We understand that much, thanks. Point is that no-one wants active cooling on a tablet, and no-one knows how Windows 8 will run on slower hardware. The fact that Microsoft had Samsung build some kind of tablet prototype with an i5 suggests that running Windows 8 on ARM-based tableat hardware is not going to be fun in its current state.
The funny thing is that a G5 PowerMac is actually very comparable to an xbox 360 in CPU performance (the 360 CPU is a stripped-down Power5 with 3 cores at 3 Ghz, adapted to trade in some general-purpose performance to increase peak floating point and cache performance). Even funnier is that we've all seen the big mess Microsoft ended up in with the first few generations of xbox 360 hardware: loud, unreliable, running too hot. It took them almost 5 years to get it right. If this Samsung 'developer platform' serves as an indication where W8 on tablets, things are not looking so great.
keywords - development platform (ie: not for sale)
The rest will look like The Seven (hopefully more) Dwarfs and "rudderless," like the Keystone Kops or The Three Stooges (I guess Microsoft would be "Moe"), except many more than "Three."
The more the merrier!
Every time things like this are said the only rebuttle is to bring reality to bear. 85% of the world (corporate and personal) that use Windows will adopt this more quickly than ever. All Microsoft has to do is deliver a seamless experience. A seamless experience between tablet and workstation. This will conquer all if done right.
So here's what I'm not getting, maybe someone can clarify for me: do the same apps run under both classic Windows 8 and Metro? That is, can I open a file in "Windows" while docked, then take off and continue to work on the same file within a touch friendly interface?
From what I know at the moment I would say no.
Depending on how they are written the two apps could share most of the same plumbing, but if you wanted a touch friendly UI and a "classic" Windows application that is going to be two separate UI apps the developer needs to deploy.
As a writer I am surprised you haven't heard of Chapters for the iPad. Whenever I am away from the office eg in a waiting room for dentist or doctor and so on I can slip out my iPad, write a couple of paragraphs, and then go into the appointment or get off the tram and all the text is available as a text file which you can later format how you like.
The more you stick into a Tablet, the more technology, memory, and storage you need. The more power you have, the shorter the battery life. To increase storage and memory and battery life costs money, so the device costs more. That's why it will be hard to displace the iPad - it sits right in the sweet spot of all of these things.
It's not the software. It's the iPad's lack of a keyboard.
For writing a few quick couple of paragraphs to record ideas, I find the iPhone perfect for that. And it fits in my pocket. I use Simplenote, and it does what you described above, more or less.
I like how Windows 8 tablet can pretty much function as a portable fully-fledged Windows 8 computer. Many GenY people don't seem to need that, but for business users and professionals, that would be something to think about seriously.
I'm the sort of person that gets an 11" MBA rather than an iPad, because of the nature of my work.
I love playing with iPads, but the nature of my work dictates the tools I use.
As said, I focus almost entirely on content-creation - and Steve Jobs has himself said that iPads are more for content-consumption.
With "old Windows" to fall back on, how can Microsoft get them to develop proper Metro apps?
For all Microsoft's failings they are pretty much universally praised for their dev tools.This doesn't change with Windows 8. If you do an app right you can target both environments.
That said there is going to be a gold rush on metro apps when Windows 8 is released. Users will reward developers that create the most compelling experiences. Any devs that refuse to release metro apps will end up being pushed to the bottom of the pile in the Windows Store.
I've got to say, that this isn't "bad", but Microsoft's no compromise attitude is going to eventually lose them the race because the device (and it's new market) needs a purpose built UI. I will also say that Apple has had nothing but a positive impact on the industry as they have been the catalyst for invention and that's what often lacks in this industry - true ingenuity and competition from the big players.
If anything Microsoft should be thanking Apple - forcing them to get their fingers out.
Depending on how they are written the two apps could share most of the same plumbing, but if you wanted a touch friendly UI and a "classic" Windows application that is going to be two separate UI apps the developer needs to deploy.
So if I can't open current Windows apps in the Metro tablet interface, I'm not clear on what Microsoft's split UI is really getting me.
The sales pitch seems to be that I can have a nice tablet UI, running new tablet friendly apps, which is fine. But then also if I need to do "real work" I can switch to "real Windows", whereupon I no longer have a nice tablet friendly UI. Yes, I can dock the tablet and work with a keyboard and mouse, but now I have a very small screen.
Am I misunderstanding? I seems as if I have a hybrid device that if it emphasizes size, weight and portability makes a useful tablet running a useful tablet OS that isn't actually Windows and isn't compatible with existing Windows software. Or, if it emphasizes power and desktop ergonomics, makes a good Windows machine for "real work" but a heavy, big tablet with short battery life,
How is this an improvement over having a tablet and a notebook/desktop? Sure, it's one device and I save a few bucks, but at what cost in usability?
I keep hearing people say how jazzed they are about having a mighty tablet to do "real work" but it looks to me like the real work part precludes usefulness as a tablet and tablet usefulness precludes real work-- unless you think running regular Windows on a 10" screen is going to be pleasant. Like folks keep mentioning Photoshop-- really? On a tablet sized screen with the standard desktop UI? Maybe in a pinch, but I don't think MS is pitching this as an emergency solution, do you? An conversely if I have a Windows 8 machine set up as a desktop and decide to grab the screen and go, it's probably going to be extremely large and heavy, so my "tablet experience" with the Metro UI is going to be pretty damn awkward.
It seems to me that MS is trying to claim that software can bridge the gap between two very different use scenarios with two very different hardware requirements, but I can't see how that's true. Sure, I can have a fall back scenario, but again that's not what MS is selling here- they're selling "no compromises." How is a useful standard Windows desktop that's too big and heavy to be a good tablet or a good tablet that's too small to make a useful standard Windows machine not a compromise?
Personally I think this looks almost perfect. The switching between metro and the desktop isn't great but what option do they have? They could release a os for tablets rather than use windows, but that didn't really work for the kin did it.
Lets also remember you only see the desktop if you have a desktop app. If you don't then the code for the desktop doesn't even load. Why take out all that functionality if there's no reason to?
It might not kill the iPad, but I think it will kill android on tablets in the long run.
I was not sure about Window 8 tablet, but this might be my next buy thanks to AI.
I and my wife have some issues with our IPad 2. It looks nice in aluminum case, but there are not many things I can do with IPad apart from reading Internet contents, playing games and viewing photos like digital photo frame.
Sure you can watch paid movies and listen paid songs, but you really need to have Apple home theater. So, at the moment, it is a failed product in terms of media player.
You can not do Window based programs that are needed in work places or even for personal uses.
Camera is not in use due to it's poor quality and not being able to MSN messenger in video mode.
My wife enjoys playing games with IPad, but gets frustrated when she is not able to view full contents since it does not suppot Flash.
It has rounded corners, but it does have quite sharp edges all around if you look it side. I accidentally hit my Lockwood house wall with it's edges, which resulted small dent a couple of times. It was a little push, but made dent and I can not do anything about it as the wall is naked lockwood house wall. Also, when my daughter of 3 years old hit my ellbow bone with it's edges, it hurts.
My daughters, however, are able to do whatever they want to do with IPad. It's amazing. It will most likely be a toy for my daughters, pre schoolers, after we buy an alternative.
Window 8 tablet would be a completely different product from IPad for me. I am sure my case would be applicable to most of you.
That thing looks way too complicated. iPad is overly simplistic which aggravates me sometimes but this Windows tablet is just a nightmare. You can't put a full computer in a tablet especially with the OS being a hybrid between different environments. Trying to shove everything into one form factor is insanity. Who is going to buy this? At least they didn't copy iOS at all.
Also, just to repeat something someone else said: while the sliding screen multitasking makes for a nice demo, I can't see where a blind sequential row is ever going to be a good way to access apps.
Again, it looks neat, and the side by side running apps might have real value (or it might be another rarely used gimmick like that persistent Windows widget sidebar thing). But why would I want to drag app after app from the side until I get to the one I want instead of using some kind of launcher?
For all the folks that are hailing this right out of the gate as awesome, shouldn't a little caution be in order? I'm not saying it isn't great or won't be hugely successful, just that it looks like a lot of fairly complex ideas are imply and if they aren't really well implemented it could be a bit of a mess.
So if I can't open current Windows apps in the Metro tablet interface, I'm not clear on what Microsoft's split UI is really getting me.
You're getting a great touch friendly UI, but also you get Windows if you ever need it
I'm not sure I explained the two UI's. Think of the Windows 8 "start screen" as being like the iOS spring board. Now think of the Windows "classic" desktop as being its own app, like if the iPad had an OSX desktop app. All of the "classic" windows, icons, task bar etc are completely contained in the "classic" desktop app.
If you never launch the "classic" desktop app, those files and required resources are never loaded.
This is an important distinction as it means users that live totally within the new metro world (which is where I would think most tablet users will spend most of their time) there is no performance penalty to having Windows 8 "classic" desktop backwards comparability available, only when they launch it.
I do understand where you are coming from though. Running something like Photoshop on current low powered hardware would be a horrible experience. So even though you could potentially dock your Atom based tablet to a keyboard, mouse and larger monitor for Photoshop, it's not something you would actually want to do.
I think the hardware is pretty quickly catching up though. When Windows 8 launches in late 2012 and as we move into 2013 it looks like the hardware from Intel will be capable of running as a tablet as well as basic "classic" Windows apps (like Office).
I'm not sure when (or if) well ever see pro Photoshop or CAD users ever running Windows on a low powered docked tablet though. Those kind of users are always going to need high powered laptops or desktops (which will BTW still boot to the same metro start screen as Windows tablets!)
Two things. Apple fanboys should be happy. How to build apps for windows 8 should make the apps very portable to osx because you can build apps via html5 or any other way you want. Should be very easy to port the programs .
Also keep in mind this is a developer preview. Meant to allow developers to start making programs for the metro ui interface. ITs not a whole OS preview. Many Things simply do not work in this DP preview.
People really shouldhold of on really reviewing the OS till atleast RC. This isnt even BETA yet.
PS unlike Apple I have been able to view the keynote on my Iphone. So this should show you how these apps should be able to be easily ported to osx.
A tile is a big rectangular graphic element taking up a LOT of screen real estate. aka, it's a big clunky icon...
Icons aren't dynamic. You can't tell that Jim sent you an email, Jane IM'd you, Jack updated his Facebook profile, Jill tweeted about the weather, the time of your next appointment, the latest headlines and the price of the NASDAQ by looking at a wall of icons.
Also, just to repeat something someone else said: while the sliding screen multitasking makes for a nice demo, I can't see where a blind sequential row is ever going to be a good way to access apps.
If you were only ever running a few apps it works, otherwise I totally agree.
They need to pull the card based app switching from WP7 into Windows 8.
You're getting a great touch friendly UI, but also you get Windows if you ever need it
I'm not sure I explained the two UI's. Think of the Windows 8 "start screen" as being like the iOS spring board. Now think of the Windows "classic" desktop as being its own app, like if the iPad had an OSX desktop app. All of the "classic" windows, icons, task bar etc are completely contained in the "classic" desktop app.
If you never launch the "classic" desktop app, those files and required resources are never loaded.
This is an important distinction as it means users that live totally within the new metro world (which is where I would think most tablet users will spend most of their time) there is no performance penalty to having Windows 8 "classic" desktop backwards comparability available, only when they launch it.
I do understand where you are coming from though. Running something like Photoshop on current low powered hardware would be a horrible experience. So even though you could potentially dock your Atom based tablet to a keyboard, mouse and larger monitor for Photoshop, it's not something you would actually want to do.
I think the hardware is pretty quickly catching up though. When Windows 8 launches in late 2012 and as we move into 2013 it looks like the hardware from Intel will be capable of running as a tablet as well as basic "classic" Windows apps (like Office).
I'm not sure when (or if) well ever see pro Photoshop or CAD users ever running Windows on a low powered docked tablet though. Those kind of users are always going to need high powered laptops or desktops (which will BTW still boot to the same metro start screen as Windows tablets!)
It's not the low power so much as the size of the screen. There's just no way to make a conventional Windows desktop user friendly in 10" of screen real estate. I guess it's great and all that I could have "real Windows" as a fall back, but that's a special case scenario and MS is pitching this deal as "no compromises."
So it looks like to me that the Metro UI is actually Microsoft's new tablet OS and Windows 8 desktop is the next iteration of Windows, but the fact that they're "the same" is being oversold. My guess is that most users of tablets will rarely venture into Windows desktop and no users of desktop/laptops will venture into Metro (because touch on a vertical screen is an ergonomic nightmare).
Now of course hardware manufactures will come out with elaborate convertibles that purport to give you the best of both worlds with folding bits and docks and whatnot, but these will be predictably clumsy and fussy and not sell very well. You just can't software your way around the incompatible hardware considerations of a tablet vs. desktop.
Moreover, the regular Windows fallback is a disincentive for software manufacturers to bother with a Metro version of their wares. I mean, the same device can run your stock offerings, so what's the point? Do you think Adobe is going to put the engineering resources into a Metro Photoshop when real Photoshop is right there next to it?
It's not the low power so much as the size of the screen. There's just no way to make a conventional Windows desktop user friendly in 10" of screen real estate. I guess it's great and all that I could have "real Windows" as a fall back, but that's a special case scenario and MS is pitching this deal as "no compromises."
So it looks like to me that the Metro UI is actually Microsoft's new tablet OS and Windows 8 desktop is the next iteration of Windows, but the fact that they're "the same" is being oversold. My guess is that most users of tablets will rarely venture into Windows desktop and no users of desktop/laptops will venture into Metro (because touch on a vertical screen is an ergonomic nightmare).
Now of course hardware manufactures will come out with elaborate convertibles that purport to give you the best of both worlds with folding bits and docks and whatnot, but these will be predictably clumsy and fussy and not sell very well. You just can't software your way around the incompatible hardware considerations of a tablet vs. desktop.
Moreover, the regular Windows fallback is a disincentive for software manufacturers to bother with a Metro version of their wares. I mean, the same device can run your stock offerings, so what's the point? Do you think Adobe is going to put the engineering resources into a Metro Photoshop when real Photoshop is right there next to it?
If you looked at the keynote making your app Metro can be as easy as a couple of lines of code. So why not add those couple of lines of codeto make an app also work in metro.
Comments
We understand that much, thanks. Point is that no-one wants active cooling on a tablet, and no-one knows how Windows 8 will run on slower hardware. The fact that Microsoft had Samsung build some kind of tablet prototype with an i5 suggests that running Windows 8 on ARM-based tableat hardware is not going to be fun in its current state.
The funny thing is that a G5 PowerMac is actually very comparable to an xbox 360 in CPU performance (the 360 CPU is a stripped-down Power5 with 3 cores at 3 Ghz, adapted to trade in some general-purpose performance to increase peak floating point and cache performance). Even funnier is that we've all seen the big mess Microsoft ended up in with the first few generations of xbox 360 hardware: loud, unreliable, running too hot. It took them almost 5 years to get it right. If this Samsung 'developer platform' serves as an indication where W8 on tablets, things are not looking so great.
keywords - development platform (ie: not for sale)
So this was a developer pre-view of a pre-release product in pre-beta? Okey dokey then!
You hit the nail right on the head!
The rest will look like The Seven (hopefully more) Dwarfs and "rudderless," like the Keystone Kops or The Three Stooges (I guess Microsoft would be "Moe"), except many more than "Three."
The more the merrier!
Every time things like this are said the only rebuttle is to bring reality to bear. 85% of the world (corporate and personal) that use Windows will adopt this more quickly than ever. All Microsoft has to do is deliver a seamless experience. A seamless experience between tablet and workstation. This will conquer all if done right.
So here's what I'm not getting, maybe someone can clarify for me: do the same apps run under both classic Windows 8 and Metro? That is, can I open a file in "Windows" while docked, then take off and continue to work on the same file within a touch friendly interface?
From what I know at the moment I would say no.
Depending on how they are written the two apps could share most of the same plumbing, but if you wanted a touch friendly UI and a "classic" Windows application that is going to be two separate UI apps the developer needs to deploy.
As a writer I am surprised you haven't heard of Chapters for the iPad. Whenever I am away from the office eg in a waiting room for dentist or doctor and so on I can slip out my iPad, write a couple of paragraphs, and then go into the appointment or get off the tram and all the text is available as a text file which you can later format how you like.
The more you stick into a Tablet, the more technology, memory, and storage you need. The more power you have, the shorter the battery life. To increase storage and memory and battery life costs money, so the device costs more. That's why it will be hard to displace the iPad - it sits right in the sweet spot of all of these things.
It's not the software. It's the iPad's lack of a keyboard.
For writing a few quick couple of paragraphs to record ideas, I find the iPhone perfect for that. And it fits in my pocket. I use Simplenote, and it does what you described above, more or less.
I like how Windows 8 tablet can pretty much function as a portable fully-fledged Windows 8 computer. Many GenY people don't seem to need that, but for business users and professionals, that would be something to think about seriously.
I'm the sort of person that gets an 11" MBA rather than an iPad, because of the nature of my work.
I love playing with iPads, but the nature of my work dictates the tools I use.
As said, I focus almost entirely on content-creation - and Steve Jobs has himself said that iPads are more for content-consumption.
With "old Windows" to fall back on, how can Microsoft get them to develop proper Metro apps?
For all Microsoft's failings they are pretty much universally praised for their dev tools.This doesn't change with Windows 8. If you do an app right you can target both environments.
That said there is going to be a gold rush on metro apps when Windows 8 is released. Users will reward developers that create the most compelling experiences. Any devs that refuse to release metro apps will end up being pushed to the bottom of the pile in the Windows Store.
If anything Microsoft should be thanking Apple - forcing them to get their fingers out.
As said, I focus almost entirely on content-creation - and Steve Jobs has himself said that iPads are more for content-consumption.
Really? Got a link to that?
From what I know at the moment I would say no.
Depending on how they are written the two apps could share most of the same plumbing, but if you wanted a touch friendly UI and a "classic" Windows application that is going to be two separate UI apps the developer needs to deploy.
So if I can't open current Windows apps in the Metro tablet interface, I'm not clear on what Microsoft's split UI is really getting me.
The sales pitch seems to be that I can have a nice tablet UI, running new tablet friendly apps, which is fine. But then also if I need to do "real work" I can switch to "real Windows", whereupon I no longer have a nice tablet friendly UI. Yes, I can dock the tablet and work with a keyboard and mouse, but now I have a very small screen.
Am I misunderstanding? I seems as if I have a hybrid device that if it emphasizes size, weight and portability makes a useful tablet running a useful tablet OS that isn't actually Windows and isn't compatible with existing Windows software. Or, if it emphasizes power and desktop ergonomics, makes a good Windows machine for "real work" but a heavy, big tablet with short battery life,
How is this an improvement over having a tablet and a notebook/desktop? Sure, it's one device and I save a few bucks, but at what cost in usability?
I keep hearing people say how jazzed they are about having a mighty tablet to do "real work" but it looks to me like the real work part precludes usefulness as a tablet and tablet usefulness precludes real work-- unless you think running regular Windows on a 10" screen is going to be pleasant. Like folks keep mentioning Photoshop-- really? On a tablet sized screen with the standard desktop UI? Maybe in a pinch, but I don't think MS is pitching this as an emergency solution, do you? An conversely if I have a Windows 8 machine set up as a desktop and decide to grab the screen and go, it's probably going to be extremely large and heavy, so my "tablet experience" with the Metro UI is going to be pretty damn awkward.
It seems to me that MS is trying to claim that software can bridge the gap between two very different use scenarios with two very different hardware requirements, but I can't see how that's true. Sure, I can have a fall back scenario, but again that's not what MS is selling here- they're selling "no compromises." How is a useful standard Windows desktop that's too big and heavy to be a good tablet or a good tablet that's too small to make a useful standard Windows machine not a compromise?
Lets also remember you only see the desktop if you have a desktop app. If you don't then the code for the desktop doesn't even load. Why take out all that functionality if there's no reason to?
It might not kill the iPad, but I think it will kill android on tablets in the long run.
I and my wife have some issues with our IPad 2. It looks nice in aluminum case, but there are not many things I can do with IPad apart from reading Internet contents, playing games and viewing photos like digital photo frame.
Sure you can watch paid movies and listen paid songs, but you really need to have Apple home theater. So, at the moment, it is a failed product in terms of media player.
You can not do Window based programs that are needed in work places or even for personal uses.
Camera is not in use due to it's poor quality and not being able to MSN messenger in video mode.
My wife enjoys playing games with IPad, but gets frustrated when she is not able to view full contents since it does not suppot Flash.
It has rounded corners, but it does have quite sharp edges all around if you look it side. I accidentally hit my Lockwood house wall with it's edges, which resulted small dent a couple of times. It was a little push, but made dent and I can not do anything about it as the wall is naked lockwood house wall. Also, when my daughter of 3 years old hit my ellbow bone with it's edges, it hurts.
My daughters, however, are able to do whatever they want to do with IPad. It's amazing. It will most likely be a toy for my daughters, pre schoolers, after we buy an alternative.
Window 8 tablet would be a completely different product from IPad for me. I am sure my case would be applicable to most of you.
aka, it's a big clunky icon...
"Icons are yesterday?s way of representing apps, tiles are today?s way of representing apps?
So the logic is Shrink the Screen and Make the Icons Huge!
Good move... A HUGE UI breakthrough...
Again, it looks neat, and the side by side running apps might have real value (or it might be another rarely used gimmick like that persistent Windows widget sidebar thing). But why would I want to drag app after app from the side until I get to the one I want instead of using some kind of launcher?
For all the folks that are hailing this right out of the gate as awesome, shouldn't a little caution be in order? I'm not saying it isn't great or won't be hugely successful, just that it looks like a lot of fairly complex ideas are imply and if they aren't really well implemented it could be a bit of a mess.
So if I can't open current Windows apps in the Metro tablet interface, I'm not clear on what Microsoft's split UI is really getting me.
You're getting a great touch friendly UI, but also you get Windows if you ever need it
I'm not sure I explained the two UI's. Think of the Windows 8 "start screen" as being like the iOS spring board. Now think of the Windows "classic" desktop as being its own app, like if the iPad had an OSX desktop app. All of the "classic" windows, icons, task bar etc are completely contained in the "classic" desktop app.
If you never launch the "classic" desktop app, those files and required resources are never loaded.
This is an important distinction as it means users that live totally within the new metro world (which is where I would think most tablet users will spend most of their time) there is no performance penalty to having Windows 8 "classic" desktop backwards comparability available, only when they launch it.
I do understand where you are coming from though. Running something like Photoshop on current low powered hardware would be a horrible experience. So even though you could potentially dock your Atom based tablet to a keyboard, mouse and larger monitor for Photoshop, it's not something you would actually want to do.
I think the hardware is pretty quickly catching up though. When Windows 8 launches in late 2012 and as we move into 2013 it looks like the hardware from Intel will be capable of running as a tablet as well as basic "classic" Windows apps (like Office).
I'm not sure when (or if) well ever see pro Photoshop or CAD users ever running Windows on a low powered docked tablet though. Those kind of users are always going to need high powered laptops or desktops (which will BTW still boot to the same metro start screen as Windows tablets!)
Also keep in mind this is a developer preview. Meant to allow developers to start making programs for the metro ui interface. ITs not a whole OS preview. Many Things simply do not work in this DP preview.
People really shouldhold of on really reviewing the OS till atleast RC. This isnt even BETA yet.
PS unlike Apple I have been able to view the keynote on my Iphone. So this should show you how these apps should be able to be easily ported to osx.
A tile is a big rectangular graphic element taking up a LOT of screen real estate. aka, it's a big clunky icon...
Icons aren't dynamic. You can't tell that Jim sent you an email, Jane IM'd you, Jack updated his Facebook profile, Jill tweeted about the weather, the time of your next appointment, the latest headlines and the price of the NASDAQ by looking at a wall of icons.
Also, just to repeat something someone else said: while the sliding screen multitasking makes for a nice demo, I can't see where a blind sequential row is ever going to be a good way to access apps.
If you were only ever running a few apps it works, otherwise I totally agree.
They need to pull the card based app switching from WP7 into Windows 8.
You're getting a great touch friendly UI, but also you get Windows if you ever need it
I'm not sure I explained the two UI's. Think of the Windows 8 "start screen" as being like the iOS spring board. Now think of the Windows "classic" desktop as being its own app, like if the iPad had an OSX desktop app. All of the "classic" windows, icons, task bar etc are completely contained in the "classic" desktop app.
If you never launch the "classic" desktop app, those files and required resources are never loaded.
This is an important distinction as it means users that live totally within the new metro world (which is where I would think most tablet users will spend most of their time) there is no performance penalty to having Windows 8 "classic" desktop backwards comparability available, only when they launch it.
I do understand where you are coming from though. Running something like Photoshop on current low powered hardware would be a horrible experience. So even though you could potentially dock your Atom based tablet to a keyboard, mouse and larger monitor for Photoshop, it's not something you would actually want to do.
I think the hardware is pretty quickly catching up though. When Windows 8 launches in late 2012 and as we move into 2013 it looks like the hardware from Intel will be capable of running as a tablet as well as basic "classic" Windows apps (like Office).
I'm not sure when (or if) well ever see pro Photoshop or CAD users ever running Windows on a low powered docked tablet though. Those kind of users are always going to need high powered laptops or desktops (which will BTW still boot to the same metro start screen as Windows tablets!)
It's not the low power so much as the size of the screen. There's just no way to make a conventional Windows desktop user friendly in 10" of screen real estate. I guess it's great and all that I could have "real Windows" as a fall back, but that's a special case scenario and MS is pitching this deal as "no compromises."
So it looks like to me that the Metro UI is actually Microsoft's new tablet OS and Windows 8 desktop is the next iteration of Windows, but the fact that they're "the same" is being oversold. My guess is that most users of tablets will rarely venture into Windows desktop and no users of desktop/laptops will venture into Metro (because touch on a vertical screen is an ergonomic nightmare).
Now of course hardware manufactures will come out with elaborate convertibles that purport to give you the best of both worlds with folding bits and docks and whatnot, but these will be predictably clumsy and fussy and not sell very well. You just can't software your way around the incompatible hardware considerations of a tablet vs. desktop.
Moreover, the regular Windows fallback is a disincentive for software manufacturers to bother with a Metro version of their wares. I mean, the same device can run your stock offerings, so what's the point? Do you think Adobe is going to put the engineering resources into a Metro Photoshop when real Photoshop is right there next to it?
It's not the low power so much as the size of the screen. There's just no way to make a conventional Windows desktop user friendly in 10" of screen real estate. I guess it's great and all that I could have "real Windows" as a fall back, but that's a special case scenario and MS is pitching this deal as "no compromises."
So it looks like to me that the Metro UI is actually Microsoft's new tablet OS and Windows 8 desktop is the next iteration of Windows, but the fact that they're "the same" is being oversold. My guess is that most users of tablets will rarely venture into Windows desktop and no users of desktop/laptops will venture into Metro (because touch on a vertical screen is an ergonomic nightmare).
Now of course hardware manufactures will come out with elaborate convertibles that purport to give you the best of both worlds with folding bits and docks and whatnot, but these will be predictably clumsy and fussy and not sell very well. You just can't software your way around the incompatible hardware considerations of a tablet vs. desktop.
Moreover, the regular Windows fallback is a disincentive for software manufacturers to bother with a Metro version of their wares. I mean, the same device can run your stock offerings, so what's the point? Do you think Adobe is going to put the engineering resources into a Metro Photoshop when real Photoshop is right there next to it?
If you looked at the keynote making your app Metro can be as easy as a couple of lines of code. So why not add those couple of lines of codeto make an app also work in metro.