IMO the fact Microsoft are working with Qualcomm, Texas Instruments and NVidia on an ARM version of Windows 8 means it's fairly likely that there will be a version of Windows 8 that runs on ARM... that's just my opinion of course...
Quote:
Originally Posted by dksmidtx
So, of course, tablets are a passing fad
IMO the ARM Windows 8, the dual UI (touch/desktop) and the fact that Mundie didn't say tablets were a fad point to Microsoft actually believing that tablets aren't a fad.
It's not really splitting hairs. He said one thing, he didn't say the other.
I'm not sure how you interpret someone saying that they "don't know" if tablets will be around forever and that they may eventually be replaced by other display technology with someone saying the iPad is just a short-lived fashion.
You even said yourself calling the iPad and clones a "fad" is not the same as saying "eventually tablets will become obsolete".
Mundie even goes as far as specifically mentioning future technology that could possibly, one day, replace the current tablet.
As in, the only thing that can potentially replace the tablet is a future technology, not current technology.
This is totally different to a fad which is a short lived fashion trend before returning to the status quo.
Again, pretending like this is just some lab guy sharing his thoughts about the future of technology is utterly disingenuous. He didn't talk about how the Xbox will go away, replaced by cloud connected contact lenses and implants. He didn't talk about how Windows will go away, replaced by distributed modules interacting via neural nets. He didn't talk about how huge, monolithic software companies like Microsoft will be replaced by agile startups.
He talked about tablets. Of all the technologies that he might have cast on the inevitable dustheap of history (and it's a given that each and every technology will change or be replaced, it's nothing unique to tablets) he picked the one that is very obviously the technology that MS has fumbled, and the one that has the most potential to drive MS towards irrelevancy.
It's like chatting about how your enemy will die someday and someone you like will probably take their place. That's not a discussion about human mortality, it's a motivated daydream.
Again, pretending like this is just some lab guy sharing his thoughts about the future of technology is utterly disingenuous. He didn't talk about how the Xbox will go away, replaced by cloud connected contact lenses and implants. He didn't talk about how Windows will go away, replaced by distributed modules interacting via neural nets. He didn't talk about how huge, monolithic software companies like Microsoft will be replaced by agile startups.
He talked about tablets. Of all the technologies that he might have cast on the inevitable dustheap of history (and it's a given that each and every technology will change or be replaced, it's nothing unique to tablets) he picked the one that is very obviously the technology that MS has fumbled, and the one that has the most potential to drive MS towards irrelevancy.
It's like chatting about how your enemy will die someday and someone you like will probably take their place. That's not a discussion about human mortality, it's a motivated daydream.
Antitrust cases, tightening the grip on supposedly open projects, blocking competitors from accessing YouTube API's, attempting to belittle competitors instead of focusing on their own products... 2011 may very well be the year that Google publicly drops that "don't be evil" tag.
Why? What's the benefit to you in Microsoft releasing a crap tablet?
There's no benefit. I just don't see it succeeding. I'd rather it fail quickly so another possible iPad alternative can come to the fore. Let Microsoft dump millions down the drain. Just do it fast.
There's no benefit. I just don't see it succeeding. I'd rather it fail quickly so another possible iPad alternative can come to the fore. Let Microsoft dump millions down the drain. Just do it fast.
If that's what you want you're going to be better served by Microsoft succeeding than failing.
There are going to be plenty of iPad competitors over the next few years, but Microsoft are the only company at the moment that have the range of products and integrated services to create the potential for a real alternative to the iPad.
In any case I'm not quite so sure about Microsoft failing quickly. It looks like the Microsoft tablet is half of the dual UI in Windows 8... and Windows 8 is a Microsoft business product which falls under the phenoninomally long product support agreement (maybe 10 years or so).
So even if it is a total train wreak, you're going to be seeing it around for another ten years.
If that's what you want you're going to be better served by Microsoft succeeding than failing.
There are going to be plenty of iPad competitors over the next few years, but Microsoft are the only company at the moment that have the range of products and integrated services to create the potential for a real alternative to the iPad.
In any case I'm not quite so sure about Microsoft failing quickly. It looks like the Microsoft tablet is half of the dual UI in Windows 8... and Windows 8 is a Microsoft business product which falls under the phenoninomally long product support agreement (maybe 10 years or so).
So even if it is a total train wreak, you're going to be seeing it around for another ten years.
*Sigh* I'm just so sick of Windows though... I want to completely get rid of it but XBOX360 and especially PS3 graphics for games is really poor nowadays compared to PC.
Windows on a tablet, in whatever form, I'd prefer Android. It's just not in their DNA for Microsoft to even understand what people want from a tablet... But you could be right, they'll just copy-and-paste from here and there, cobble something together, make it sync smoothly with desktop Windows, market the hell out of it and another decade of living with Windows on the desktop AND now the tablet.
Re: My assertion that machine controls are "cheap"
Quote:
Originally Posted by mknopp
I agreed with pretty much everything that you said. However, the biggest error in your post was the assertion that machine controls (and I assume you are talking PLC or PAC here) are on the cheaper end of the spectrum. The machine controls for a small and simple machine will run you about the cost of a mid-range iMac, a medium sized machine will run you about the same as a tricked out Mac Pro, and a large machine can easily run you more than a server setup for a small company.
Good point - even while I was writing it, I was a bit troubled on how to classify machine controls. I do agree that per unit, COTS machine controls can be very expensive! This is due to the very specialized nature and tiny production runs.
However, the non-recurring development costs, and component costs are generally pretty low. Usually, these are not pushing the limits of technology, and the hardware and software are not very complex (next to a PC or smart phone).
There is a significant amount of hobbyist involvement in home automation, robotics, kinetic art, and the like, and most of these people don't have massive budgets. An Arduino is cheap ($30!), and can do simple machine-control jobs.
I myself built a one-off controller that was used by a company to make parts in production. A friend employed there designed the machine itself. I charged $500 and made money (at a pretty poor hourly rate, but I did it more for the challenge and experience). There is no way I would be able to design a PC or phone!
OK, so last year I read an article about Steve Ballmer commenting about the iPad, saying they're overpriced, they don't have a keyboard, and for heaven's sake, you cannot even print from them....He said that when the Windows tablet comes out, your going to be able to print from it, by golly! I heard the pronouncements about the iPad being suitable for content consumption but not not content origination, and how the iPad is unsuited for use in enterprise environments, etc. I think this demonstrates how some people have gotten stuck in this 'legacy mindset' about computing and computers: plugging in cables and physically connecting peripherals and such. As for the iPad being embraced by the business community: that horse is already out of the barn: I work in an upscale hotel and you would not believe how many business people, doctors, science-related professionals,and salespeople I see using iPads. I read somewhere last week that 22% of doctors are using iPads now...I think we're moving a little beyond the fad stage, if we're using that term in it's most trivial sense, anyway.
Microsoft had a whole team working on tablet computing over ten years ago. Bill Gates said that tablets are the future of computing.....but Microsoft Office software team started haggling with the tablet dev. team about how Office would work on a tablet and eventually the project was shelved. They had a good idea, they just couldn't get it to the marketplace.
Ballmer: "But Windows machines are not going to be trucks."
Oh my, why do they let this guy speak in public. No, maybe they're not trucks, maybe they're tractors.
Compared to Jobs, Ballmer and most other industry leaders are monkeys. Jobs is brilliant, the 1983 tape re-confirms it, and he outshines them all.
When Ballmer sits there with his 10 lbs, 14 USB ports, DTS surround projector home entertainment station, torpedo loaded nuclear charged Apple-killer, ultra "super-slate" with it's blue screen calling for support his grandma will sit next to him with her iPad just browsing the web, reading mails, video chatting with her grandchildren while listening to music.
Comments
an i7 processor
IMO the fact Microsoft are working with Qualcomm, Texas Instruments and NVidia on an ARM version of Windows 8 means it's fairly likely that there will be a version of Windows 8 that runs on ARM... that's just my opinion of course...
So, of course, tablets are a passing fad
IMO the ARM Windows 8, the dual UI (touch/desktop) and the fact that Mundie didn't say tablets were a fad point to Microsoft actually believing that tablets aren't a fad.
Again, just my opinion...
It's not really splitting hairs. He said one thing, he didn't say the other.
I'm not sure how you interpret someone saying that they "don't know" if tablets will be around forever and that they may eventually be replaced by other display technology with someone saying the iPad is just a short-lived fashion.
You even said yourself calling the iPad and clones a "fad" is not the same as saying "eventually tablets will become obsolete".
Mundie even goes as far as specifically mentioning future technology that could possibly, one day, replace the current tablet.
As in, the only thing that can potentially replace the tablet is a future technology, not current technology.
This is totally different to a fad which is a short lived fashion trend before returning to the status quo.
Again, pretending like this is just some lab guy sharing his thoughts about the future of technology is utterly disingenuous. He didn't talk about how the Xbox will go away, replaced by cloud connected contact lenses and implants. He didn't talk about how Windows will go away, replaced by distributed modules interacting via neural nets. He didn't talk about how huge, monolithic software companies like Microsoft will be replaced by agile startups.
He talked about tablets. Of all the technologies that he might have cast on the inevitable dustheap of history (and it's a given that each and every technology will change or be replaced, it's nothing unique to tablets) he picked the one that is very obviously the technology that MS has fumbled, and the one that has the most potential to drive MS towards irrelevancy.
It's like chatting about how your enemy will die someday and someone you like will probably take their place. That's not a discussion about human mortality, it's a motivated daydream.
Again, pretending like this is just some lab guy sharing his thoughts about the future of technology is utterly disingenuous.
I'm just talking about what the guy actually did or didn't say.
You can feel free to theorise about his motivation all you want, although I think the only way you will ever know the truth is by actually asking him.
Again, pretending like this is just some lab guy sharing his thoughts about the future of technology is utterly disingenuous. He didn't talk about how the Xbox will go away, replaced by cloud connected contact lenses and implants. He didn't talk about how Windows will go away, replaced by distributed modules interacting via neural nets. He didn't talk about how huge, monolithic software companies like Microsoft will be replaced by agile startups.
He talked about tablets. Of all the technologies that he might have cast on the inevitable dustheap of history (and it's a given that each and every technology will change or be replaced, it's nothing unique to tablets) he picked the one that is very obviously the technology that MS has fumbled, and the one that has the most potential to drive MS towards irrelevancy.
It's like chatting about how your enemy will die someday and someone you like will probably take their place. That's not a discussion about human mortality, it's a motivated daydream.
Yes, I believe that you have the tenor correct.
Apparently Google isn't too impressed with Microsoft's Kinect driven future.
I saw that.
Antitrust cases, tightening the grip on supposedly open projects, blocking competitors from accessing YouTube API's, attempting to belittle competitors instead of focusing on their own products... 2011 may very well be the year that Google publicly drops that "don't be evil" tag.
They are activley building a custom tablet shell into Windows 8 which, I'm guessing, will run on the lightweight ARM version of Windows 8.
Can't wait for it....
.... to fail miserably
Can't wait for it to fail miserably
Why? What's the benefit to you in Microsoft releasing a crap tablet?
Why? What's the benefit to you in Microsoft releasing a crap tablet?
There's no benefit. I just don't see it succeeding. I'd rather it fail quickly so another possible iPad alternative can come to the fore. Let Microsoft dump millions down the drain. Just do it fast.
There's no benefit. I just don't see it succeeding. I'd rather it fail quickly so another possible iPad alternative can come to the fore. Let Microsoft dump millions down the drain. Just do it fast.
If that's what you want you're going to be better served by Microsoft succeeding than failing.
There are going to be plenty of iPad competitors over the next few years, but Microsoft are the only company at the moment that have the range of products and integrated services to create the potential for a real alternative to the iPad.
In any case I'm not quite so sure about Microsoft failing quickly. It looks like the Microsoft tablet is half of the dual UI in Windows 8... and Windows 8 is a Microsoft business product which falls under the phenoninomally long product support agreement (maybe 10 years or so).
So even if it is a total train wreak, you're going to be seeing it around for another ten years.
If that's what you want you're going to be better served by Microsoft succeeding than failing.
There are going to be plenty of iPad competitors over the next few years, but Microsoft are the only company at the moment that have the range of products and integrated services to create the potential for a real alternative to the iPad.
In any case I'm not quite so sure about Microsoft failing quickly. It looks like the Microsoft tablet is half of the dual UI in Windows 8... and Windows 8 is a Microsoft business product which falls under the phenoninomally long product support agreement (maybe 10 years or so).
So even if it is a total train wreak, you're going to be seeing it around for another ten years.
*Sigh* I'm just so sick of Windows though... I want to completely get rid of it but XBOX360 and especially PS3 graphics for games is really poor nowadays compared to PC.
Windows on a tablet, in whatever form, I'd prefer Android. It's just not in their DNA for Microsoft to even understand what people want from a tablet... But you could be right, they'll just copy-and-paste from here and there, cobble something together, make it sync smoothly with desktop Windows, market the hell out of it and another decade of living with Windows on the desktop AND now the tablet.
I agreed with pretty much everything that you said. However, the biggest error in your post was the assertion that machine controls (and I assume you are talking PLC or PAC here) are on the cheaper end of the spectrum. The machine controls for a small and simple machine will run you about the cost of a mid-range iMac, a medium sized machine will run you about the same as a tricked out Mac Pro, and a large machine can easily run you more than a server setup for a small company.
Good point - even while I was writing it, I was a bit troubled on how to classify machine controls. I do agree that per unit, COTS machine controls can be very expensive! This is due to the very specialized nature and tiny production runs.
However, the non-recurring development costs, and component costs are generally pretty low. Usually, these are not pushing the limits of technology, and the hardware and software are not very complex (next to a PC or smart phone).
There is a significant amount of hobbyist involvement in home automation, robotics, kinetic art, and the like, and most of these people don't have massive budgets. An Arduino is cheap ($30!), and can do simple machine-control jobs.
I myself built a one-off controller that was used by a company to make parts in production. A friend employed there designed the machine itself. I charged $500 and made money (at a pretty poor hourly rate, but I did it more for the challenge and experience). There is no way I would be able to design a PC or phone!
Microsoft had a whole team working on tablet computing over ten years ago. Bill Gates said that tablets are the future of computing.....but Microsoft Office software team started haggling with the tablet dev. team about how Office would work on a tablet and eventually the project was shelved. They had a good idea, they just couldn't get it to the marketplace.
Oh my, why do they let this guy speak in public. No, maybe they're not trucks, maybe they're tractors.
Compared to Jobs, Ballmer and most other industry leaders are monkeys. Jobs is brilliant, the 1983 tape re-confirms it, and he outshines them all.
When Ballmer sits there with his 10 lbs, 14 USB ports, DTS surround projector home entertainment station, torpedo loaded nuclear charged Apple-killer, ultra "super-slate" with it's blue screen calling for support his grandma will sit next to him with her iPad just browsing the web, reading mails, video chatting with her grandchildren while listening to music.
Originally Posted by Meniac
Compared to Jobs, Ballmer and most other industry leaders are monkeys.
Well, that is why they call him Monkey Boy.