you are directing the above at me. I don't use tablets and have no intention to anytime soon. I'm more interested in where MS is headed than I am interested in what any one of us may or may not want.

    I agree that MS can't afford to provide OS upgrades to Windows RT users that some come to perceive as a downgrade. However, up until your last post I felt that the desktop's window management and app launching features were completely irrelevant for RT. I felt that the desktop serves no purpose other than to provide compatibility to Win32 based software that MS had not yet been able to fully port over to the WinRT API.

    If enough people share your view, that desktop window management is a central feature of Windows RT, then removing the desktop really would be akin to MS shooting themselves in the foot. If that group is large enough, then MS would do well to not provide RT updates, or at least not provide full updates to the newest W9 tablet OS. MS could still opt to update only specific subsystems however, like the newest WinRT runtime and API.

    I'm back to being unsure about what MS is likely to do on the Windows RT update front.
    09-21-2014 08:43 PM
  11. HeyCori's Avatar
    A lot of people are too focused on having it one way or the other. This doesn't have to be a desktop versus metro battle. Maybe metro isn't finished evolving but the desktop is and having both options doesn't take away from the other. A fully functional metro-fied file manager doesn't take away from the desktop. Having metro Office doesn't make desktop Office useless. We're already living in a hybrid world where people can choose what works best for them. For example, I prefer desktop OneDrive over the metro app for several reasons. Being able to drop something in a folder is, IMO, way more convenient than using the upload feature in the metro app. Yet, I still prefer metro IE. I use the ESPN app instead of the website. Heck, I use the ESPN app even when I'm outputting to a second monitor. I check the weather using the metro app but I open photos using Windows Photo Viewer. These are true hybrid devices where both options work. I don't see the appeal of removing features that doesn't take away from the user experience.

    The real question is, why does Windows RT need to exist when Windows 8 can do everything RT can but cheaper? I sold my Surface 2 and picked up a Encore 2 with Windows 8.1 w/Bing. So get this, the Encore 2 boots way faster. They're both 32GB devices but the Encore 2 has more available space. It's cheaper than the Surface 2 (both the 8" and 10" version are cheaper). And Bay Trail is pretty much on equal ground with the Tegra 4. You could get an Encore 2 10", a Bluetooth keyboard, a micro HDMI cable and a micro USB adapter and it's still cheaper than a Surface 2 without any accessories. That's crazy.

    I can understand why people want a Surface 2. It has a nice 1080p screen, full size USB 3.0, kickstand, micro HDMI, Office 2013 instead of Office 365 and virus makers have pretty much ignored it. Those are all the reasons I got one. And that's fine if what you mostly want to do is consume media, take notes and use Office. And for a while there the Surface 2 was pretty much unchallenged in those regards. But now that I can get a full Windows 8 tablets, with all the software options of Windows RT, where does that leave RT? I still think RT has a future in schools and businesses since you're not going to wreck it with some random .exe. However, it's a hard sale as a consumer product because Windows 8 does it all and does it cheaper.
    a5cent and Philip Hamm like this.
    09-21-2014 11:36 PM
  12. Michael Alan Goff's Avatar
    Lol. But Windows RT does have desktop apps that you are clinging to like Word, Excel, Outlook, File explorer, CMD etc. Why?

    Because Windows RT needs the desktop to function as an OS. In WinRT 9 they wont "remove it", they will hide it away but still use it for the things that require legit power rather than sandboxed "app" power.

    The problem with Windows RT diehards saying "an app store in enough" dont release that Windows 8.1 has that very same app store + the biggest PROGRAM (real software) store of any platform (bigger than Android, iOS, OSX and Linux) called Win32.

    Why have WinRT apps when you could have WinRT apps AND Win32 programs? For 2-3 extra hours of battery life? Are you actually using your tablet for 10 hours every day? If you are then god help you but the reality is that you proably use it for 5 hours a day or maybe less. So that difference in battery life is just pure marketing hype, as it always is.



    Office for touch will be terrible compared to Office for Win32. Next.

    Adobe CC is not available for the Windows store, unless you think Photoshop express is as powerful as Photoshop CC. Next.

    Autodesk is not available for the Windows store. Neither is Lightroom, Fireworks, Visual studio, Chrome, Firefox, Audacity, Fraps, Steam, VMware, and so on. And they never will be. Sandboxing these apps into the Windows runtime will mean they will lose all the functionality they have and it will turn them into apps instead of programs people use every day for work.

    So yes, we do and always will need Win32. "Full windows" as you call it. Because Windows runtime and Windows RT are built upon Win32. We don't need Windows runtime at all but its nice to have as an addition to Win32 software. Deciding to make an OS that can only run Windows Runtime apps instead of the millions of programs software developers have been working on since XP and earlier was the stupidest idea ever. *

    * I didnt say vista because vista was amazing, and anyone who says otherwise is deluded as f***
    Yes, right now it needs it. We don't have the few things that are on the desktop in Metro. Windows 9 will have those, and thus the need for the Windows 9 RT version to have a desktop will be gone. And according to everything we're hearing from reputable sources, that's exactly what's going to be happening.

    I completely disagree, I have a surface RT 64G, I use it as a replacement for Windows XP, I have tweaked Windows RT 8.1 to go to the desktop, I use outlook, word, IE, basic internet access and Remote Desktop, for a Laptop replacement it has surpassed my expectation, I understand others want a tablet to do tablet things, but this is a hybrid device, it can be used as both, to remove the desktop would be suicide to the hybrid design, even in their keynotes they mentioned the market they were trying to design these for. I use the device as a tablet, and I use it as a laptop (Windows XP) replacement...

    If Microsoft in Windows RT 8.2/9 removes the desktop, then they have destroyed the hybrid design they created the Surface RT/2 for... I understand everyone has their opinion this is my take on it...
    They designed it to compete with the iPad. It is a hybrid device? No, it's a device whose OS hasn't fully matured, and as such still needs the desktop. Also, who is to say that you won't be able to do all of that with Windows 9 without a desktop?

    I disagree, you would not create a tablet that can use a full functioning keyboard (touch or type), include office, if it was not meant to have a desktop experience?

    I understand you have a right to your opinion, but this is my understanding watch the original surface rt keynote ( ) seems they are showing both in their design...



    I agree to disagree, if you watch the keynote, they included office, they included a keyboard/mouse input, they talk about connecting to printers, they talk about long flights with watching movies and producing content. If it was just for a consumption device they would have never allowed a keyboard/mouse to interact, they created a hybrid device that can be a tablet and a laptop... I wanted a laptop/tablet replacement for my old Windows XP laptop, the surface RT 64G has surpassed my expectations, (came with office), I did not want to get a surface pro (run IE and get malware and viruses), I get the best of both worlds...
    They were talking about keyboard and mouse, and how they're going to be first class citizens from what I watched. You don't need a desktop to use a mouse and keyboard. I use one all the time on my RT, and I don't go to the desktop for much other than Office.

    I got your back John. I was under the impression that RT would be a scaled down version of Windows minus the .exe functions. Without any apps to offer, what's there to dissuade customers from getting an iPad or Android tablet?
    From an Android side, we have the fact that Windows just works better. It also gets all the updates and has Office for free. From the iOS side, we get fixes more frequently, Office for free. We also have a better browser than either.

    Neo suggested why have an ARM based tablet if desktop is a need. That's the point. Without the desktop, what does RT offer besides a dearth of apps?

    Sent from my LG G3 via Tapatalk
    Better browser, free Office, consistent updates?

    As I mentioned in an earlier post, desktop IE is a vital component that makes up for a lot of missing apps. You're right, you don't need desktop to have Office or file managers. But you can't have Outlook without it. Mail is a fine client but it is very rudimentary and not exactly enterprise-grade.

    Without apps, RT doesn't have anything to compete against iOS or Android. The tipping point, what keeps them in the ball game, is desktop IE and Outlook. N-Trig or Wacom support would be a real game changer for the platform.
    For now, but I'd be surprised if Metro Office didn't come with Outlook. Also, even Metro IE is better than the Android browser or Safari on iOS.
    neo158 likes this.
    09-22-2014 07:58 AM
  13. John Steffes's Avatar
    A lot of people are too focused on having it one way or the other. This doesn't have to be a desktop versus metro battle. Maybe metro isn't finished evolving but the desktop is and having both options doesn't take away from the other. A fully functional metro-fied file manager doesn't take away from the desktop. Having metro Office doesn't make desktop Office useless. We're already living in a hybrid world where people can choose what works best for them. For example, I prefer desktop OneDrive over the metro app for several reasons. Being able to drop something in a folder is, IMO, way more convenient than using the upload feature in the metro app. Yet, I still prefer metro IE. I use the ESPN app instead of the website. Heck, I use the ESPN app even when I'm outputting to a second monitor. I check the weather using the metro app but I open photos using Windows Photo Viewer. These are true hybrid devices where both options work. I don't see the appeal of removing features that doesn't take away from the user experience.

    The real question is, why does Windows RT need to exist when Windows 8 can do everything RT can but cheaper? I sold my Surface 2 and picked up a Encore 2 with Windows 8.1 w/Bing. So get this, the Encore 2 boots way faster. They're both 32GB devices but the Encore 2 has more available space. It's cheaper than the Surface 2 (both the 8" and 10" version are cheaper). And Bay Trail is pretty much on equal ground with the Tegra 4. You could get an Encore 2 10", a Bluetooth keyboard, a micro HDMI cable and a micro USB adapter and it's still cheaper than a Surface 2 without any accessories. That's crazy.

    I can understand why people want a Surface 2. It has a nice 1080p screen, full size USB 3.0, kickstand, micro HDMI, Office 2013 instead of Office 365 and virus makers have pretty much ignored it. Those are all the reasons I got one. And that's fine if what you mostly want to do is consume media, take notes and use Office. And for a while there the Surface 2 was pretty much unchallenged in those regards. But now that I can get a full Windows 8 tablets, with all the software options of Windows RT, where does that leave RT? I still think RT has a future in schools and businesses since you're not going to wreck it with some random .exe. However, it's a hard sale as a consumer product because Windows 8 does it all and does it cheaper.
    I sort of agree, the price is what got me into a Surface RT 64G, you find a 10 inch tablet hybrid that has office RT or full office, for less then $179, I have been eyeing the Toshiba Encore Mini 7 (Buy Toshiba Encore Mini WT7-C16MS Signature Edition Tablet - Microsoft Store) for $119 and it comes with Office 365 (only for a year)... That seems great, but the boot time and recovery, are another issue, the way these smaller foot print devices work, is they boot via wimboot (the recovery image) and then use the remainder of the space for updates and your data, when you reset, all it does is wipe the data space and default you back to the default WIMBOOT image. SSD/ or flash drives do fail... What happens if the space of the WIMBOOT gets corrupted, now you might not know, because it is not being used as the file that resides there is not in use (as newer updated one is on your data space), now if you crash and need to recover then your image is corrupt with no way to repair? I have not look into other recovery options as of yet. But my kids NEXTBOOKS are like this, I have re-flashed Android ICS about a million times, with their space disappearing (I have a full image backup, which when applied re-formats all spaces so the bad spaces are marked bad). Not sure if these WIMBOOT Windows 8.1 with Bing have such an option (as I do not own one yet)...

    But these new tablets/full Windows are just starting to take off, what does Surface RT/Surface 2 have, the build quality of the device is great, full USB, colorful covers that allow one to customize, and you can type on them, they give you a hybrid tablet/laptop with full office (as much as Office RT can be full), and for Surface 2 200G of OneDrive (used to be SkyDrive) and Skype for a year... The issue for me was always price, wanted a Surface for what it offered, would never pay $500 for it... But at $179 it was perfect...
    neo158 likes this.
    09-22-2014 07:59 AM
  14. Philip Hamm's Avatar
    John - great post. I remember reading a great article about the original Surface and RT based Windows being a very large strategic move by Microsoft largely to put pressure on Intel because Intel was not forthcoming with competitive chips to the ARM chips in regards to battery life, cost, etc. Intel has answered the call, and Windows RT's usefulness has been greatly diminished in the light of these new arrangements.

    I still love my RT tablet - I love that it's virus proof, that it has a beautiful screen, that it has USB and great driver support - RT still is a great, great platform. However, the value proposition that was the original "Surface" versus "Surface Pro" has largely been nullified by Intel.

    If I were buying a new tablet today I'd still get this RT because the value proposition of a sub-$200 (street price for original Surface) is still impossible to beat. I always buy trailing edge hardware because it offers so much for the dollar.

    Another thing to keep in mind - when using the Surface as a "light" laptop the type cover, USB port for a mouse, and kickstand are pretty fantastic. I have been using a Bluetooth keeyboard for years on my iPad and find the hardwired keyboard to be a far better solution. No battery drain, better responsiveness, etc. etc. etc.
    09-22-2014 08:17 AM
  15. fatclue_98's Avatar
    Yes, right now it needs it. We don't have the few things that are on the desktop in Metro. Windows 9 will have those, and thus the need for the Windows 9 RT version to have a desktop will be gone. And according to everything we're hearing from reputable sources, that's exactly what's going to be happening.



    They designed it to compete with the iPad. It is a hybrid device? No, it's a device whose OS hasn't fully matured, and as such still needs the desktop. Also, who is to say that you won't be able to do all of that with Windows 9 without a desktop?



    They were talking about keyboard and mouse, and how they're going to be first class citizens from what I watched. You don't need a desktop to use a mouse and keyboard. I use one all the time on my RT, and I don't go to the desktop for much other than Office.



    From an Android side, we have the fact that Windows just works better. It also gets all the updates and has Office for free. From the iOS side, we get fixes more frequently, Office for free. We also have a better browser than either.



    Better browser, free Office, consistent updates?



    For now, but I'd be surprised if Metro Office didn't come with Outlook. Also, even Metro IE is better than the Android browser or Safari on iOS.
    It's not that Metro IE is better than its counterparts, it's that without apps, you're forced to rely on the desktop IE to do things that mobile browsers can't. As Cori mentioned, why the one or the other attitudes? RT is simply not developed enough to eliminate the traditional desktop functions.

    Sent from my LG G3 via Tapatalk
    09-22-2014 11:50 AM
  16. Michael Alan Goff's Avatar
    It's not that Metro IE is better than its counterparts, it's that without apps, you're forced to rely on the desktop IE to do things that mobile browsers can't. As Cori mentioned, why the one or the other attitudes? RT is simply not developed enough to eliminate the traditional desktop functions.

    Sent from my LG G3 via Tapatalk
    When released, you're right. But Windows 9 will be bringing a lot to the RT table with the merge. IE 12, for example. ;)
    neo158 likes this.
    09-23-2014 07:52 AM
  17. RTGent's Avatar
    I have a great 8/256 Pro 2 now, but still use my original RT (now on 8.1) nearly every day.
    09-29-2014 11:02 AM
  18. John Steffes's Avatar
    Wow, watching the Preview of Windows 10, hope it also is released as RT 10... I want that design, everything I was talking about in my posts, the hybrid Windows 7 with Windows 8/8.1, Love the part that when the keyboard is there it asks do you want the desktop for keyboard/mouse, when the keyboard (type cover) is removed is asks if you want to be optimized for Touch... Now they are thinking...
    09-30-2014 05:49 PM
  19. Jonathanmr7's Avatar
    The last saturday i buy a surface rt and hell i love it!! Hope they update this to win 10!!
    Philip Hamm likes this.
    10-01-2014 12:16 AM
69 123

Similar Threads

  1. App for Mac window won't show
    By WPCentral Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-15-2014, 04:48 PM
  2. Kill bugs and mosquitoes in Sok and Sao's Adventure for Windows Phone
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-15-2014, 04:42 PM
  3. Microsoft announces Windows 9 event to take place on September 30th
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-15-2014, 03:30 PM
  4. Benji Bananas Adventures - the sequel - swings on to Windows Phone for free
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-15-2014, 02:30 PM
  5. Delete Groups in Windows Phone 8.1?
    By chobo2 in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-15-2014, 01:30 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD