And with this answer Surface owners just got screwed....

[theefman]

Obviously not. People are taking this the wrong way though (I blame Microsoft's communication skills). Windows 10 only includes SKUs for 7" and under devices on ARM and 8" and over on x86. The update is equivalent to what would've been Windows 10 RT if Microsoft hadn't decided to kill RT. People are overreacting to this.

They haven't said exactly what the update for RT will contain so there is no way to know what will and wont be included, anything else is speculation. If RT was going to get the same SKU as 7" and under devices I would imagine they would have said so but they have only said they are working on it. Only time will tell exactly what the update will entail.

 

[JamesPTao]

Not getting the "full" windows 10 on older tablets is being taken completely wrong. Every tablet will get it, but if the existing hardware doesn't support a certain feature obviously the device will not be able to use that feature. Big difference from getting a partial or not full upgrade, please people use common sense and stop complaining about things that aren't possible. If your device can't support a new feature ms can't magically replace your hardware through the upgrade to support it!

 

[xFalk]

Not getting the "full" windows 10 on older tablets is being taken completely wrong. Every tablet will get it, but if the existing hardware doesn't support a certain feature obviously the device will not be able to use that feature. Big difference from getting a partial or not full upgrade, please people use common sense and stop complaining about things that aren't possible. If your device can't support a new feature ms can't magically replace your hardware through the upgrade to support it!

Totally this! I'm a proud Surface RT owner from within the first month they came out. Still use it, still love it. I realize it is 1st gen hardware and may not support new advances in the W10 software that are meant to take advantage of new hardware. That's okay. It's not Microsoft's obligation to update my hardware.

Reminds me of when I purchased my Xbox console 2 months before Xbox 360 came out...Oops! My bad. Didn't expect Xbox 360 games to play on it. And I've enjoyed playing on my gen 1 Xbox for many years since, skipping over Xbox 360 and finally picked up my Xbox One in November.

 

[Michael Alan Goff]

When W10 for phones can run Win32 applications, then I'll agree with you that it's the same OS (not that I'd actually want that... terrible idea). Until then it's marketing speak for: "we want you think it's the same OS, even though it isn't".



Definitely not. Windows RT included all of Win32 and the desktop, which accounts for 90% of what we traditionally called Windows so far. W10 for phones has none of that.

W10 for phones is WP8.1 with full WinRT API support and a .NET runtime more similar to what W10 uses.

​Win32 does not make something Windows or not.

 

[J Frost]

Totally this! I'm a proud Surface RT owner from within the first month they came out. Still use it, still love it. I realize it is 1st gen hardware and may not support new advances in the W10 software that are meant to take advantage of new hardware. That's okay. It's not Microsoft's obligation to update my hardware.

Reminds me of when I purchased my Xbox console 2 months before Xbox 360 came out...Oops! My bad. Didn't expect Xbox 360 games to play on it. And I've enjoyed playing on my gen 1 Xbox for many years since, skipping over Xbox 360 and finally picked up my Xbox One in November.

Well said. I've followed the same path purchasing an RT about a month after it came out and I've owned an original Xbox since 2002 and enjoyed it passing over the 360 jumping into One Christmas of 13'.
I use my RT for work and travel and its been an excellent device with limitations that I've learned to work around. I'm just now thinking of upgrading to a SP3 and passing my RT to my youngest.

 

[a5cent]

​Win32 does not make something Windows or not.

And I never claimed otherwise. The point of what you quoted was this:

Denoting two operating systems to be the same, typically means both can run the same software. If two OSes can not run the same software, they are not considered to be the same. W10M can not run Win32 based software, which W10 can, so it's technically not the same OS. That has always been and continues to be my position. Whether one or both OSes are named Windows isn't relevant to my point.

For marketing reasons MS has decided to use a different definition of "the same OS", and although I think I understand why, I think it's an unwise decision that will help nobody and cause yet more confusion and misunderstandings.

Microsoft's marketing department is not going to change my mind on whether two OSes deserve to be called "the same OS".

 

[Michael Alan Goff]

And I never claimed otherwise. The point of what you quoted was this:

Denoting two operating systems to be the same, typically means both can run the same software. If two OSes can not run the same software, they are not considered to be the same. W10M can not run Win32 based software, which W10 can, so it's technically not the same OS. That has always been and continues to be my position. Whether one or both OSes are named Windows isn't relevant to my point.

For marketing reasons MS has decided to use a different definition of "the same OS", and although I think I understand why, I think it's an unwise decision that will help nobody and cause yet more confusion and misunderstandings.

Microsoft's marketing department is not going to change my mind on whether two OSes deserve to be called "the same OS".

​From ?he kernel level up, it's the same OS. There are some different API, but that's about it.

 

[a5cent]

​From ?he kernel level up, it's the same OS. There are some different API, but that's about it.

So what?

Lay down two identical foundations. On the first build a four-story building. On the second build a log cabin. Is it justified to call them the same building because they have the same foundation? That's pretty much what you and MS are doing.

I completely agree that both OSes share some identical components (.NET runtime and the WinRT API) but when one is but 10% of the other's size, and can't even run the same software, you're not going to convince me they are "the same".

 

[etphoto]

In the scheme of things, not enough, but I am curious just how many Surface RT / 2 were sold.