03-12-2013 04:39 PM
75 123
tools
  1. omniusovermind'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.
    Keep your eyes on Bay Bridge. The tech community are all saying it's going to be a big performance leap from current Atoms
    03-08-2013 08:51 PM
  2. Ray Adams's Avatar
    Having Core i5 on table will not give you 9 hours of working. Personally I think it's better to buy atom based table than RT. I did it buying Asus Vivotab Smart instead of RT version. Price is about the same, but you also have full access to your desktop! RT will be useful only if price for tablet will be twice less than Atom version.
    03-09-2013 03:58 AM
  3. GSOgymrat'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.
    .
    Are you saying that Microsoft shouldn't have "apps" anymore but just have Windows 8 programs? Eliminating Windows RT seems to be the equivalent of Apple eliminating iOS in favor of OS X. Perhaps that would be good in terms of a unified ecosystem but the trend seems to be people buying more media consumption devices such as iPad Mini, Kindle Fire, Nexus 7 in comparison to laptops and desktops.

    As an average consumer I know that if Microsoft had come out with Surface Pro and not released Surface RT I would have never bought it because Surface Pro cannot compete with iPad as a tablet. Surface Pro is not a tablet, it's more like a laptop and I don't want or need a laptop. It is too heavy, the power supply is too big, you can't hold it in one hand while you read, etc. Many people think iPad is too big and are choosing iPad Mini, Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire.

    If Windows 8 can be placed on a device like iPad Mini with comparable speed, battery life and apps selection I see no need for Windows RT either but we don't seem to be there yet.
    03-09-2013 08:53 AM
  4. Rich White's Avatar
    . Many people think iPad is too big and are choosing iPad Mini, Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire.

    If Windows 8 can be placed on a device like iPad Mini with comparable speed, battery life and apps selection I see no need for Windows RT either but we don't seem to be there yet.
    That's it. I expect we see the 7.5" Surface (both Pro and RT) this year to compete with the mini for Holiday Season.

    It's next year when the 6" phones and Atoms hit where we see a convergence of sorts. With Smart Glass and other Display Sharing tech we will see 10" and 14" Touchscreen monitors weighing under a pound. Lenovo announced a 14" travel touchscreen monitor at CES with Stylus. 1.5 lbs, Gorilla Glass, 10 hours battery life kickstand,, etc. Choose your weapon :).

    One look at the Lenovo K900 5.5" Atom Phone and you know that's just beggin to go 6" next year and add Windows Pro or RT with LTE.

    When you think about it a 10" tablet doesn't make sense. Just bring the display with you when you need it. When my 920 goes off contract I expect some incredible choices on the market.
    03-09-2013 09:57 AM
  5. Traderhorn's Avatar
    Hi i bought surface RT 64GB, 3 months ago, after looking at Apple/Android tablets, decided on RT, as i have windows phone 7.5,
    and windows 7 laptop,both have worked very well, so i thought stick with windows, so far it does everything i need,
    having full flash player support is one reason i went for RT, and it is well made with good battery life,
    lack of apps at the start is not an issue as i can do most things with the browser, if i need full windows i prefer laptop not tablet,
    so surface RT will meet many peoples needs. and surface pro for others, every device will suit someone.
    WinFan1 likes this.
    03-09-2013 01:49 PM
  6. ny_yankees's Avatar
    Price is a big issue when comes to do these things. People want a tablet on the go that can do most of the things their home desktop/laptops can do. So some will opt for the cheaper tablets which will can get the work done
    03-09-2013 04:47 PM
  7. Joe920's Avatar
    Hey, if there's no point to RT then prices will start dropping rapidly, which would become a pretty good point! Fingers crossed.
    03-09-2013 08:25 PM
  8. Reflexx's Avatar
    I've come to the conclusion that there are just some people who do not have the ability of understanding that different people have different priorities and needs.
    ninjaap and WinFan1 like this.
    03-09-2013 08:36 PM
  9. Flagz's Avatar
    I don't want full windows, I have a 27" i7 touch screen desktop and a 13" i5 ultrabook for my paper work, studio work, and video work. I want a media consumption tablet (Netflix, Hulu, web browsing, light email, games.) I don't want a fan in my tablet, or quick draining battery. Surface RT has been my PERFECT TABLET.
    03-09-2013 09:28 PM
  10. Billy Harrison's Avatar
    What's the point of having the iPad and an Apple laptop? Its the same thing your asking about windows! RT has better battery like than Pro. Its app based just like the iPad. Its less expensive and the Pro just like the iPad. But you have an option to go all out with the Pro and still have a great tablet unlike the Apple laptop. Makes since to me.
    03-10-2013 06:42 AM
  11. Ridemyscooter86's Avatar
    My main theory for windows RT, and it sounds funny, was to give intel a kick in the right direction. Up until clover trail, the atoms had bad performance, ok battery life, but mainly the performance sucked. Once ARM got popular and iOS and android were using a ton of ARM processors, it became apparent that windows 7 was too big. That is why windows 8 and intel atoms run so well now. Intel increased the battery life and performance of the atoms and Microsoft increased the performance of its OS. These make windows 8 tablets on atoms run just fine.
    Before people say this is crazy, remember that like 3 years ago apple did the exact same thing to intel as well. Intel always made ulv processors for ultraportable laptops but up until the air, they never got super big. Once the air came out with the ulv core 2 duo processors, intel started improving their ulv processors drastically. The core i series, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd gen ulv processors have all had major improvements with each generation.

    The second major reason for RT is to gain a foothold in arm. The scary thing about the tablet market/PC market in general is that no one really knows which way it will go. Intel is still the king overall because of notebooks and desktops, but tablets are gaining traction very quickly and ARM has overwhelmingly dominant marketshare on tablets. Tablets will eventually take over PC sales. This is a fact, they will do to notebooks what notebooks did to desktops...sure notebooks and desktops will still always be around, but many consumers now for their general purpose needs are starting to buy more and more tablets. Especially with windows 8 thrown into the mix, tablets can replace standard computers as a primary device. So if the market does switch to ARM, Microsoft can be prepared.

    RT really has the major problem of its price being too expensive. Remember, that while RT right now isn't necessarily as much of a direct comparison to android and iOS, it is gaining apps quickly. For RT really to succeed, they need to have 200-300$ tablets. Right now, windows 8 is better seeing as one can purchase a windows 8 atom tablet for 500$ which can do so much more than an iPAD or android. RT does have full office, however, which does give it a huge leg up on android and iOS but with the price and apps, its not as much of a viable competitor to ipads or android. what Microsoft needs to do quickly is to make a 7" tablet with RT for 200-250$, maybe 300$ at most and they will sell like hotcakes. Why do you think apple made the ipad mini? Because 7" tablets are very popular. Once Microsoft does this, RT will be viable again. I think you will need to wait a generation to see this though, so about a year.
    03-10-2013 06:38 PM
  12. kittshelby's Avatar
    At least for me, the reasons to buy RT (especially the Surface RT) over full Windows 8 tablets are:

    - thinner, lighter, sexier
    - much longer battery life
    - free Microsoft Office 2013
    - may be cheaper

    However, if manufacturers can make their Windows 8 tablets thinner, lighter, and have a full days battery life, then I may consider buying a full Windows 8 tablet.
    03-10-2013 06:54 PM
  13. SlayerSpecial's Avatar
    My reasons for choosing a Surface RT over a Pro: Don't want nor need to install bloating "exe's" on my tablet, since I have a laptop for that; battery lasts twice longer; cheaper; lighter; cooler; touch devices are not, conceptually, suited for desktop UI's.

    As a matter of fact even if it cost the same I'd go RT.
    jaimeastin likes this.
    03-10-2013 07:09 PM
  14. mparker's Avatar
    Windows RT means that Microsoft is no longer tethered to Intel's hip. It's a huge deal, because now it doesn't actually matter in the slightest which hardware is superior, they can use either ARM or x86/64.
    Windows has never been tethered to Intel's hip. Windows NT was originally written for the MIPS R3000 then ported to the Intel 386 and DEC Alpha at launch, and was later ported to the Intel Itanium as well. ARM is just continuing in the grand tradition.


    The app framework for all future programs, WinRT, is largely platform agnostic.
    Win32 is also platform agnostic - you just have to tell Dev Studio that you want the program to run on the various architectures. At one time I was a developer on an application that we shipped for DEC Alpha and Intel x86.
    Ridemyscooter86 likes this.
    03-11-2013 09:05 AM
  15. jhoff80's Avatar
    Windows has never been tethered to Intel's hip. Windows NT was originally written for the MIPS R3000 then ported to the Intel 386 and DEC Alpha at launch, and was later ported to the Intel Itanium as well. ARM is just continuing in the grand tradition.
    For the consumer version (aka the version most widely used in the marketplace)? Sure they have. They don't call it "Wintel" for no reason.

    Win32 is also platform agnostic - you just have to tell Dev Studio that you want the program to run on the various architectures. At one time I was a developer on an application that we shipped for DEC Alpha and Intel x86.
    You could do it that way in Visual Studio in the past, but now it's much more firmly 'encouraged'.
    03-11-2013 09:33 AM
  16. berty6294's Avatar
    For the consumer version (aka the version most widely used in the marketplace)? Sure they have. They don't call it "Wintel" for no reason
    I have never heard anybody call them "Wintel" lol but I think the reason is that ARM is much stronger now. It started as a mobile processor, now its being used in tablets, next you will see it in the personal computer market! ARM is the future.
    03-11-2013 10:07 AM
  17. jaimeastin's Avatar
    My reasons for choosing a Surface RT over a Pro: Don't want nor need to install bloating "exe's" on my tablet, since I have a laptop for that; battery lasts twice longer; cheaper; lighter; cooler; touch devices are not, conceptually, suited for desktop UI's.

    As a matter of fact even if it cost the same I'd go RT.
    pretty much same here.
    03-11-2013 10:12 AM
  18. HeyCori's Avatar
    I don't think I'm the only one that assumed that RT devices would launch at a much (much) cheaper price point. After all, there was plenty of speculation. Lenovo even stated that RT tablets would cost as low as $300. What did we get instead? The Surface RT launches with a $600 dollar bundle. The Asus VivoTab also launches for $600. And let's not forget the Samsung Ativ and its $600 price tag. Simply put, these are not the prices we're looking for. /jedi

    I believe the goal was that Windows RT gives you a gimped version of Windows 8 but at a much lower cost. Unfortunately, that goal has not materialized. I believe the cheapest RT tablet you can get right now is the VivoTab RT for $420 on Amazon. That price tag isn't even remotely close to the Kindle Fire, Nexus, Nook or other low-end Android tablets. A $400-$600 RT tablet leaves a lot to be desired because you don't get full W8 functionality and the app market pales in comparison to the competition. And lets not forget that $600 can buy a decent W8 laptop too.

    I have a Surface RT, and I know exactly why I bought one, but I'd have an easier time trying to sell a Windows Phone. Microsoft and OEMs have to lower the price, period. Yeah, many core apps need to be fixed and there needs to be more education on the differences between RT and W8, but the immediate problem (IMO) is cost. Lower the cost, increase RT's market share, more developers will support it, more consumers will buy it. I just don't see anything else that will help as much as lowering the cost.
    stmav and Ridemyscooter86 like this.
    03-11-2013 01:34 PM
  19. ninjaap's Avatar
    I don't think I'm the only one that assumed that RT devices would launch at a much (much) cheaper price point. After all, there was plenty of speculation. Lenovo even stated that RT tablets would cost as low as $300. What did we get instead? The Surface RT launches with a $600 dollar bundle. The Asus VivoTab also launches for $600. And let's not forget the Samsung Ativ and its $600 price tag. Simply put, these are not the prices we're looking for. /jedi

    I believe the goal was that Windows RT gives you a gimped version of Windows 8 but at a much lower cost. Unfortunately, that goal has not materialized. I believe the cheapest RT tablet you can get right now is the VivoTab RT for $420 on Amazon. That price tag isn't even remotely close to the Kindle Fire, Nexus, Nook or other low-end Android tablets. A $400-$600 RT tablet leaves a lot to be desired because you don't get full W8 functionality and the app market pales in comparison to the competition. And lets not forget that $600 can buy a decent W8 laptop too.

    I have a Surface RT, and I know exactly why I bought one, but I'd have an easier time trying to sell a Windows Phone. Microsoft and OEMs have to lower the price, period. Yeah, many core apps need to be fixed and there needs to be more education on the differences between RT and W8, but the immediate problem (IMO) is cost. Lower the cost, increase RT's market share, more developers will support it, more consumers will buy it. I just don't see anything else that will help as much as lowering the cost.
    Well with the recent news (rumor?) that MS is cutting prices on Windows 8, then it stands to reason that Pro devices will get a price cut and so would RT.
    03-11-2013 01:45 PM
  20. Simon Tupper's Avatar
    What is the point of iOS when OS X could run on the Surface Pro? It's simple... a lot of people want to use their tablet as a tablet.
    03-11-2013 04:07 PM
  21. HeyCori's Avatar
    Well with the recent news (rumor?) that MS is cutting prices on Windows 8, then it stands to reason that Pro devices will get a price cut and so would RT.
    I really hope so. Microsoft and OEMs are shooting themselves in the foot with these high prices.
    03-11-2013 04:43 PM
  22. paulm187's Avatar
    Windows RT future is on cheap 7" tablets based on ARM. Microsoft should kill the desktop in Windows RT. For 10" tablets Intel/AMD SoC hardware, Windows 8 is the future.
    03-12-2013 05:08 AM
  23. Simon Tupper's Avatar
    Windows RT future is on cheap 7" tablets based on ARM. Microsoft should kill the desktop in Windows RT. For 10" tablets Intel/AMD SoC hardware, Windows 8 is the future.
    I agree. I never use the desktop mode on my RT... no need to.
    03-12-2013 12:54 PM
  24. berty6294's Avatar
    Why don't people understand that desktop in RT and 8 are only for the transition. At launch there are more legacy apps than Windows Store apps. Once the Windows Store catalog increases, desktop will be removed and maybe they will sandbox non updated legacy apps! As for RT desktop is there for Office, as soon as Office is updated to the Modern UI feel, desktop will be removed from there. Eventually, RT and 8 will become one with the exception of 8 being able to sandbox legacy apps. THERE WILL BE NO MORE DESKTOP only Start screen! That's the plan, and that's why RT is the future.
    ninjaap likes this.
    03-12-2013 01:03 PM
  25. Ridemyscooter86's Avatar
    Yeah, the desktop totally needs to be ditched in RT. One of the major issues I have with win RT/8 is that many of the options are only able to be changed in the desktop. I know its because MS never got around to it because lets be honest, there are WAY more important things for them to do like improving the core apps like mail, calendar, IE, making the next xbox, office, skydrive, etc...but one of the major gripes I have with windows 8 and RT is that you'll be in the metro settings menu to do something and to get to a more advanced setting it then kicks you into the desktop. I'm sure with the blue updates and windows 9, they will have managed to migrate this all over to the metro interface but this is one of the major complaints I have with them.

    Also in reguards to desktop in RT. It seems to me the only reason other than transition was so they did not have to make another entirely new office suite for it. They already made 2013 and if the made metro only versions of word, excel, onenote, and powerpoint it would be another entirely new suite they would have to make in addition to the 2013 suite. Pretty much all they had to do for 2013 on RT was recompile office for ARM and then optimize it. I do think onenote for metro is pretty cool and it does seem like MS is working on making metro versions of office.
    03-12-2013 04:39 PM
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, 02:56 PM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-03-2012, 08:38 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, 05:14 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, 07:56 AM
  5. What is the point in jailbreaking?
    By dj9928 in forum Windows Phone 7
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-03-2011, 07:27 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD