Why Windows 8 will fail for tablets

[tokie]

Simple: Microsoft is playing a game of specifying system requirements to OEMs.

For example: all Windows RT tablets have a resolution of 1366x768. No 1080p screens for RT. This also applies for Atom based systems -- none of these have high resolution screens.

To get a high res screen you need to buy the more expensive Core-based Windows tablets.

Also, I don't care what extra features Windows 8 has over iOS or Android-- you CANNOT price higher than Apple. If you do not have an even more premium brand, you cannot price higher.

These tablets look to be priced for a minimum of $699. Ripoff when the iPad 3 is $499.

 

[yinan]

One of the many...

 

[Maximilian]

You know its bad when its not as good as the crapple alternative and it costs more.

 

[dagamer34]

Simple: Microsoft is playing a game of specifying system requirements to OEMs.

For example: all Windows RT tablets have a resolution of 1366x768. No 1080p screens for RT. This also applies for Atom based systems -- none of these have high resolution screens.

To get a high res screen you need to buy the more expensive Core-based Windows tablets.

Also, I don't care what extra features Windows 8 has over iOS or Android-- you CANNOT price higher than Apple. If you do not have an even more premium brand, you cannot price higher.

These tablets look to be priced for a minimum of $699. Ripoff when the iPad 3 is $499.

If I were to take that statement literally, apparently laptops shouldn't cost more than the $499 iPad, because Windows 8 clearly blurs the line between tablet and laptop. Or did I get that wrong?

 

[tokie]

If I were to take that statement literally, apparently laptops shouldn't cost more than the $499 iPad, because Windows 8 clearly blurs the line between tablet and laptop. Or did I get that wrong?

If it looks like an iPad then you can't price higher than an iPad. If it looks like a laptop then you can't price higher than a Mac.

 

[Tom]

What can be done with a Windows tablet that can't be done with an ios or android tablet ?

I'm betting nothing.

If it wasn't for games compatibility , I don't know why any consumer should buy a Windows pc. (I exclude business because maybe there's a reason for business I don't know about.)

 

[Anteaus]

The reason Windows 8 won't fail for tablets, is that you use the term tablet kind of rigidly. Not all future tablets will use ARM therefore not all tablets will be bound by the restrictions of Windows RT. Tablet PCs were out before the iPad even existed in the form of laptops with screens that could be flipped around, hiding the keyboard. Obviously they had issues, but it was a decent first try.

Now just take that same style machine, design it without a keyboard and just integrate the hardware into the same unit as the 10-14" touch LCD. Throw in some already available laptop tech and a small SSD that's how these things are ultimately going to be mainstream. Windows 8 will flourish in that environment. Windows 8 RT is only for niche devices.

 

[Tom]

The reason Windows 8 won't fail for tablets, is that you use the term tablet kind of rigidly. Not all future tablet PCs will use ARM therefore not all tablet PCs will be bound by the restrictions of Windows RT. Tablet PCs were out before the iPad even existed in the form of laptops with screens that could be flipped around, hiding the keyboard. Obviously they had issues, but it was a decent first try.

Now just take that same style machine, design it without a keyboard and just integrate the hardware into the same unit as the 10-14" touch LCD. Throw in some already available laptop tech and a small SSD that's how these things are ultimately going to be mainstream. Windows 8 will flourish in that environment. Windows 8 RT is only for niche devices.

What would you do with it ?

 

[Anteaus]

I was primarily responding to the OP who commented that Windows 8 will fail on tablets. His examples were predominately RT based and don't reflect non ARM tablets. As to what you could do with a tablet PC? All of the above plus you would have every PC software developer in the mix and not just the ones who feel like going through the software gauntlet of getting published in Windows App Store, Apple's App Store or Androids. This isn't an either/or situation. I like Apple and Android products, but I think there is plenty of room to grow for all sorts of products, the tablet PC being one of them.

I'm not saying tablet PCs are going to be better than the rest, but any platform that can draw the largest number of software developers will ultimately win. This is why to this day Apple only maintains a 18.48% market share (iOS and OSX combined) whereas Windows maintains a 68.74% market share (All MS OS combined). I wonder how that would skew if we knew how many Apple users regularly boot camp into Windows.

You ask why consumers would buy/build a Windows PC? There are numerous reasons why someone would by a PC, gaming only being one. I'm not going into detail, but there are lots of things that you can do with PCs both hardware and software wise that the people at Apple have decided either wasn't worth their time or that you as a user don't need. I might change my tune when they release a user upgradable machine that doesn't cost as much as a high end Falcon Northwest PC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems

 

[lopri]

Does anyone remember how much MS sabotaged PC gaming for the XBox? How ironic is it now that many consider the gaming as the most valuable feature Windows can offer to consumers.

 

[Anteaus]

Does anyone remember how much MS sabotaged PC gaming for the XBox?

I've heard it said before, but I've never seen proof to back it up. In fact, I'd counter to say that everything MS has done with DirectX up to date has been a boon for PC gaming in general. I don't think anyone can deny that console gaming has had an negative impact on PC gaming in the past 5 years or so, but I think that is more about the market and less about Microsoft.

I can't blame MS for shifting PC development over to Xbox when that's where the money was to be made. Now that PC gaming is picking up again, I'm sure we'll see it swing right back. Ironic as it is, digital distribution ended up becoming the great savior of PC gaming, with game sales in record numbers over the past couple years and a bright future.

 

[HeXen]

Surface will no doubt make sales, it might be less than their projected however. They will also continue to sell it like it is doing well regardless and next year we will see a Surface 2. Their app base will grow, but i do wonder how some developers will deal with 3 seperate platforms to program for.

Then there are the other OEM's making W8 tablets. So the OS and apps will at the very least, slowly gain recognition. WinRT is actually a good tablet design, i mean who prefers static icons compared to live tiles? ideally a live tile is superior...but its about what developers do with it.

Personally, all of Surfaces features and WinRT sound pretty impressive to me, the only caveat being is too few apps and the fact i already have investments in Ipad software. I'm not giving up all that money just to start over on a new platform when i could just buy a new Ipad and keep using my purchased apps.

 

[Rhonda the Sly]

Simple: Microsoft is playing a game of specifying system requirements to OEMs.

For example: all Windows RT tablets have a resolution of 1366x768. No 1080p screens for RT. This also applies for Atom based systems -- none of these have high resolution screens.

To get a high res screen you need to buy the more expensive Core-based Windows tablets.

That's a product of market segmentation, likely partially caused by MS releasing two OSs that can be marketed towards two very different groups.

Microsoft only mandates a minimum resolution for Windows RT. How things shook out, it's implicit that if you want a higher end product, you probably want x86 as well. As such, it's entirely possible a high-end RT tablet will be made, just unlikely.

• Hardware buttons: Must have five hardware buttons - 'Power', 'Rotation lock', 'Windows Key', 'Volume-up', 'Volume-down'. The Windows Key to be at least 10.5 mm in diameter.
• Five-point digitizers: Microsoft requires that Windows 8 touch PCs use digitizers supporting a minimum of five touch points.
• Mobile Broadband: If a mobile broadband device is integrated into a tablet or convertible system, then an assisted GPS radio is required
  [*]Display: Minimum native resolution/color depth is 1366x768 at a depth of 32-bits. The physical dimensions of the display panel must match the aspect ratio of the native resolution. The native resolution of the panel can be greater than 1366 (horizontally) and 768 (vertically).
• Near field communication: Devices supporting NFC need to have visual marks to help users locate and use the proximity technology.
• New button combination for Control-Alt-Delete: The new option is to press Windows Key + Power.
• Storage: At least 10 GB free space, after the out-of-box experience completes.
• Graphics: Direct3D 10 device with WDDM 1.2 driver
• Camera: Minimum resolution 1280 x 720[6]
• Ambient light sensor: 1-30k lux capable with dynamic range of 5-60K.
• Accelerometer: three axes with data rates at or above 50 Hz
• Magnetometer and gyroscope
• USB 2.0: At least one controller and exposed port.
• Networking: WLAN and Bluetooth 4.0 + LE (low energy)
• System firmware: UEFI
• Built-in speaker and microphone[7]

 

[lopri]

@Anteaus: I don't remember the details now but there were quite a few tails how MS stopped development of certain PC games and made those as XBox exclusives. Others may have better memory. I would present Windows 8 itself as proof as well, with its XBox Games, XBox Video, XBox Music, or what have you.

 

[dagamer34]

That's a product of market segmentation, likely partially caused by MS releasing two OSs that can be marketed towards two very different groups.

Microsoft only mandates a minimum resolution for Windows RT. How things shook out, it's implicit that if you want a higher end product, you probably want x86 as well. As such, it's entirely possible a high-end RT tablet will be made, just unlikely.

• Hardware buttons: Must have five hardware buttons - 'Power', 'Rotation lock', 'Windows Key', 'Volume-up', 'Volume-down'. The Windows Key to be at least 10.5 mm in diameter.
• Five-point digitizers: Microsoft requires that Windows 8 touch PCs use digitizers supporting a minimum of five touch points.
• Mobile Broadband: If a mobile broadband device is integrated into a tablet or convertible system, then an assisted GPS radio is required
  [*]Display: Minimum native resolution/color depth is 1366x768 at a depth of 32-bits. The physical dimensions of the display panel must match the aspect ratio of the native resolution. The native resolution of the panel can be greater than 1366 (horizontally) and 768 (vertically).
• Near field communication: Devices supporting NFC need to have visual marks to help users locate and use the proximity technology.
• New button combination for Control-Alt-Delete: The new option is to press Windows Key + Power.
• Storage: At least 10 GB free space, after the out-of-box experience completes.
• Graphics: Direct3D 10 device with WDDM 1.2 driver
• Camera: Minimum resolution 1280 x 720[6]
• Ambient light sensor: 1-30k lux capable with dynamic range of 5-60K.
• Accelerometer: three axes with data rates at or above 50 Hz
• Magnetometer and gyroscope
• USB 2.0: At least one controller and exposed port.
• Networking: WLAN and Bluetooth 4.0 + LE (low energy)
• System firmware: UEFI
• Built-in speaker and microphone[7]

I remember reading somewhere that it's Intel who requested OEMs using Clover Trail chips not to ship with high DPI displays in order to a) advertise higher battery life b) ensure smooth performance and c) because Atom next year is getting a die shrink and architecture revamp that should handle 1080p screens easier.

 

[ViRGE]

Personally I'm withholding judgement on Win8 tablets until they actually ship. Microsoft has done a lot with Windows 8 to make it work well on tablets so I think they have a serious chance of succeeding there. The wild card is going to be the hardware; the iPad is an amazing piece of engineering, and I'm not convinced any of the Win8 tablets are going to match it this generation.

 

[Anteaus]

@Anteaus: I don't remember the details now but there were quite a few tails how MS stopped development of certain PC games and made those as XBox exclusives. Others may have better memory. I would present Windows 8 itself as proof as well, with its XBox Games, XBox Video, XBox Music, or what have you.

I understand where you're going with that. As long as Microsoft doesn't do something stupid like block third party distribution services, all this means is we have yet another way to get content. RT users are forced to use these services, but not regular Windows 8 users.

Name similarities aside, those services have little to do with the actual Xbox or its titles. Basically all installed games, from this year or 5 years ago, fall under the Xbox games category when installed on Windows 8. I'll agree that it's a stupid thing for MS to do, but it really has no bearing on the overall PC game market. Services such as Steam and Origin will continue to work as always in Windows 8, but not RT. The confusion sets in because many of these features are really meant for the RT experience but they are shared with the standard Windows 8 system even though functionally they aren't mandatory. The Xbox name has become more of a metaphor for Microsoft gaming in general and less about the console.

As for Microsoft exclusives, they can keep them. I don't have any problem with third party developers and while I am disappointed to see companies like Aces (Flight Simulator) and Ensemble (Age of Empires)defunct, they had to adjust to market demands and PC gaming simply wasn't that profitable in the whole. I don't mean to sound pro Microsoft because I'm really not, but on the flip side I'm not going to keep beating them with a stick just because that's what we've always done, especially if we consider that these are businesses.

"In fact, the Xbox Games on Windows branding won't be used for retail games at all, but only for downloadable games on the Windows 8 Store."

"The best way to think of the Xbox Games on Windows is as a PC-based version of Xbox Live Arcade."

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/09/what-xbox-games-on-windows-actually-means/

 

[Mem]

Personally I'm withholding judgement on Win8 tablets until they actually ship. Microsoft has done a lot with Windows 8 to make it work well on tablets so I think they have a serious chance of succeeding there. The wild card is going to be the hardware; the iPad is an amazing piece of engineering, and I'm not convinced any of the Win8 tablets are going to match it this generation.

It's not so much iPad(overrated in my books) but how will Win8 tablets do against Android tablets which do have a strong foothold and amazing amount of free open software.

 

[N4g4rok]

It's not so much iPad(overrated in my books) but how will Win8 tablets do against Android tablets which do have a strong foothold and amazing amount of free open software.

The advantage Microsoft has going into the mobile space is the foothold they already have in desktop and laptop market segments. As far as tablet operating systems go, Windows 8 will be the most flexible. Even Win8 RT, though locked down in comparison to the professional version. this makes it easy to develop for.

An x86 based windows tablet will have access to all the currently available open source software used for windows, along with the capability of expanding into touch capable applications.

And because Microsoft ecosystems are common among homes and businesses, it won't be much of a chore to have a new windows 8 tablet operate within that system. Anything a regular windows 7 PC is capable of will be doable on an x86 windows 8 tablet. RT will not be quite as expandable, but the addition of Office will ease that transition.

However, none of that will matter if pricing remains absurd. If Windows 8 wants the attention it needs, OEMs need to keep x86 variants under $800 and try to keep RT variants under $400. $500 at most.

 

[Mem]

I'm still not convinced,I already use my Android smartphone to transfer Win7 files to my phone.
Android is flexible in it allows you to do stuff even from Microsoft Windows and for free.

Pricing wise Android is free and Microsoft will have to do something seriously right if they are going to make a dent in the tablet market.
I won't be buying a Win8 tablet but will be buying Android tablet in the near future,Android just ticks all the boxes I need.

 

[hhhd1]

MS has had windows phones for like 12 years, and it wasn't able to win a descent market share like IOS/Android has been able to do in a very short period, they are not good when it comes handheld devices.

I wouldn't really be 'shocked' if their tablet OS (RT) failed, In fact, I would be really surprised if it was able to gain a descent market share over Android and IOS.

 

[Pretty Cool]

The appeal of course is that you can run Windows applications. Even if you have WinRT, you still get the desktop versions of IE and Office. For people who just buy computers and never install anything, that is enough. For those who buy x86 tablets, they are obviously getting real Windows which means they can absolutely get work done. With other mobile OS solutions, that might not be the case.

Obviously, the pricing is going to be all over the map since there will eventually be ARM-based, Atom-based, AMD-based, i3-based, and i5-based tablets. So to say that all these tablets have to fit under some price is probably not realistic.

 

[HeXen]

MS has had windows phones for like 12 years, and it wasn't able to win a descent market share like IOS/Android has been able to do in a very short period, they are not good when it comes handheld devices.

I wouldn't really be 'shocked' if their tablet OS (RT) failed, In fact, I would be really surprised if it was able to gain a descent market share over Android and IOS.

If you look at their history, MS has never really been good at anything other than getting OEM's and business's to support their OS and gain partnerships and developer support.
Their original XBox didn't do too well either, especially in Japan. They pretty much brute force everything to a point where people would buy their poorly designed 360's until it red ringed then buy them again and again, same with their funky OS's...they are good at those things, but actually producing products and services that people really..really want, they usually fail or come up short, sometimes abandoning them altogether at the flick of a switch.
they couldn't even get internet TV right, handheld touch PDA's right and they are always a day late to the party.

Its weird though how most people just accept funky products and software that was literally strong armed into their living rooms through a variety of means, but apparently their phones are just not being accepted maybe because they were a bit far too late, sitting on their hands too long while focusing on an invalid OS (vista), GFWL..etc, spending way too much money in the wrong places.

 

[blurredvision]

Simple: Microsoft is playing a game of specifying system requirements to OEMs.

For example: all Windows RT tablets have a resolution of 1366x768. No 1080p screens for RT. This also applies for Atom based systems -- none of these have high resolution screens.

To get a high res screen you need to buy the more expensive Core-based Windows tablets.

Also, I don't care what extra features Windows 8 has over iOS or Android-- you CANNOT price higher than Apple. If you do not have an even more premium brand, you cannot price higher.

These tablets look to be priced for a minimum of $699. Ripoff when the iPad 3 is $499.

So basically, you typed a lot just to say something about resolution for ARM-based tablets and about prices that haven't been announced yet.

I'm really surprised this thread has gotten as many replies as it has so far.