That was my thought too. Google must be now thinking a free OS for PCs would be just the ticket. All they have to do is rip of Windows 7 and give it away for free. Dell et al would be all over it as an option at first then their main OS. Heck if Google can rip off iOS that fast they can probably make a pretty decent copy of 7 and in fact probably make it far better. I suggest 7 as the most likely OS to succeed as a copy since it is really a working XP and what most PC users feel most comfortable with.
There is a big difference there tho. The phone market had the benefit of not having tons and tons of legacy software. Let's say Google creates their own non-Chrome OS or even just decides to buy a chunk of Ubuntu and pushes it forward in some major ways. You would still have the problem that all that Windows software doesn't work and Wine is only so good. Breaking into the desktop OS market is difficult and likely suicide.
My advice to PC makers (because they care about what I think lol) is - stay the course, you'll have the last laugh on Microsoft. You'll pick up the wreckage that the surface will become and hopefully learn from mistakes made.
That is very good advice!
I posted this on another thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
What MS should have done:
1) Wait until they had a fully-baked (speced) and demonstrable solution before announcing anything (then announce everything: including price, battery, availability)
2) Build minimum "reference" designs to be manufactured (equaled or exceeded) by theirOEM Partners
3) Offer incentives to theirOEM Partners-- such as special advertising $, marketing/distribution $, Windows/Office Software price tiers for these products, sell through MS online and physical stores
4) Demonstrate to pundits, observers, consumers, enterprise customers, OEM partners, alike -- that MS and its OEM Partners offer and support the best solutions available.
...showing everyone that MS has your back and offers the portal to the future
....remembering that: "it takes two -- to Tango"
...Yeah, that's the way an astute and agile company would parlay their strengths!
I'd say in about 3-6 months, lack of pre-orders (pricing, manufacturing, supply chain) will force MS to talk it back and say: "Heh, heh -- just kidding guys".
Of course, MS will tout this as a positive... something like:
"We've had such extraordinary interest from our customers and partners that we've decided make the Surface a "reference design" that our partners can implement to satisfy the amazing demand for Windows RT and Windows 8 in the mobile space."™
Then, they'll do what they should have done in the first place.
Ah, if I were a PC manufacturer I wouldn't be too worried about it. This tablet is okay, but not innovative or threatening in any significant way. Like Asus or Acer can't make a skinny keyboard cover for their own tablets? Like Apple or one of it's accessory providers can't or won't have a similar accessory for iPad within six months?
Y'know, when the first iPhone and iPad came out, people were blown away. Their approach and interface was so novel that the things seemed almost magical. But a tablet with a keyboard cover? Really Microsoft? Really? Do even you really think that constitutes innovation?
My question is this. Apple created and owns the smart phone and tablet concepts we have today. Fine. But what's next? What's the next Apple product that when I see someone use it, I crane my neck to look on in disbelief?
Anybody can wow people with a new tablet when you don't give them the price. I've also already seen confusion in the media between the two tablets. The pro model should have used a completely different name.
I don't understand all the hate for "the Surface" tablets. Honestly, the RT model is lackluster, but the Pro version is a welcome addition to the slate world with its dimensions and full OS(not the usual mobile one which pretends to be full). When Apple releases an OSX tablet then look out Microsoft, but for now all these slates like the iPad(and mini iPad), Fire, and Playbook are still only companions to a PC.
I also find it ridiculous that journalists are using mere rumors to say OEM partners feel betrayed by Microsoft with monday's announcement. It's a niche product reveal that I highly doubt will damper the other hardware manufacturers bottom lines. Might even get some of them to improve their wares, hopefully.
That was my thought too. Google must be now thinking a free OS for PCs would be just the ticket. All they have to do is rip of Windows 7 and give it away for free. Dell et al would be all over it as an option at first then their main OS. Heck if Google can rip off iOS that fast they can probably make a pretty decent copy of 7 and in fact probably make it far better. I suggest 7 as the most likely OS to succeed as a copy since it is really a working XP and what most PC users feel most comfortable with.
If I remember correctly, Apple has certain rights to Windows XP... AIR, this was part of a lawsuit settlement or a cross-licensing agreement.
I watched the keynote video. It was incredibly sad, and pathetic. There were constant veiled references to the iPad, I laughed when Ballmer talked about the innovation Microsloth has done in the past few years. There was virtually no actual demonstrations of the surface itself. They spent almost all the time talking about the physical characteristics of the unit. "It is only _____ mm wide!" "It has a professionally designed kick stand that goes away." "Look at this venting." ...
It's not sad - it's just another version of the Zune - meaning "soon to be dead" iPad knockoff ... Better MS should take money and burn it in the middle of their parking lot.
I don't understand all the hate for "the Surface" tablets. Honestly, the RT model is lackluster, but the Pro version is a welcome addition to the slate world with its dimensions and full OS(not the usual mobile one which pretends to be full).
The problem is, it'll probably cost the same as an Asus ultrabook, which is a very usable pastiche of a macbook air.
That surface has fail written all over it. The well paid reviewers giving that non-demonstrate product high praise are pathetic.
Steve Ballmer can wipe his butt after a number two, show the pro MS trolls his doo doo and they'd write about how goddamn innovative and game changing that blood and feces soaked piece of toilet paper is.
And how is that any different than what the pro Apple trolls do?
Fortunately, (or unfortunately, depending on which side you are on), leave it to Microsoft to build it by the lowest bidders. Something that I wouldn't want my crew to depend their livelihoods on.
Like Apple or one of it's accessory providers can't or won't have a similar accessory for iPad within six months?
I don't think so. iOS cannot make use of a trackpad. There are already plenty of keyboards for the iPad. but there are no trackpads, which makes the combined device VERY different.
They can feel betrayal all they want...its not like they have a viable choice. They're still going to make tablets and PCs. Instead of being pissed off over it, why not go out and create something better than the Surface Tablet. I think its Microsoft who is fed up with these companies trying to create knock-offs at cheaper prices thinking people will buy it instead of designing their own, with better technology and better features.
Microsoft designs by committee. Most big companies do. Or they will actually outsource the design to some high priced design group that is going to get paid regardless of whether the product succeeds or fails.
Apple is the exception. Jonathan Ives holds the keys to that kingdom.
MS has the opportunity to have a competitive offering here - tablet ids are functionally screens - but that ship is getting ready to sail...
1. Naming designation between ARM / nonARM isn't clear. Nor is the fact that the ARM version will seriously handicap what you think you can do (everyone say 'legacy pc applications' please). Even if the ARM only ran ONE legacy app at a time, it would be better than the current gig.
2. They need to do a better job of motivating the app community to develop something that makes their device interesting.
As for the PC makers? Well, MS just threw themselves to the bleeding edge of a market dominated by a behemoth you can't even begin to compete with. Your days were numbered anyhow. Focus on displays. Everything else will just bolt on to the back of that anyhow.
They can feel betrayal all they want...its not like they have a viable choice. They're still going to make tablets and PCs. Instead of being pissed off over it, why not go out and create something better than the Surface Tablet. I think its Microsoft who is fed up with these companies trying to create knock-offs at cheaper prices thinking people will buy it instead of designing their own, with better technology and better features.
ok, odd and all as this might sound, this could be a VERY smart move by MS, in strategy terms, not actual product.
Up to now, MS could never do an 'Apple' on it and produce all the SW and HW themselves. Would cause war. So they had to do the SW only and move into other markets with integrated systems like the Xbox.
Now, they start thinking that maybe Jobs was right and we are starting in the PostPC era, so they see an opening. So they do this. All the other HW guys cry. They can respond with "Well you did try it yourselves and all failed, and remeber most of you tried it with our COMPETITORS product (android) so &^% off and dont take the moral high ground on us."
So they carry this for a few years, watching each desktop maker shrink and buy eachother up until there are one or 2 main ones left who sell Windows... HP will have their own OS and who knows who else will be there.
So MS will have the entire windows tablet market to themselves for HW and SW, like Apple does. They will sell Windows Licences direct and through the one or 2 big guys left and Windows Mobile through Nokia (effectively making these companies all but subsidarys, to avoid anti trust maybe) Maybe even in 10-15 years, simply buy out the last big guys and make MS a company like Apple.
By then we will have a market made up of Apple, MS, Samsung, HP, Google and a few other tryers. All with their own phone, tablet, desktop (minimal), cloud, apps and OS's
Your OS of choice will be largely irrelevant, like mobile phones of old. You just decide what one like and suits you. then you are in their ecosystem, but it wont be such a big deal to change due to cloud apps.
The few games and odd apps on your tablet/phone can just be repurchased from the new devices app store. €50 -100 to change SW, unlike years ago, where it would be €500-1000 , if you could actually find the SW on an different platform.
I guess my point is that MS have a legit opportunity now to jump in and control the HW and SW and are taking it. They never had that before.
Call me in 10 years and see if I was completely out. If I was then I qualify for a job in Wall Street ;-)
Because they believe that there are two markets. The 'consumer' which is looking for something similar to an iPad. And the 'professional' who thinks the iPad is a toy and wants a real computer. time will tell if they are right or if things are more as you suggest.
As for the OEMs, I doubt Microsoft ever promised they would never never get into the hardware space, or that if they did they would tell the OEMs ahead of time. In fact I'll bet money they didn't do either. Especially the latter because why tip off the real competition.
As long as they don't do something in some anti-trust way etc Microsoft can do as they want. As for the OEMs all that is left to say to them is
I think there's no way the Surface will have a battery life comparable to that of the iPad, and when we find out what the battery life is it will make the Surface look like a poor iPad competitor. It's amazing that the M$ presentation didn't once mention battery life. What do they take us for? Journalists?
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
That was my thought too. Google must be now thinking a free OS for PCs would be just the ticket. All they have to do is rip of Windows 7 and give it away for free. Dell et al would be all over it as an option at first then their main OS. Heck if Google can rip off iOS that fast they can probably make a pretty decent copy of 7 and in fact probably make it far better. I suggest 7 as the most likely OS to succeed as a copy since it is really a working XP and what most PC users feel most comfortable with.
There is a big difference there tho. The phone market had the benefit of not having tons and tons of legacy software. Let's say Google creates their own non-Chrome OS or even just decides to buy a chunk of Ubuntu and pushes it forward in some major ways. You would still have the problem that all that Windows software doesn't work and Wine is only so good. Breaking into the desktop OS market is difficult and likely suicide.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IQatEdo
My advice to PC makers (because they care about what I think lol) is - stay the course, you'll have the last laugh on Microsoft. You'll pick up the wreckage that the surface will become and hopefully learn from mistakes made.
That is very good advice!
I posted this on another thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
What MS should have done:
1) Wait until they had a fully-baked (speced) and demonstrable solution before announcing anything (then announce everything: including price, battery, availability)
2) Build minimum "reference" designs to be manufactured (equaled or exceeded) by their OEM Partners
3) Offer incentives to their OEM Partners -- such as special advertising $, marketing/distribution $, Windows/Office Software price tiers for these products, sell through MS online and physical stores
4) Demonstrate to pundits, observers, consumers, enterprise customers, OEM partners, alike -- that MS and its OEM Partners offer and support the best solutions available.
...showing everyone that MS has your back and offers the portal to the future
....remembering that: "it takes two -- to Tango"
...Yeah, that's the way an astute and agile company would parlay their strengths!
I'd say in about 3-6 months, lack of pre-orders (pricing, manufacturing, supply chain) will force MS to talk it back and say: "Heh, heh -- just kidding guys".
Of course, MS will tout this as a positive... something like:
"We've had such extraordinary interest from our customers and partners that we've decided make the Surface a "reference design" that our partners can implement to satisfy the amazing demand for Windows RT and Windows 8 in the mobile space."™
Then, they'll do what they should have done in the first place.
Soooo...In summary: Change is uncomfortable.
Ah, if I were a PC manufacturer I wouldn't be too worried about it. This tablet is okay, but not innovative or threatening in any significant way. Like Asus or Acer can't make a skinny keyboard cover for their own tablets? Like Apple or one of it's accessory providers can't or won't have a similar accessory for iPad within six months?
Y'know, when the first iPhone and iPad came out, people were blown away. Their approach and interface was so novel that the things seemed almost magical. But a tablet with a keyboard cover? Really Microsoft? Really? Do even you really think that constitutes innovation?
My question is this. Apple created and owns the smart phone and tablet concepts we have today. Fine. But what's next? What's the next Apple product that when I see someone use it, I crane my neck to look on in disbelief?
Time will tell. I hope.
I bet the hardware manufacturers can be comforted by the fact that their tablets will be covered under the MSFT Plays For Sure system.
Oh, wait, that was for music players with protected files. And nobody got burned by that.
hammered shit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hexor
Anybody can wow people with a new tablet when you don't give them the price. I've also already seen confusion in the media between the two tablets. The pro model should have used a completely different name.
I don't understand all the hate for "the Surface" tablets. Honestly, the RT model is lackluster, but the Pro version is a welcome addition to the slate world with its dimensions and full OS(not the usual mobile one which pretends to be full). When Apple releases an OSX tablet then look out Microsoft, but for now all these slates like the iPad(and mini iPad), Fire, and Playbook are still only companions to a PC.
I also find it ridiculous that journalists are using mere rumors to say OEM partners feel betrayed by Microsoft with monday's announcement. It's a niche product reveal that I highly doubt will damper the other hardware manufacturers bottom lines. Might even get some of them to improve their wares, hopefully.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
That was my thought too. Google must be now thinking a free OS for PCs would be just the ticket. All they have to do is rip of Windows 7 and give it away for free. Dell et al would be all over it as an option at first then their main OS. Heck if Google can rip off iOS that fast they can probably make a pretty decent copy of 7 and in fact probably make it far better. I suggest 7 as the most likely OS to succeed as a copy since it is really a working XP and what most PC users feel most comfortable with.
If I remember correctly, Apple has certain rights to Windows XP... AIR, this was part of a lawsuit settlement or a cross-licensing agreement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maecvs
I watched the keynote video. It was incredibly sad, and pathetic. There were constant veiled references to the iPad, I laughed when Ballmer talked about the innovation Microsloth has done in the past few years. There was virtually no actual demonstrations of the surface itself. They spent almost all the time talking about the physical characteristics of the unit. "It is only _____ mm wide!" "It has a professionally designed kick stand that goes away." "Look at this venting." ...
It's not sad - it's just another version of the Zune - meaning "soon to be dead" iPad knockoff ... Better MS should take money and burn it in the middle of their parking lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmm21
I don't understand all the hate for "the Surface" tablets. Honestly, the RT model is lackluster, but the Pro version is a welcome addition to the slate world with its dimensions and full OS(not the usual mobile one which pretends to be full).
The problem is, it'll probably cost the same as an Asus ultrabook, which is a very usable pastiche of a macbook air.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maccherry
That surface has fail written all over it. The well paid reviewers giving that non-demonstrate product high praise are pathetic.
Steve Ballmer can wipe his butt after a number two, show the pro MS trolls his doo doo and they'd write about how goddamn innovative and game changing that blood and feces soaked piece of toilet paper is.
And how is that any different than what the pro Apple trolls do?
Surface to Air
IMO, one is a firecracker, the other an interplanetary missile.
But according to others, e.g., as opined by our allies at Gizmodo. "Microsoft Surface Just Made the MacBook Air and the iPad Look Obsolete."
Fortunately, (or unfortunately, depending on which side you are on), leave it to Microsoft to build it by the lowest bidders. Something that I wouldn't want my crew to depend their livelihoods on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xxSampleXX
Like Apple or one of it's accessory providers can't or won't have a similar accessory for iPad within six months?
I don't think so. iOS cannot make use of a trackpad. There are already plenty of keyboards for the iPad. but there are no trackpads, which makes the combined device VERY different.
They can feel betrayal all they want...its not like they have a viable choice. They're still going to make tablets and PCs. Instead of being pissed off over it, why not go out and create something better than the Surface Tablet. I think its Microsoft who is fed up with these companies trying to create knock-offs at cheaper prices thinking people will buy it instead of designing their own, with better technology and better features.
/sigh.
Microsoft designs by committee. Most big companies do. Or they will actually outsource the design to some high priced design group that is going to get paid regardless of whether the product succeeds or fails.
Apple is the exception. Jonathan Ives holds the keys to that kingdom.
MS has the opportunity to have a competitive offering here - tablet ids are functionally screens - but that ship is getting ready to sail...
1. Naming designation between ARM / nonARM isn't clear. Nor is the fact that the ARM version will seriously handicap what you think you can do (everyone say 'legacy pc applications' please). Even if the ARM only ran ONE legacy app at a time, it would be better than the current gig.
2. They need to do a better job of motivating the app community to develop something that makes their device interesting.
As for the PC makers? Well, MS just threw themselves to the bleeding edge of a market dominated by a behemoth you can't even begin to compete with. Your days were numbered anyhow. Focus on displays. Everything else will just bolt on to the back of that anyhow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress
They can feel betrayal all they want...its not like they have a viable choice. They're still going to make tablets and PCs. Instead of being pissed off over it, why not go out and create something better than the Surface Tablet. I think its Microsoft who is fed up with these companies trying to create knock-offs at cheaper prices thinking people will buy it instead of designing their own, with better technology and better features.
They already do.
... but that's not the point.
ok, odd and all as this might sound, this could be a VERY smart move by MS, in strategy terms, not actual product.
Up to now, MS could never do an 'Apple' on it and produce all the SW and HW themselves. Would cause war. So they had to do the SW only and move into other markets with integrated systems like the Xbox.
Now, they start thinking that maybe Jobs was right and we are starting in the PostPC era, so they see an opening. So they do this. All the other HW guys cry. They can respond with "Well you did try it yourselves and all failed, and remeber most of you tried it with our COMPETITORS product (android) so &^% off and dont take the moral high ground on us."
So they carry this for a few years, watching each desktop maker shrink and buy eachother up until there are one or 2 main ones left who sell Windows... HP will have their own OS and who knows who else will be there.
So MS will have the entire windows tablet market to themselves for HW and SW, like Apple does. They will sell Windows Licences direct and through the one or 2 big guys left and Windows Mobile through Nokia (effectively making these companies all but subsidarys, to avoid anti trust maybe) Maybe even in 10-15 years, simply buy out the last big guys and make MS a company like Apple.
By then we will have a market made up of Apple, MS, Samsung, HP, Google and a few other tryers. All with their own phone, tablet, desktop (minimal), cloud, apps and OS's
Your OS of choice will be largely irrelevant, like mobile phones of old. You just decide what one like and suits you. then you are in their ecosystem, but it wont be such a big deal to change due to cloud apps.
The few games and odd apps on your tablet/phone can just be repurchased from the new devices app store. €50 -100 to change SW, unlike years ago, where it would be €500-1000 , if you could actually find the SW on an different platform.
I guess my point is that MS have a legit opportunity now to jump in and control the HW and SW and are taking it. They never had that before.
Call me in 10 years and see if I was completely out. If I was then I qualify for a job in Wall Street ;-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kustardking
Why is MS releasing it with two architectures?
Because they believe that there are two markets. The 'consumer' which is looking for something similar to an iPad. And the 'professional' who thinks the iPad is a toy and wants a real computer. time will tell if they are right or if things are more as you suggest.
As for the OEMs, I doubt Microsoft ever promised they would never never get into the hardware space, or that if they did they would tell the OEMs ahead of time. In fact I'll bet money they didn't do either. Especially the latter because why tip off the real competition.
As long as they don't do something in some anti-trust way etc Microsoft can do as they want. As for the OEMs all that is left to say to them is
"Would you like some
with your
Wow ... didn't know that!
I think there's no way the Surface will have a battery life comparable to that of the iPad, and when we find out what the battery life is it will make the Surface look like a poor iPad competitor. It's amazing that the M$ presentation didn't once mention battery life. What do they take us for? Journalists?