Windows 8 tablets will dominate.

[Big Bang Radar]

For now its called an ultra book or MacBook air.

Trying to merge a tablet and desktop in one unit has all kinds of fail written on it.
It will be too heavy for a tablet, have poor performance for a desktop, or crappy battery life.
Oh and let's not talk about price.

Having said that apple is the only company that can do it, because they own both the hardware and software.

Just because you can do a thing does not mean you should do it.

This. Only x86 will run well. A mobile phone system doesnt work with a mouse, and (Excluding x86) it can't run x86 programs etc. It should not have 'Windows' as the name, because it ISNT WINDOWS. Its an oversized phone OS designed for tabs, and not DTops which is the core money-maker.

 

[ejb222]

For now its called an ultra book or MacBook air.

Trying to merge a tablet and desktop in one unit has all kinds of fail written on it.
It will be too heavy for a tablet, have poor performance for a desktop, or crappy battery life.
Oh and let's not talk about price.

Having said that apple is the only company that can do it, because they own both the hardware and software.

Just because you can do a thing does not mean you should do it.

Really? I suppose people thought the smae thing when it came to aviation or automobiles. If we can do it...lets give it a shot and see if the technology can keep up. If it fails...oh well. If it works and improves...we've gained much. Why kill the idea prematurely because of a loack of vision?

 

[socialcarpet]

Why can't they just run Atom processors in them so they keep their ability to run programs designed for the x86 architecture?

They can and will make some Atom based tablets.

But Atom still can't compete with ARM for battery life and the manufacturing for Atom processors is still a generation behind mobile in terms of process. The Atom (Medfield) chip in development will be 32nm while mobile chips will be at 22nm. Smaller process means more transistors on the same die and that can be leveraged for either more performance or more energy efficiency or a compromise between the two.

The Medfield chip will probably outperform most ARM chips in raw processing power, but the ARM chips have been under development for embedded/mobile applications for a lot longer, so they have been optimized for that, for example they have a lot of dedicated hardware codecs for different media and other functions that Atom doesn't have and which levels out the performance difference, or gives them an edge. i.e. A good ARM chip may be able to stream video, or maybe run Java applications equally or faster than the Atom while using less energy.

ARM also has the advantage of being a RISC architecture vs. CISC for x86 and it's the architecture used by the iPad and all Android tablets now, so there is much more development on ARM as far as solutions in tablets and the biggest player in tablets, Apple, is heavily invested in it.

Intel is working very hard on x86 for mobile now though and some people think they will eventually catch up to and surpass ARM in tablets and even smartphones. Time will tell, but I think it will take Intel at least 2 years to even make a dent there and the companies making ARM processors aren't going to sit still the whole time.

 

[c8m6p]

For now its called an ultra book or MacBook air.

Trying to merge a tablet and desktop in one unit has all kinds of fail written on it.
It will be too heavy for a tablet, have poor performance for a desktop, or crappy battery life.
Oh and let's not talk about price.

Having said that apple is the only company that can do it, because they own both the hardware and software.

Just because you can do a thing does not mean you should do it.

Right.... does the Macbook air have a touch screen? What does the Macbook air have anything to do with this discussion? It's a small laptop running OSX.

And yeah, a portable tablet that can be taken around anywhere, easier than a laptop, dock and instantly turn into a full Windows 7 machine is a terrible idea. Why would anyone ever want such a piece of technology

There's a reason Windows machines own a good 92% of the desktop/laptop marketshare, and it's because Apple's can't do squat besides run their pretty little apps and stupid gimmicks like photobooth.

A windows 8 tablet is both a toy and a tool you can do real, limitless work on, given the hardware advances that will come eventually. An apple ipad, macbook, or whatever other product they have is nothing more than a toy (a very expensive one) unless you're in certain niche industries, like music and art.

Oh wait, music and art? Can you run photoshop on an iPad? No. Can you run Ableton live on an iPad? No. Can you run anything of substance on an iPad? Not unless you mod it out.

A Windows 8 tablet on intel architecture will be more useful than a full fledged iMac, let alone an iPad. El-oh-el. Most people would be willing to sacrifice a little battery life for that priveldge, I believe.

I've been seeing a lot of my friend's Mac's with Windows 7 on them recently. Wonder why that is.

 

[welsbloke]

Having said that apple is the only company that can do it, because they own both the hardware and software

You might have bought into the hype a bit to much. I think you will find the hardware manufacturers will be able to work with Windows on this little project. What will be the test is whether folks buy into the idea, I was going to say need it but that never stopped people wanting the iPad.

We will have Intel and ARM chips in addition to an array of manufacturers. This should pave the way for cheap powerful designs in all form factors. The Ultra market is producing some very nice models at the moment and they will look even more attractive with Windows 8 on board.

The next generation of Intel chips are also likely to make some headway especially if they finally manage to conquer the CPU, GPU and power combo which it looks they they are having a damn good stab at.

So no I am not convinced we need Apple to make this happen. Although we all know Apple feel its a waste of time, maybe the boot is on the other foot who knows. Similar things have been said with regards to the phone and tablets they produced.

 

[tekhna]

Right.... does the Macbook air have a touch screen? What does the Macbook air have anything to do with this discussion? It's a small laptop running OSX.

And yeah, a portable tablet that can be taken around anywhere, easier than a laptop, dock and instantly turn into a full Windows 7 machine is a terrible idea. Why would anyone ever want such a piece of technology

There's a reason Windows machines own a good 92% of the desktop/laptop marketshare, and it's because Apple's can't do squat besides run their pretty little apps and stupid gimmicks like photobooth.

A windows 8 tablet is both a toy and a tool you can do real, limitless work on, given the hardware advances that will come eventually. An apple ipad, macbook, or whatever other product they have is nothing more than a toy (a very expensive one) unless you're in certain niche industries, like music and art.

Oh wait, music and art? Can you run photoshop on an iPad? No. Can you run Ableton live on an iPad? No. Can you run anything of substance on an iPad? Not unless you mod it out.

A Windows 8 tablet on intel architecture will be more useful than a full fledged iMac, let alone an iPad. El-oh-el. Most people would be willing to sacrifice a little battery life for that priveldge, I believe.

I've been seeing a lot of my friend's Mac's with Windows 7 on them recently. Wonder why that is.

Yeah! Which is why crappy bands that no one has heard of, like Gorillaz, record whole albums on ipads! :dry

 

[badMojo69]

Right.... does the Macbook air have a touch screen? What does the Macbook air have anything to do with this discussion? It's a small laptop running OSX.

And yeah, a portable tablet that can be taken around anywhere, easier than a laptop, dock and instantly turn into a full Windows 7 machine is a terrible idea. Why would anyone ever want such a piece of technology

There's a reason Windows machines own a good 92% of the desktop/laptop marketshare, and it's because Apple's can't do squat besides run their pretty little apps and stupid gimmicks like photobooth.

A windows 8 tablet is both a toy and a tool you can do real, limitless work on, given the hardware advances that will come eventually. An apple ipad, macbook, or whatever other product they have is nothing more than a toy (a very expensive one) unless you're in certain niche industries, like music and art.

Oh wait, music and art? Can you run photoshop on an iPad? No. Can you run Ableton live on an iPad? No. Can you run anything of substance on an iPad? Not unless you mod it out.

A Windows 8 tablet on intel architecture will be more useful than a full fledged iMac, let alone an iPad. El-oh-el. Most people would be willing to sacrifice a little battery life for that priveldge, I believe.

I've been seeing a lot of my friend's Mac's with Windows 7 on them recently. Wonder why that is.

I said nothing about iPad. I'm saying the best you can hope for today if you want desktop performance with the portability of a tablet is an ultra book. But no to my knowledge there are no touch screen ultra books.

 

[welsbloke]

Microsoft doesn't need Win8 to sell in the bulk numbers that 7 does.

This is a valid point all Windows 8 needs to do is continue the trend away from XP and Vista.

 

[welsbloke]

There's a reason Windows machines own a good 92% of the desktop/laptop marketshare, and it's because Apple's can't do squat besides run their pretty little apps and stupid gimmicks like photobooth

I understand the reasoning but with the iPad it is the pretty apps that sell it. Most notable when a business specific App is built then deployed via the iPad.

Now with the advent of the W8 tablet I see no reaon why the pretty little apps cannot run on them after all they will be able to run both the Apps and enterprise applications. The important observation will be whether the public and Enterprise realise this and desert the platform. I am think Enterprise will get it early on and will slowly turn the execs not so sure about a brand concious public.

 

[socialcarpet]

There's a reason Windows machines own a good 92% of the desktop/laptop marketshare, and it's because Apple's can't do squat besides run their pretty little apps and stupid gimmicks like photobooth.

Wow that's such a load of horsesh*t I don't even know where to begin or if it's even worth it.

I didn't realize there were still people this ignorant about Mac OS.

I'll try and keep it brief.

Windows has 92% of the desktop/laptop market because:

1. Microsoft licenses the OS to everyone so there is a massive selection of machines at every price point and form factor out there.

2. Apple SAT STILL on their OS development for more than 10 years with System 6 - Mac OS 9 and even then, it took Microsoft years to get to Windows XP to pass the Mac OS up in any meaningful way.

3. Apple still limits their OS to their hardware deliberately. They are a hardware company, not a software company like Microsoft, that's why, and because they insist on controlling the quality of the user experience from start to finish.

There are pros and cons to both. I use both myself. Windows 7 is the first Microsoft OS I've used that I don't loathe though. It's actually pretty good.

Windows compatibility and licensing to everything and everyone makes it very versatile and PC's make sense in the enterprise market because Microsoft offers lots of solutions there, the machines can be had cheap and Microsoft is just fine with holding back development of their OS to maintain the backwards compatibility to the year 0 that enterprise customers demand.

There are also a massive ton more games for Windows and it's fantastic that you can build your own PC with great specs for half the price of a locked down iMac. I grant you all of that. That is why I use both.

Don't kid yourself though. If you think Microsoft would have made anything remotely as user friendly and intuitive as Windows 7 or Windows Phone without the influence of Apple's work, you are delusional.

As far as capability, you're truly an ignoramus if you think all Mac's can do is run photo booth and "pretty little apps". Whenever I read something like this tripe, I always picture the guy with the red stapler from Office Space.

I'm typing this on a MacBook Air right now that is running Mac OS X 10.7 on one desktop, Windows 7 on another, email on a third desktop and a VM running Ubuntu Linux (not on at the moment though) I'm connected to Citrix Xen Desktop as well, in another browser window on my FOURTH desktop.

The FOUR desktops I have running are all on my external monitor, which I can flip through or minimize anyway I like with some simple trackpad gestures, while I have a 5th browser window open on the laptop screen for this forum and my "goofing off" webpages.

I also have Photoshop, Microsoft Office, OmniGraffle Pro, which I use to make Visio compatible diagrams, which I regular get compliments on because they look far better than anything Visio spits out.

There are about 1000 other things I do regularly, probably with a lot more ease than you, with fewer steps than you on your uber-capable Windows PC, but I won't bore you with the details.

Pull your head out of your backside. Mac OS X isn't iOS. It's a UNIX based OS that is easily as capable or more capable than any form of Windows you've got and the interface still kicks the crap out of Windows. For the love of God, Windows is still using the registry, WinFS still hasn't been implemented (is it even being developed any more or has Microsoft given up on a modern file system?) and Windows STILL doesn't have multiple desktops after Linux has had it for more than 10 years and the Mac has had it for about 4+ years.

:dry:

 

[mYth]

Right.... does the Macbook air have a touch screen? What does the Macbook air have anything to do with this discussion? It's a small laptop running OSX.

And yeah, a portable tablet that can be taken around anywhere, easier than a laptop, dock and instantly turn into a full Windows 7 machine is a terrible idea. Why would anyone ever want such a piece of technology

There's a reason Windows machines own a good 92% of the desktop/laptop marketshare, and it's because Apple's can't do squat besides run their pretty little apps and stupid gimmicks like photobooth.

A windows 8 tablet is both a toy and a tool you can do real, limitless work on, given the hardware advances that will come eventually. An apple ipad, macbook, or whatever other product they have is nothing more than a toy (a very expensive one) unless you're in certain niche industries, like music and art.

Oh wait, music and art? Can you run photoshop on an iPad? No. Can you run Ableton live on an iPad? No. Can you run anything of substance on an iPad? Not unless you mod it out.

A Windows 8 tablet on intel architecture will be more useful than a full fledged iMac, let alone an iPad. El-oh-el. Most people would be willing to sacrifice a little battery life for that priveldge, I believe.

I've been seeing a lot of my friend's Mac's with Windows 7 on them recently. Wonder why that is.

You're comparing apples to oranges here.
iPad isn't suppose to be a full blown computer OS
Win8 tabs are.

You completely forgot the movie industry in your list as well. Guess that's niche as well.

 

[socialcarpet]

You're comparing apples to oranges here.
iPad isn't suppose to be a full blown computer OS
Win8 tabs are.

You completely forgot the movie industry in your list as well. Guess that's niche as well.

Mac OS X is widely used in the movie industry, and popular in certain segments of scientific research.

I used to work at the National Institutes of Health and they had the third largest Apple network in the world at the time (still do) The institute I worked in, the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), was over 80% Mac OS. About 10% were Linux/UNIX and 10% Windows. A lot of other institutes had a similar ratio.

The over 200 users on Mac OS only required 3 Mac help desk people for support, while the 25 or so PC's had 4 help desk people assigned to them. Of course that was back in the Windows 98 and XP days when PC's more unreliable than Macs by a much wider margin.

The NHGRI is the institute responsible for mapping the human genome btw. So the human genome was mapped using Mac OS, and I can assure c8m6p it wasn't done using Photo Booth or any "cute little apps".

Incidentally, the number 2 largest Apple network in the world then was Apple Computer, and Lawerence Livermore Labs was #1.

 

[GreenScrew]

Wow that's such a load of horsesh*t I don't even know where to begin or if it's even worth it.

I didn't realize there were still people this ignorant about Mac OS.

I'll try and keep it brief.

Windows has 92% of the desktop/laptop market because:

1Pull your head out of your backside. Mac OS X isn't iOS. It's a UNIX based OS that is easily as capable or more capable than any form of Windows you've got and the interface still kicks the crap out of Windows. For the love of God, Windows is still using the registry, WinFS still hasn't been implemented (is it even being developed any more or has Microsoft given up on a modern file system?) and Windows STILL doesn't have multiple desktops after Linux has had it for more than 10 years and the Mac has had it for about 4+ years.

:dry:

While I agree that its very cool to run multiple desktops <the crowd roars - oooh, ahhh> I'm really not sure how practical it is? I expect very few people have this desire, let alone need. Most just want one desktop, that will do everything they need, cost effectively. And that, my friend, is why most people have Windows.

I can tell you that in our very large global manufacturing business we use Windows because it is the only operating system that all of our applications (either vendor or internally developed) will run on. The IE browser is a large component of that as well. Blame it on poor development, but facts are facts. We have a very very small number of Mac's that are used for niche requirements mainly around graphics (not sure why they insist the same graphics packages on Windows aren't acceptable). Our primary need for virtual desktop is to accommodate our clients that insist they need Macs.