03-12-2013 05:39 PM
75 123
tools
  1. berty6294's Avatar
    I have a feeling you haven't read anything about what Intel is up to this year.
    I have, but I'll hold my breath till I see how it turns out. Plus, its not like nvidea isn't going to answer with something extraordinary!
    03-07-2013 02:16 AM
  2. clbarker10's Avatar
    Having the same OS for tablets and phones is not ideal IMHO. Apple took this route with iOS and so did Android, but from a development point of view it is problematic. The screen layout and relative size (i.e. the screen size in relation to the distance from your eyes) on a tablet is actually closer to the relative size of a laptop/desktop than it is to a smart phone. You hold a smart phone about the same distance from your eyes as a tablet, but the screen is much smaller and it's usually oriented in portrait layout. As a result, the UI for phone apps needs to be designed specifically for that layout. On the other hand, a touch app designed for a tablet will generally work just as well on a laptop or desktop monitor. A phone is also very restricted by the hardware/battery that can fit in it's form factor. A modern tablet can be nearly as powerful as a laptop.

    I think that MS got this right. If MS had used a shared OS for both tablets and phones, the apps (at least for the UI layer, and possibly also to account for phone performance limitations) would still have to be written twice. A lot of code can be shared if the app is designed well, but there is no getting around the UI differences. Extending the desktop OS down to the tablet makes a lot more sense than extending the phone OS up to the tablet. In the MS ecosystem, I can write two touch apps (one for phone, another for Windows8/RT) and that will cover any device including phones, tablets, laptops, and desktops. Having tablets share the same OS as laptops and desktops also allows for innovative hybrid form factors that are not possible in the Apple or Google world. My Surface Pro is used as both a laptop and a tablet.

    In the Apple ecosystem I would still have to write the same two apps, but they would only cover phone and tablet. To cover laptops and desktops I would have to write a third app that runs on OSX (which uses entirely different APIs). In the Google ecosystem the same applies except that there is no real laptop/desktop OS to write for. Apple is actually in an awkward position going forward in my opinion. They are going to have to decide if they want to extend OSX down to the iPad and make OSX capable of running touch apps (in other words copy Windows 8), or they are going to be stuck with tablets that are quite limited compared to what MS is offering. They will also have no capability to provide a hybrid device.

    As far as the OP's question, I think Win RT exists for two reasons.

    1) Tablet hardware is still developing and for truly small, lite, and cheap tablets with good runtime (i.e. direct iPad competitor) ARM is really the only option at the moment. Traditional Windows and the programs written for it won't run on ARM so something else was needed. However, Intel is very close to having x86 CPUs that will be a viable option for building tablets in that category.

    2) This is just my personal opinion, but I think MS needed to be able to sell a super cheap version of Windows to tablet OEMs if they wanted to compete with iPads and Android tablets on the low end of the price scale $400 - $500. They could always license the full Windows 8 at a lower price for tablets, but what would stop OEMs from using that discounted licensing on other products. It would be hard to enforce, especially for the new hybrid devices like the Lenovo Yoga. For this reason, It's possible that Windows Lite (RT) could be around for a while and maybe even in an x86 version.
    Yes. Reason 2...Price! Price! Price! bigger market. It's simple guys.
    ninjaap likes this.
    03-07-2013 02:29 AM
  3. ninjaap's Avatar
    Ok, so I guess we differ there but I already have Office. So if you had Office would you still choose an RT?

    PS: RD is ok but it's just not as good as the real thing.
    Yes that's my point, we all differ in our needs and wants. I already have Office on my home computer but need it on all my devices. Just because you want full desktop does not mean I do. Yes RD is not as good as the real thing, but its still helpful and can only improve as it gets more users.
    Laura Knotek likes this.
    03-07-2013 02:37 AM
  4. ninjaap's Avatar
    Yes. Reason 2...Price! Price! Price! bigger market. It's simple guys.
    Yes! Why is it so hard to understand? RT will always be cheaper than Pro, and will hold its own value as the "lite" version of Windows 8. As Pro devices drop in price, so will RT devices.
    clbarker10 likes this.
    03-07-2013 03:23 AM
  5. derek533's Avatar
    Yes! Why is it so hard to understand? RT will always be cheaper than Pro, and will hold its own value as the "lite" version of Windows 8. As Pro devices drop in price, so will RT devices.
    Seems like there are a lot of "dense" posters who just can't see the benefit of having both RT and Pro machines on the market.

    If Apple had an iPad that had an appearance that mirrored OSX but wasn't as fully featured as OSX, people would be calling it genius, and that "Apple is innovating again". Especially if said iPad functioned as a "macbook lite" with a detachable keyboard cover and stand built into the device. Yet MS does it, and people just can't see the forest for the trees, and bash it to death rendering it dead in the court of public opinion before it even has a chance to show what it can truly do.

    Give me a break...
    WinFan1 likes this.
    03-07-2013 08:55 AM
  6. martinmc78's Avatar
    If Apple had an iPad that had an appearance that mirrored OSX but wasn't as fully featured as OSX, people would be calling it genius, and that "Apple is innovating again". Especially if said iPad functioned as a "macbook lite" with a detachable keyboard cover and stand built into the device. Yet MS does it, and people just can't see the forest for the trees, and bash it to death rendering it dead in the court of public opinion before it even has a chance to show what it can truly do.

    Give me a break...
    You know thats probably going to happen anyway right?
    03-07-2013 09:12 AM
  7. chinesepiratefood's Avatar
    I hope I don't see RT on an i7 machine. We will begin to see the decline of the x86 processors and as ARM technology gets better and better, they will replace the clunkers we have now! I like to compare it to Electric Cars (ARM) to gas cars (x86).
    Intel's current Clovertrail Atom CPUs are faster than tegra 3 and Snapdragon S4, AND more power efficient. Yes next gen Cortex A15 designs are coming this year, so are next-gen atom designs by Intel.
    03-07-2013 09:14 AM
  8. Coreldan's Avatar
    Personally for me there's a few things, although some might be doable on full W8 tablets all the same.

    1) First comes to mind is connected standby, but I suppose this is achievable with good battery life on Atoms too, otherwise no one would probably buy them :D
    2) No cooling needed, doesn't heat up nearly as much when running ARM
    3) Given that I don't need to run legacy apps on what I use Surface for, it's great how resistant it is against malware. I can remote desktop at home and on the move I only reall need officer and browser does the rest. Full W8 tablet would need the whole deal your desktop would, firewall, antivirus etc.. And that's a great way to slow down your tablet with limited power at it's disposal.

    For the above reasons, I'm happy with my RT and don't really even want it to have full Windows 8.
    03-07-2013 09:29 AM
  9. WinFan1's Avatar
    I personally think the main reason that windows with RT exists is because 1) not everyone does work with legacy applications. 2)It works fantastically well as a media consumption device. 3) Has free office that still allows you to edit powerpoints, word docs, and excel documents.
    I think to dismiss a product because it does not fit with you as an individual is silly to say the very least. i own a surface RT and it works great.
    GSOgymrat likes this.
    03-07-2013 10:27 AM
  10. berty6294's Avatar
    Intel's current Clovertrail Atom CPUs are faster than tegra 3 and Snapdragon S4, AND more power efficient. Yes next gen Cortex A15 designs are coming this year, so are next-gen atom designs by Intel.
    I understand that. Intel is making some great improvements, thing is, Nvidea is making even bigger improvements! I'd like to see the new Atom compared to Tegra 4 or 4i. The Tegra 3 is last years technology.
    03-07-2013 11:36 AM
  11. theefman's Avatar
    The facts seem to speak for themselves, no RT device seems to be selling in any significant numbers apart from the Surface RT and those numbers pale in comparison to ios and android tablets. When advocating for RT you also have to look at what market it is competing in and what that market is buying and they are not buying devices that have Office, can connect to priners or USB peripherals. They are buying devices that rely primarily on apps and connect to a rich ecosystem and that is an area that RT is lacking in and why it is not seen as competitive with ios and android.

    RT also defeats the purpose of Windows 8, an OS that is pitched as being able to run on practically any hardware and fulfil any computing requirement, whether light or heavy. Will RT evolve to the point that you can write apps for it with only an RT device? Will full Photoshop, AutoCAD and other complex programs come to RT? RT also has minimal price advantage over full Windows 8 devices, the Surface RT is still the same price and the only other available RT device has only recently seen a price cut, and that is for the 32GB version. Office is touted as the killer feature but its readily available to Windows 8 users and at $99 for 5 PC's its not going to be an issue for someone who really wants Office. If not they can probably make do with Office Web Apps or other free alternatives.

    So where really is the advantage of Windows RT at the moment? In the ARM world its less competitive because of apps, in the x86 world its limited by lack of compatibility. Maybe in the future it will be the defacto Windows version but today it doesnt look like it is able to compete in the computing environment that exists.
    03-07-2013 11:45 AM
  12. berty6294's Avatar
    The facts seem to speak for themselves, no RT device seems to be selling in any significant numbers apart from the Surface RT and those numbers pale in comparison to ios and android tablets. When advocating for RT you also have to look at what market it is competing in and what that market is buying and they are not buying devices that have Office, can connect to priners or USB peripherals. They are buying devices that rely primarily on apps and connect to a rich ecosystem and that is an area that RT is lacking in and why it is not seen as competitive with ios and android.

    RT also defeats the purpose of Windows 8, an OS that is pitched as being able to run on practically any hardware and fulfil any computing requirement, whether light or heavy. Will RT evolve to the point that you can write apps for it with only an RT device? Will full Photoshop, AutoCAD and other complex programs come to RT? RT also has minimal price advantage over full Windows 8 devices, the Surface RT is still the same price and the only other available RT device has only recently seen a price cut, and that is for the 32GB version. Office is touted as the killer feature but its readily available to Windows 8 users and at $99 for 5 PC's its not going to be an issue for someone who really wants Office. If not they can probably make do with Office Web Apps or other free alternatives.

    So where really is the advantage of Windows RT at the moment? In the ARM world its less competitive because of apps, in the x86 world its limited by lack of compatibility. Maybe in the future it will be the defacto Windows version but today it doesnt look like it is able to compete in the computing environment that exists.
    Right now? Light weight, thin, incredible battery life, virus free, sexy design, and cheaper.
    derek533 likes this.
    03-07-2013 12:02 PM
  13. MacDaMachine's Avatar
    I understand that. Intel is making some great improvements, thing is, Nvidea is making even bigger improvements! I'd like to see the new Atom compared to Tegra 4 or 4i. The Tegra 3 is last years technology.
    Tegra 4 would beast it. Atom is all CPU, the GPU on it can't compete.
    03-07-2013 12:20 PM
  14. CSJr1's Avatar
    [opinion]

    Surface RT is going to be the core for WP8.5 or GDDR 5. All apps that will run on RT will be able to be run on WP and of course W8pro. So Surface RT will the bridge from Windows 8 and WP8.

    [/opinion]
    03-07-2013 12:22 PM
  15. berty6294's Avatar
    Tegra 4 would beast it. Atom is all CPU, the GPU on it can't compete.
    Not to mention it is noise free, fan free, and takes up less space! Id take Tegra 4 over Atom any day!
    03-07-2013 12:25 PM
  16. jhoff80's Avatar
    Wow, there's ignorance on both sides here. First of all, to address a few points. Intel already has Connected Standby on Atom, and it's coming to Haswell later this year. Bay Trail, the next generation Atom SoC, will have a greatly improved GPU, using Ivy Bridge style Execution Units (instead of just licensing something from PowerVR like in the past). That being said, Bay Trail probably won't be fanless, nor will Haswell (even at 7W). It's more likely we won't see fanless Intel SoCs until late 2014, possibly with Broadwell. Of course, Nvidia, Qualcomm, and Samsung aren't just sitting on their hands either, and will continue to improve.

    More importantly though, the fact that all of you are arguing about SoC superiority though is exactly what I'm talking about. As far as Microsoft is now concerned, it doesn't matter which is better any more. Whichever one does end up being better, they can use it, no matter the architecture.
    calfee20 likes this.
    03-07-2013 01:11 PM
  17. theefman's Avatar
    Right now? Light weight, thin, incredible battery life, virus free, sexy design, and cheaper.
    All your criteria apart from 2 are met by devices like the Acer W510, Asus Vivo Tab Smart, and currently the HP Envy X2. Sexy design does not apply to the OS which is what we are discussing, not the Surface RT itself. Viruses are debatable, other ARM platforms are not immune so its probably just a matter of time before the first RT virus (or to put it more accurately exploit) appears.
    03-07-2013 02:53 PM
  18. Rich White's Avatar
    RT appeals to Microsoft Office users who require a long battery life. Internet, Kindle, Office and streaming media. That's its niche. Android is a toy and many aren't in the Apple ecosystem.

    Does RT have a future? I was skeptical until MS lowered the price of Office/ Windows for small devices to $30 for OEMs.. At that price point Windows RT should be a $50 premium at retail and no more when compared to a Google Nexus 7. Worth it to me. I expect a Surface Pro 7" inch to sell for $500 with Office, HD, 64GB, LTE. and a touch cover. Likely not that low on opening day but $499 off contract makes it a winner. $299 without the touch cover and LTE.

    Do I think Intel will eventually smoke ARM chips and RT doesn't make it to Windows 9? Yes. That's about the size of it..
    03-07-2013 03:16 PM
  19. ninjaap's Avatar
    Ahhh phooey! I don't understand why you guys are so adamant about killing off RT devices? You don't see us advocating the demise of Pro machines. If you don't need or want it then don't buy it. Let the market decide. There hasn't even been any numbers out for the Surface Pro and/or other Atom devices (or has there been?). As far as we know, the Surface RT has outsold current Windows 8 hybrids/tablets. I will believe none of you naysayers, because none of you can predict the future. All I know is, as long as it's an option, I will continue to support and buy Windows RT for my 10" and below tablet needs, for all the reasons I have already mentioned in earlier posts, and buy Windows 8 Pro for my larger laptops and desktop needs. And please stop trying to convince me that my criteria is inferior to those of yours and I will stop trying to convince you that your criteria is a waste of money.
    03-07-2013 03:18 PM
  20. Raghu Gundlapalli's Avatar
    Cost, battery life, weight. Intel has a long way to go before they can catchup with ARM on battery life. I do agree that there are advantages to having a pro compared to RT.

    Can somebody tell me what is the Point of Windows RT ??

    I mean if i would buy a Tablet, id buy a Full Windows 8 Tablet like Surface Pro.

    I dont get the Point of Windows RT, i never will-
    03-07-2013 03:25 PM
  21. omniusovermind's Avatar
    None of the pro RT arguments address what's already been pointed out - By the end of this year with the newer Intel x86 CPU's, you'll be looking at being able to do everything you can do on an RT, while getting the same battery life and on top of that be able to run full Windows programs for a negligible difference in price. It's simple math and common sense: Do more with no drawbacks.

    Ahhh phooey! I don't understand why you guys are so adamant about killing off RT devices? You don't see us advocating the demise of Pro machines. If you don't need or want it then don't buy it. Let the market decide. There hasn't even been any numbers out for the Surface Pro and/or other Atom devices (or has there been?). As far as we know, the Surface RT has outsold current Windows 8 hybrids/tablets. I will believe none of you naysayers, because none of you can predict the future. All I know is, as long as it's an option, I will continue to support and buy Windows RT for my 10" and below tablet needs, for all the reasons I have already mentioned in earlier posts, and buy Windows 8 Pro for my larger laptops and desktop needs. And please stop trying to convince me that my criteria is inferior to those of yours and I will stop trying to convince you that your criteria is a waste of money.
    Nobody's trying to kill off RT. But I don't see the point in covering my eyes and ears to the fact that I could be standing at he counter looking at an RT barely priced any less than a full Windows 8 tablet and buying the RT when you can do so much more on the other. It's simply not as much value for the small price difference.

    Cost, battery life, weight. Intel has a long way to go before they can catchup with ARM on battery life.
    No, no they don't. Those newer chips are slated to be out by the end of this year. Even right now, with the Clover Trail Atoms which aren't quite "there" yet in terms of power you can buy an Asus Vivo Tab Smart for $500. So by January I could be looking at buying the next gen CPU Windows 8 tablet for around the same price, same weight, same battery life.
    03-07-2013 03:26 PM
  22. KingCrimson's Avatar
    Can somebody tell me what is the Point of Windows RT ??

    I mean if i would buy a Tablet, id buy a Full Windows 8 Tablet like Surface Pro.

    I dont get the Point of Windows RT, i never will-
    I think having a pure ARM experience is worth something. Especially once the Surface RT gets on the Tegra 4 or Snapdragon 800 and the app store fills out, and Microsoft removes the desktop once and for all. There is room for a pure RT experience in the market for those that have no need for the old programs.
    03-08-2013 01:24 AM
  23. Nogitsune Micah's Avatar
    price is the biggest point.
    HeyCori likes this.
    03-08-2013 08:05 AM
  24. Coreldan's Avatar
    and Microsoft removes the desktop once and for all. There is room for a pure RT experience in the market for those that have no need for the old programs.
    That would be one huge selling point less for me. While I agree that perhaps Office etc could've been baked into new UI, but I don't want to give up file management and other aspects of the desktop. I would be REALLY bummed if they removed the desktop from me now. By all means minimize the need to use it by implementing other stuff, but removing features doesn't sound smart.
    03-08-2013 08:21 AM
  25. ninjaap's Avatar
    Windows 7 with an Atom processor's draw was that it was affordable, but was considered slow. Then they came out with Windows 7 tablets with Atom processors, tagged it with a $1000+ price tag, and that was considered crap, because it performed like a $300 HP netbook with Atom. All of a sudden we get Windows 7, slapped with Modern UI, called it Windows 8, and it's a godsend. Sure Modern UI runs great on Atom, like it does on ARM, but it still runs kinda slow in desktop mode, especially when you start using heavier programs. Never again Atom, never again! If I want desktop mode in my tablet it will be an i5 or higher.
    03-08-2013 11:38 AM
75 123

Similar Threads

  1. What's the point of 820 when 8X exists?
    By Hiiiiiiiii in forum Phone Wars
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-07-2012, 03:56 PM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-03-2012, 09:38 PM
  3. What's the point of the Windows Phone App?
    By dawindbag in forum Windows Phone 8
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-13-2012, 06:14 PM
  4. What is the point of the windows phone 8 app for Win8?
    By Michael Weisberg in forum Windows Phone 8
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-13-2012, 08:56 AM
  5. What is the point in jailbreaking?
    By dj9928 in forum Windows Phone 7
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-03-2011, 08:27 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD