Windows 8 and 8.1 Forums


Do or die: Windows RT decision looms for new Microsoft ...

  1. #11


    Posts : 87
    Windows 7 Pro 64


    Quote Originally Posted by Mystere View Post
    Really? You're saying Microsoft did not have DOS that ran most of the computers when they introduced Windows 1.0? You're saying Microsoft didn't have Windows 3.x which ran most of the computers when Microsoft introduced Windows NT?

    What exactly are you talking about?
    you do realize that DOS (text/keyboard UI) and windows (grafics/mouse UI) are totally different for the user while W8 and windows RT look and work almost the same way? (this is why most people don't even know there is a difference.... not many people failed to realize the difference between DOS and windows)

    You also don't realize that W 3.x and windows NT were totally different in terms of multitasking, network capability, stability?

      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  2. #12


    Posts : 1,925
    Windows 8.1 Pro


    Windows NT 3.1 looked *EXACTLY* like Windows 3.1. Exactly. The exact same Program Manager Inteface. Of course you couldn't buy Windows NT in stores really, and it was a lot more money.. but my point was more about the fact that Microsoft has released new products that failed to be successes in their first, second, maybe even third versions.. Microsoft sticks with them.

    The fact is, Microsoft's release strategy takes this into account in most cases. They understand that the first version is typically only bought by early adopters. They also tend to want to get the product out early, and cut a lot of the features they want in the product, and those features don't make it into the product until 2 or 3 releases later. It's not until the more fully featured version is out that it becomes more popular.

    For instance, Windows NT 3.1 was originally released without OLE 2 (ie, only the crappy DDE based OLE from the Windows 2.x era). despite the fact that OLE2 was already long out for 2 years in Windows 3.1.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  3. #13


    Posts : 87
    Windows 7 Pro 64


    Quote Originally Posted by Mystere View Post
    Windows NT 3.1 looked *EXACTLY* like Windows 3.1. Exactly. The exact same Program Manager Inteface. Of course you couldn't buy Windows NT in stores really, and it was a lot more money.. but my point was more about the fact that Microsoft has released new products that failed to be successes in their first, second, maybe even third versions.. Microsoft sticks with them.

    The fact is, Microsoft's release strategy takes this into account in most cases. They understand that the first version is typically only bought by early adopters. They also tend to want to get the product out early, and cut a lot of the features they want in the product, and those features don't make it into the product until 2 or 3 releases later. It's not until the more fully featured version is out that it becomes more popular.

    For instance, Windows NT 3.1 was originally released without OLE 2 (ie, only the crappy DDE based OLE from the Windows 2.x era). despite the fact that OLE2 was already long out for 2 years in Windows 3.1.
    I'm not sure how NT 3.1. looked like, but "NT" which you originally said sure looked different than 3.1. And NT (whichever version) was the professional/enterprise version with NeTwork capability, but not the capability for as much gaming.

    W8 and RT on the other hand are both suitable for home and professional use (if RT had all the software....) and both have similar capabilities as far as tablets go. So they directly compte with each other, which W 3.1 and NT (whichever version) didn't. With W 2000 and XP MS finally unified home and professional OS.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  4. #14


    Hafnarfjörður IS
    Posts : 4,376
    Linux Centos 7, W8.1, W7, W2K3 Server W10


    Hi there
    Why did Ms have to bring out RT in the first place unless W8 was intended for desktops and RT destined for mobiles --now that could have made sense. Using "Metacode" a lot of W8 apps COULD run on ARM type architecture -- the Source is translated by a "metacompiler" which is done at the microcode level so you'd have two different OS's running similar apps but under a different GUI.

    Everyone would have had the best of both worlds with that solution -- now we have a half baked OS which is neither Desktop or Mobile and an "Orphan OS" (RT) which is going nowhere and why on earth would YOU as a consumer buy a product that you know is going to be abandoned even before the warranty on the hardware has run out.

    BTW Windows NT was possibly the most "User Aggressive" Os ever in the entire history of OS'es -- maybe at an enterprise level for servers but for home use it was a total and unmitigated disaster -- even simple things like getting a network configured was a real dogs dinner -- remember RAS and all those horrible things. As for "Plug 'n Play" devices - forget it and even THINKING about attaching any sort of USB device was going to end in tears.

    No wonder we called Windows NT - Windows No Thanks or Windows Neanderthal. Windows 2000 was a much better bet all round and then that morphed into Windows 2003 server and Windows XP which we all know lasted far far longer than Ms ever anticipated.

    Cheers
    jimbo
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  5. #15


    South Coast NSW, Australia
    Posts : 615
    Windows 8.1 'Ultimate' RTM 64 bit (Pro/WMC).


    I have NT4, and, while it's a lot of fun to play with, I wouldn't consider using it as my main OS.

    Not then, not now.

    It runs nicely in VIrtual-Box, and is not net-connected.

    Wenda.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Do or die: Windows RT decision looms for new Microsoft ...
Related Threads
Read more at: How the 'One Microsoft' mission is changing Microsoft Research | ZDNet
Read more at: Microsoft to rebrand 'Windows Azure' as 'Microsoft Azure' | ZDNet
If you're going to make a Start Menu toolbar (see the Tutorial https://www.eightforums.com/tutorials/2460-start-menu-toolbar-create-windows-8-taskbar.html?ltr=S), you should decide which of the two Start Menu folders to use based on your own needs. By this time it's become common knowledge that...
Read more at: Microsoft inches closer to a unified Windows and Windows Phone Store | ZDNet
Read more at source: Microsoft's Lync and OneNote apps for Windows 8, Windows RT now in Windows Store | ZDNet See also: How to Install Metro Apps from Windows 8 Store
Hello Guys, There has been serious, heated debates and disappoint among users over Microsoft's controversial decision to remove the start button. But I though find some logics behind this, here they are: 1) Start button has been replaced by Start Screen, as simple as that, whether you like it...
More - Windows 8, Windows Phone 8, Windows 8 Embedded, There’s a Trend at Microsoft - Softpedia
Eight Forums Android App Eight Forums IOS App Follow us on Facebook