Windows 8 and 8.1 Forums


If the iPad was late, ran Windows 8, it would fail too

  1. #1

    If the iPad was late, ran Windows 8, it would fail too


    Microsoft's Surface RT debacle has more to do with a collapsing PC market and Windows RT than hardware.
    Imagine this. Apple comes out with the iPad about three years late and slaps on a stripped-down version of Windows 8.
    Now imagine the consumer response.
    Yeah, I wouldn't buy it either.
    "Several other vendors that released [Windows] RT products had lackluster sales and difficulty clearing inventory," Rhoda Alexander, an analyst at IHS iSuppli, told CNET.
    "Poor product reviews and bad press contributed to the overall problem, poisoning the water not just for Microsoft but for other brands as well," she added.
    If the iPad was late, ran Windows 8, it would fail too | Microsoft - CNET News

      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  2. #2


    Posts : 1,925
    Windows 8.1 Pro


    iOS was basically a stripped down OSX, what's the point?
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  3. #3


    Posts : 5,360
    7/8/ubuntu/Linux Deepin


    People bought ios in large numbers, they didn't do the same with RT. Everybody knows that bit - he then goes on to say, he isn't sure the hybrids will be the answer for MS either.

    I expect MS will sell a lot more tablets from October onwards, not because of 8.1, but because of the other factors in the marketing mix. MS have a lot of clout, and they have learned to pitch it better.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  4. #4


    Quote Originally Posted by Mystere View Post
    iOS was basically a stripped down OSX, what's the point?
    Apple really does get away with a lot of things. iOS couldn't run traditional macOS apps but nobody seems to care. Windows RT couldn't run traditional desktop apps and OMG IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD.

    I remember the same criticisms when android first made its debut in tablets. People were criticizing that android sucked because it couldn't run desktop apps and that iOS was the best thing in the world because it couldn't run desktop apps either.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  5. #5


    Quote Originally Posted by goodintentions View Post
    Apple really does get away with a lot of things. iOS couldn't run traditional macOS apps but nobody seems to care. Windows RT couldn't run traditional desktop apps and OMG IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD.
    Actually it is M$ that is trying to get away with something and it is killing Surface somewhat. They called it Windows RT implying that it would run traditional desktops apps. Apple did not call there tablet os OSX xx which would imply that it would run macOS apps they called it iOS leaving no doubt it would not run macOS apps.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  6. #6


    Posts : 149
    Windows 8.1 Pro 64-Bit, Ubuntu 13.04 64-Bit


    People didn't lose as much going from MacOSX to iOS. Apple stuff is already stripped down and stupid simple to start with. The people who already liked that about MacOSX, enjoyed the same thing with the iOS version of their favorite software. Apple made sure to provide built-in stuff that was similar in design and functionality to their desktop counterparts (which isn't hard, considering...) so established Apple people feel right at home with iOS. There's not much to take away! So not much lost. Apple also never conditioned their users to enjoy that much backwards compatibility. Apple also kept things pretty familiar.

    Windows is different, Windows for decades carries a torch from one generation to the next as a staple desktop-oriented OS with a taskbar, resizable and movable windows, and x86 based software. Windows software tended to be more complex, with more options and features which required knowledge of a good number of keyboard combinations and using two mouse buttons effectively. The thing is, Microsoft always tried to make sure stuff from way old still worked for a long time. Windows has always stuck to this until suddenly!

    Windows 8. Radical, jarring change from traditional desktop to the sudden entrance into the mobile platform. This platform oversimplifies applications and the UI itself, taking away many features in the process. How the UI is used is a jarring, radical change as well, even down to how it looks massively changed (for the worse). It's also not in any shape or form compatible with previous windows software, requiring -all new applications- to be made specifically for this platform. They forced this platform onto desktops and laptops as well, something even Apple didn't try to do. Microsoft took a well working desktop platform and put a bullet in the foot trying to kill it off themselves. Thank goodness the proper Windows 8 still has a desktop side that runs our stuff or it would have been a total disaster.

    This is why Apple 'gets away' with it. It also helps that they pretty much were first to stampede the mobile market with smartphones and tablets, and they didn't do so by sacrificing their desktop environment.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  7. #7


    Adelaide
    Posts : 1,338
    Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 (64 bit), Linux Mint 17.1 MATE (64 bit)

    Agreed


    I don't think that Apple's initial plan was, "Let's force OS X users to use iOS."

    Unlike Microsoft's W8 plan, which was, "Let's force Windows desktop users to use our tablet GUI."
    This can be seen by the way MS reacted, when they discovered that people weren't using their tablet GUI (they were using the W8DP Start Menu Hack).

    MS ripped the code out of subsequent versions of W8 ("shooting themselves in the foot" in the process).
    If they hadn't done, that they could have offered a simple checkbox option somewhere (hidden, of course) to turn Metro on/off (removing/restoring the Start Menu).

    IMO, this would have prevented a lot of the online complaining and poor uptake of W8.
    Metro lovers would have been happy.
    Desktop lovers would have been happy.
    MS would have been happy ($).
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  8. #8


    Posts : 1,925
    Windows 8.1 Pro


    Your opinion would have been wrong, because Nobody would have been happy. Certainly not desktop users, who would not have been able to find this hidden hack. Metro users would not be happy because, if the desktop hack actually did become common knowledge, why would anyone write Metro apps? (the OS/2 dillemna), and MS would not be happy because Users would still be dependent upon their Win32 (ie x86/64 architecture) apps, making it that much harder for ARM based devices to gain a foothold.

    Your problem is that you misunderstand Microsoft's motives. It's not to make users use a tablet. It's to get users off x86 architecture dependency. They may still use x86 chips, but apps need to be able to run on any hardware platform going forward. That's what WinRT is all about.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  9. #9


    Adelaide
    Posts : 1,338
    Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 (64 bit), Linux Mint 17.1 MATE (64 bit)


    Quote Originally Posted by Mystere View Post
    Your opinion would have been wrong, because Nobody would have been happy. Certainly not desktop users, who would not have been able to find this hidden hack.
    It would be hidden in the Control Panel.
    The various blogs and media mouthpieces would "advertise" its location.
    Just like they have had to regarding the hidden "Boot to desktop" option (in W8.1).

    Quote Originally Posted by Mystere View Post
    Metro users would not be happy because, if the desktop hack actually did become common knowledge, why would anyone write Metro apps? (the OS/2 dillemna), and MS would not be happy because Users would still be dependent upon their Win32 (ie x86/64 architecture) apps, making it that much harder for ARM based devices to gain a foothold.
    People constantly claim that Win32 programs are unsuitable for battery powered devices, but WinRT is suitable for those uses.

    If this is true then Apps for phones and tablets would be written in WinRT, if RT was a easier/better development environment and/or provided "end device benefits" (i.e if consumers were to "lap them up" for whatever reason).

    Quote Originally Posted by Mystere View Post
    Your problem is that you misunderstand Microsoft's motives. It's not to make users use a tablet. It's to get users off x86 architecture dependency. They may still use x86 chips, but apps need to be able to run on any hardware platform going forward. That's what WinRT is all about.
    In fact, in 2 out of the 3 quotes above, you let slip that the real reason is to force users to use a new architecture.
    This architecture "just happens" to be highly suited to phones and tablets.

    If it wasn't about tablets, then why all the tablet hoopla?
    Why all of the whining about people not purchasing desktops?
    Why introduce a touchscreen interface for desktops, if no one is buying them?

    The fact is that phones and tablets are treated as disposable items (by the majority of consumers apparently).
    They are replaced at a far higher rate than desktops and laptops.
    MS wanted a slice of that action.

    Their motives are crystal clear.
    They get nothing from Win32 programs (except the ones they sell).
    They want to take a cut from every bit of software that runs on their OS, just like Apple does (apart from free Apps obviously).

    Take Adobe Creative Suite (the software that is used as the prime example for people not being able to swap to Linux-based operating systems).
    Adobe was raking in >$1K from Creative Suite purchases (I don't know what the US price is) and MS were getting nothing.

    If MS tried to "lock down" Win32, they get sued into oblivion by software companies and fined by the EU (maybe even the US Government).
    WinRT was created in an attempt to bypass that problem.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

  10. #10


    Posts : 5,360
    7/8/ubuntu/Linux Deepin


    It is all about what MS wants.

    Customers do not have to go along with that. If they have any sense, they won't lap it up and wind up totally subservient to the corporate masters. Other corporations may be attempting similar manipulations, but that is no excuse.
      My System SpecsSystem Spec

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
If the iPad was late, ran Windows 8, it would fail too
Related Threads
So I had tried to fix this for months. I have tried various forums without any replies or help. I purchased an Apple retina Macbook Pro and put Windows 8.1 on it. OS X does NOT flicker, but Windows 8.1 will flicker every time I login. Occasionally I will get a brief period of 10 seconds where it...
Read more at: Microsoft to deliver Windows 'Threshold' tech preview around late September | ZDNet
Read more at: How Microsoft can salvage Windows 8 before it's too late | ZDNet
Read more at: Windows 8 to arrive by late October, Microsoft says | Windows 8 - CNET Reviews
Windows 8 tablets too late ? in General Support
I just finished a quote for a high school, they want a wireless network for their 632 students that will use Ipad instead of text book and pen. They make the experience last year with 1 class and was extremely satisfy. Apple offer the Ipad at discount for the parents. It's not unique here in...
Eight Forums Android App Eight Forums IOS App Follow us on Facebook