So the Metro UI is actually just a layer. What happened to the classic desktop won't load if the user don't want it?!
...
As it is normal within the windows community, there will be somebody who would produce a workaround that would bypass the layer just like MS would do to their enterprise customer as noted in the article. I wouldn't be surprise if the pirated copy of W8 would have the option to do this. There would also be a version where they streamlined the OS that enable it to run faster and more efficient w/o the craps that is windows add-ons.
OTH, by removing the Metro layer, what you essentially get is 2010 Windows 7 FAIL!
This layer over 7 reminds me of OSX Lion. if 10.7.2 doesn't fix some things up, i'm downgrading back to Snow Leopard (and not because of the bugs) but because it has a lot of necessaries not to mention its killing my productivity.
Great to know windows is trying to take t he same path.
Linux might be in your future. You can choose a basic window manager without sacrificing up to date apps and a modern OS. Xfce seems to be what the minimalists are using nowadays.
It means if iTunes is free, Apple would have to share 30% of $0.00 with Microsoft. Do the math.
Not so. The Kindle Reader app is certainly free, but that hasn't stopped Apple from setting up their policies to try to charge Amazon 30% for books purchased through that app. So if Apple brought a Metro version of iTunes out, it would logically follow that Microsoft could charge Apple 30% of all music/video/book purchased through it.
I actually think that's a crap policy on Apple's part too - there are legitimate reasons for taking a cut on apps, but if you have something where the content is well known, the distribution mechanism is NOT through Apple's servers, etc., it seems pretty rich to try to enforce the same cut.
The strategy, if correct, suggests that Microsoft would profit from being the default choice for Windows apps, much as Apple hopes for the Mac App Store. It could simultaneously fork Windows 8 app development where those who want to be in the Windows Store are pushed to either use an older, desktop-oriented interface to get full profits or to lose 30 percent of their revenue to publish a modern and tablet-native version. Microsoft won't require that apps publish through its store but will give much more exposure to apps that go through its official channel.
What happened to everyone who called Apple a greedy, evil, anti-competitive corporation for taking a 30% cut of app sales? According to them, Apple didn't need a 30% cut for the service they provide and this was another example of the "Apple tax." Well, guess what. It's a pretty typical arrangement. Even the great Google charges a 30% cut for app sales in the Android Market.
I'm assuming you're linking to that because you think Windows tablets are doomed and you want to buttress your case?
Because that's a video of pretty much the same failed tablet format that MS has been shipping for years-- Windows with a passing application of touch. We already know that Windows with a passing application of touch can do Flash, it's just that it does it in a lousy touch environment.
Metro, Microsoft's somewhat more specific touch environment on the other hand, does not, and if you run it on a tablet with a reasonable power envelope you won't have the Windows That Does Flash available to you. So I guess people will really dig having Flash on their terrible battery life, hot, non-touch optimized browser? Awesome. Point taken.
And apparently "Windows tablets" = Neon lights - Windows 7. Honestly, I don't see how this works for MS any better than WP7 has worked to capture smart phone market. WP7 is a very similar approach to a touch device UI, and it's gone nowhere. I thought the whole selling point of a Windows Touch Tablet is that it would leverage the might of Windows while delivering on the promise of WP7. Instead, it proves to be basically a stand alone tablet OS with no backwards compatibility, entering a very competitive market with an entrenched incumbent. So why is Metro a big success when WP7 has been a total flop, again?
Paul Thurrott has shown time and time again what a complete Fk'n moron he is! It is truly amazing that someone so stupid can keep a job in the tech space.
Thurott: "the other big difference between this and a iPad..well actually I guess there are several differences, this is a computer and iPad is a device, right. So this has a fan...
Wouldn't it be cool if Microsoft actually made a better music and video store than Apple? It would cause Apple to redesign iTunes to work better and have a more user friendly interface. I do think iTunes could improve a lot.
Don't flame me but I really think that the Zune online interface was pretty good, though all the Flash stuff could cause it to slow a bit. MS should incorporate that into their next music store.
many PPC based Macs didnt have Fans either. Original iMac, PowerMac B&W, PowerMac Gigabit, etc.
Windows 8, a culmination of eights generations of PITA.
As someone who both owned both an original 233 Megahertz iMac and a Blue&White G3, they both have fans. The G3 has one in the side opposite the door. The iMac has an internal fan you can see as soon as you pull the logic board.
Thurott: "the other big difference between this and a iPad..well actually I guess there are several differences, this is a computer and iPad is a device, right. So this has a fan...
Leo laPorte: "It has a fan?!... Wow"
Thurott: "Yeah, well it's a computer."
I don't get why people are struggling so much with this one?
It's so obvious to me that the Samsung tablet is nothing like an iPad.
It's a hot, energy hungry, powerful x86 Intel i5 dev computer crammed into a tablet case - fans and all.
It's nothing like the svelte, cool running, power sipping, consumer focused ARM driven device like the iPad is.
You're making a joke, right? Zero existing Windows applications will work on these tablets. You know that.
THE ARTICLE EXPLICITLY SAYS THIS IS THE CASE.
No, actually the article says that there WILL be x86 tablets released: "While PC makers can continue to sell x86 tablets, these devices, ranging from Tablet PC to UMPCs to Slate PC to convertible notebooks with tablet features, have never sold well in the past due to their performance and efficiency compromises and their significant cost premium over modern ARM tablets."
But what if Windows 8 actually runs WELL on x86 hardware? It runs remarkably on the dev preview tablets out in the wild, and those are only prototypes.
And according to Renee James from Intel, "[Windows 8 traditional] means that our customers, or anyone who has an Intel-based or an x86-based product, will be able to run either Windows 7 mode or Windows 8 mode," she said. "They'll run all of their old applications, all of their old files ? there'll be no issue."
But what if Windows 8 actually runs WELL on x86 hardware? It runs remarkably on the dev preview tablets out in the wild, and those are only prototypes.
Looking at Intel's latest announcements I think they will get there.
They have Ivy Bridge in 2012 before Windows 8 launches which should work for "dockable" devices and Haswell in 2013 which looks to be a true tablet contender.
I think their two main problems aren't the CPU itself but the integrated GPU and pricing.
Here's what I don't get about Microsoft's strategy: Microsoft had a proper low-power version of Windows that supported ARM and other low power CPUs (like Hitachi SH or the MIPS chips) for many, many years. It was Windows CE, later renamed Windows Mobile. And before iOS, this mobile OS was dominating Palm OS, their nearest competitor.
Windows Mobile is built on top of Windows CE, not a rebranding. Windows CE still exists under Windows Phone 7 and many other devices.
Quote:
Now their mobile strategy is: forget that code base, we are going to put Windows on a tablet, but "real Windows", which means it's x86 and can run real Windows applications, but there's also an ARM version that'll be "real Windows" except it can't run any programs written for "real Windows" because it only supports this new Metro UI. So how is it "real Windows" and why would it have any advantage over their lean and clean version of Windows for devices formerly known as Windows CE? And I'm using the term "real Windows" the way Paul Thuriott was using it in his quote above.
The Desktop and Metro UI will be accessible both on X86 and ARM based devices. I don't think they were very accurate when stating the desktop won't be accessible on ARM devices. Microsoft is rewriting Office and their apps for ARM devices and other developers will be able to do so as well. Paul has been inaccurate before. Adobe demoed Flash running in the desktop IE on an ARM device.
Microsoft just has to market it correctly. How? Idk, but I'm sure they have all this planned out. People just have to stop being so pessimistic about what they are doing and just wait and see how their plans unfold.
What happened to everyone who called Apple a greedy, evil, anti-competitive corporation for taking a 30% cut of app sales? According to them, Apple didn't need a 30% cut for the service they provide and this was another example of the "Apple tax." Well, guess what. It's a pretty typical arrangement. Even the great Google charges a 30% cut for app sales in the Android Market.
Yes, but remember the fandroid rule: When Google does it, it is not evil.
Comments
So the Metro UI is actually just a layer. What happened to the classic desktop won't load if the user don't want it?!
...
As it is normal within the windows community, there will be somebody who would produce a workaround that would bypass the layer just like MS would do to their enterprise customer as noted in the article. I wouldn't be surprise if the pirated copy of W8 would have the option to do this. There would also be a version where they streamlined the OS that enable it to run faster and more efficient w/o the craps that is windows add-ons.
OTH, by removing the Metro layer, what you essentially get is 2010 Windows 7
This layer over 7 reminds me of OSX Lion. if 10.7.2 doesn't fix some things up, i'm downgrading back to Snow Leopard (and not because of the bugs) but because it has a lot of necessaries not to mention its killing my productivity.
Great to know windows is trying to take t he same path.
Linux might be in your future. You can choose a basic window manager without sacrificing up to date apps and a modern OS. Xfce seems to be what the minimalists are using nowadays.
It means if iTunes is free, Apple would have to share 30% of $0.00 with Microsoft. Do the math.
Not so. The Kindle Reader app is certainly free, but that hasn't stopped Apple from setting up their policies to try to charge Amazon 30% for books purchased through that app. So if Apple brought a Metro version of iTunes out, it would logically follow that Microsoft could charge Apple 30% of all music/video/book purchased through it.
I actually think that's a crap policy on Apple's part too - there are legitimate reasons for taking a cut on apps, but if you have something where the content is well known, the distribution mechanism is NOT through Apple's servers, etc., it seems pretty rich to try to enforce the same cut.
i like Metro. at least Microsoft is actually innovating and trying to differentiate from Apple/iOS.
Well there is thing that they may be copying.
Rumor has it, Metro won't support Flash
Qualcomm based tablet running Windows 8 showing a Flash enabled webpage inside IE 10 Desktop version:
http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/16/a...#disqus_thread
Maybe it is Apple copying Xbox Live service.
I'm assuming you're linking to that because you think Windows tablets are doomed and you want to buttress your case?
Because that's a video of pretty much the same failed tablet format that MS has been shipping for years-- Windows with a passing application of touch. We already know that Windows with a passing application of touch can do Flash, it's just that it does it in a lousy touch environment.
Metro, Microsoft's somewhat more specific touch environment on the other hand, does not, and if you run it on a tablet with a reasonable power envelope you won't have the Windows That Does Flash available to you. So I guess people will really dig having Flash on their terrible battery life, hot, non-touch optimized browser? Awesome. Point taken.
Windows 8 = Windows 7 + neon lights.
And apparently "Windows tablets" = Neon lights - Windows 7. Honestly, I don't see how this works for MS any better than WP7 has worked to capture smart phone market. WP7 is a very similar approach to a touch device UI, and it's gone nowhere. I thought the whole selling point of a Windows Touch Tablet is that it would leverage the might of Windows while delivering on the promise of WP7. Instead, it proves to be basically a stand alone tablet OS with no backwards compatibility, entering a very competitive market with an entrenched incumbent. So why is Metro a big success when WP7 has been a total flop, again?
Just go ahead and misquote him.
Windows Weekly 228 TWIT network
8:58
Re: the tablet handed out at BUILD...
Thurott: "the other big difference between this and a iPad..well actually I guess there are several differences, this is a computer and iPad is a device, right. So this has a fan...
Leo laPorte: "It has a fan?!... Wow"
Thurott: "Yeah, well it's a computer."
Wouldn't it be cool if Microsoft actually made a better music and video store than Apple? It would cause Apple to redesign iTunes to work better and have a more user friendly interface. I do think iTunes could improve a lot.
Don't flame me but I really think that the Zune online interface was pretty good, though all the Flash stuff could cause it to slow a bit. MS should incorporate that into their next music store.
Hope you like Apple-flavored napalm...
many PPC based Macs didnt have Fans either. Original iMac, PowerMac B&W, PowerMac Gigabit, etc.
Windows 8, a culmination of eights generations of PITA.
As someone who both owned both an original 233 Megahertz iMac and a Blue&White G3, they both have fans. The G3 has one in the side opposite the door. The iMac has an internal fan you can see as soon as you pull the logic board.
Windows Weekly 228 TWIT network
8:58
Re: the tablet handed out at BUILD...
Thurott: "the other big difference between this and a iPad..well actually I guess there are several differences, this is a computer and iPad is a device, right. So this has a fan...
Leo laPorte: "It has a fan?!... Wow"
Thurott: "Yeah, well it's a computer."
I don't get why people are struggling so much with this one?
It's so obvious to me that the Samsung tablet is nothing like an iPad.
It's a hot, energy hungry, powerful x86 Intel i5 dev computer crammed into a tablet case - fans and all.
It's nothing like the svelte, cool running, power sipping, consumer focused ARM driven device like the iPad is.
Windows 8 = Windows 7 + Metro ?
Do the math, more like:
Windows 8 = Windows 7 + Hype
Windows 8 = Windows 7 + Metro ?
Do the math, more like:
Windows 8 = Windows 7 + Hype
More like Windows 8 = OSX + significant sales?
You're making a joke, right? Zero existing Windows applications will work on these tablets. You know that.
THE ARTICLE EXPLICITLY SAYS THIS IS THE CASE.
No, actually the article says that there WILL be x86 tablets released: "While PC makers can continue to sell x86 tablets, these devices, ranging from Tablet PC to UMPCs to Slate PC to convertible notebooks with tablet features, have never sold well in the past due to their performance and efficiency compromises and their significant cost premium over modern ARM tablets."
But what if Windows 8 actually runs WELL on x86 hardware? It runs remarkably on the dev preview tablets out in the wild, and those are only prototypes.
And according to Renee James from Intel, "[Windows 8 traditional] means that our customers, or anyone who has an Intel-based or an x86-based product, will be able to run either Windows 7 mode or Windows 8 mode," she said. "They'll run all of their old applications, all of their old files ? there'll be no issue."
But what if Windows 8 actually runs WELL on x86 hardware? It runs remarkably on the dev preview tablets out in the wild, and those are only prototypes.
Looking at Intel's latest announcements I think they will get there.
They have Ivy Bridge in 2012 before Windows 8 launches which should work for "dockable" devices and Haswell in 2013 which looks to be a true tablet contender.
I think their two main problems aren't the CPU itself but the integrated GPU and pricing.
Here's what I don't get about Microsoft's strategy: Microsoft had a proper low-power version of Windows that supported ARM and other low power CPUs (like Hitachi SH or the MIPS chips) for many, many years. It was Windows CE, later renamed Windows Mobile. And before iOS, this mobile OS was dominating Palm OS, their nearest competitor.
Windows Mobile is built on top of Windows CE, not a rebranding. Windows CE still exists under Windows Phone 7 and many other devices.
Now their mobile strategy is: forget that code base, we are going to put Windows on a tablet, but "real Windows", which means it's x86 and can run real Windows applications, but there's also an ARM version that'll be "real Windows" except it can't run any programs written for "real Windows" because it only supports this new Metro UI. So how is it "real Windows" and why would it have any advantage over their lean and clean version of Windows for devices formerly known as Windows CE? And I'm using the term "real Windows" the way Paul Thuriott was using it in his quote above.
The Desktop and Metro UI will be accessible both on X86 and ARM based devices. I don't think they were very accurate when stating the desktop won't be accessible on ARM devices. Microsoft is rewriting Office and their apps for ARM devices and other developers will be able to do so as well. Paul has been inaccurate before. Adobe demoed Flash running in the desktop IE on an ARM device.
Microsoft just has to market it correctly. How? Idk, but I'm sure they have all this planned out. People just have to stop being so pessimistic about what they are doing and just wait and see how their plans unfold.
What happened to everyone who called Apple a greedy, evil, anti-competitive corporation for taking a 30% cut of app sales? According to them, Apple didn't need a 30% cut for the service they provide and this was another example of the "Apple tax." Well, guess what. It's a pretty typical arrangement. Even the great Google charges a 30% cut for app sales in the Android Market.
Yes, but remember the fandroid rule: When Google does it, it is not evil.