iOS and OSX don't have the same user interface. They have interfaces best suited for their hardware. I am surprised MS didn't go that way and instead chose one-user-interface-fits-all. I am starting to wonder if Windows 8 will be an epic disaster for Microsoft. And I am a Windows guy.
The OTHER scary thing here is that they promote the idea that "you can interact with the Metro interface, of some other way". I know that the Uber Geeks like the idea of choices, but the practicality of development and design is; consistency rules. Even a bad interface, if it is at least logically consistent, can be useful. Just think of the support headache, or the developers, they've got to ask WHICH interface is being used -- and was the intent "desktop style or tablet usage". Choose between the keyboard, the mouse, or the touch screen -- that's great. But what's on screen and is ONE always available?
With the iOS system, the latest iPhone 5 is the first break in having the same consistent aspect ratio -- and they deal with that by having a black band, or an extra row of icons. So really, it's the same dimension except when watching a movie. But Developers are probably still going to design for the "standard aspect." iOS still has a HUGE advantage over Android because of the testing, development and interface are all consistent. Most Android users do not update their OS and some vendors don't even bother with support after the first year. They got their 2 year contract and they are done.
Now Microsoft doesn't have to go down that road because they are selling the hardware -- but they've already split the OS interface on two paths, just so they can keep that one foot back on the desktop. Truly -- they don't believe in "Pads" at all. If they can't commit to the "best design for the use" of the machine -- how can the user? One mediocre interface that performs well is better than two mediocre interfaces that perform slightly worse, and then you write software and target it as if it were two platforms. The developers have to test against a dozen reference platforms, aspect ratios, versions of OS and which vendor provides service because certain things have to be turned on or off due to the vagaries of the carrier signals, power consumption, and what it costs to keep "pinging" the phone. So they end up writing to the iPhone FIRST, and if successful, they may decide to port it to Android and spend the resources to make it right.
The raw numbers might make Android look good -- but it's more than one platform when it comes to development and support. You write to iOS and for the most part, it's one contiguous experience.
Sure, everyone says they want choice -- they really mean CONTROL. Give people the best product you can design instead of a choice between mediocre. A company that has millions, perhaps billions to spend on designing a gadget, can do usability testing. Apple agonized over every detail and what they LEFT OUT is more important than all the bells and whistles they left in. Samsung was smart to copy the iPhone and iPad -- they made $26 Billion and only spent $1 billion in fines and court costs, while Blackberry and others went the 'bake your own" path and lost money. Many smart phones had tons of features and bragged about Flash and Multitasking -- that was in every ad they could squeeze out. Apple's ads showed people doing stuff. Raw numbers of RAM and Mhz and things people with "dumb phones" never concern themselves with. "Does it work, and do I have to think about it?" People aren't buying powerful computers anymore -- they are buying "solutions" and ways to get things done.
>> Sorry for the marketing rant -- but it's so obvious, and it's annoying that Microsoft can be such a mighty behemoth and then leave the playing field open like this. It sounds like a fundamental problem with people who look inward at the company, rather than out at the users.
Microsoft is demonstrating that they don't get the tablet, and don't believe in tablets, but they've got a tablet for you, if you HAVE to have one, and by the way, you know how to use it because it's just like Windows. Or that Windows 8 that you are just getting to learn and isn't intuitive. So it's a way to run all those Windows things, if you HAVE no access to a laptop. I can imagine the internal conversation at Microsoft; "I'll just snap on the keyboard, and take advantage of all that expandability that stupid iPad doesn't have, and after a mouse and an external DVD -- I'll have all the power and convenience of a laptop. Bam!"
>> I'm amazed that the Windows 8 phone doesn't come with a parachute to help everyone jump off the MS platform.
The OTHER scary thing here is that they promote the idea that "you can interact with the Metro interface, of some other way". I know that the Uber Geeks like the idea of choices, but the practicality of development and design is; consistency rules. Even a bad interface, if it is at least logically consistent, can be useful. Just think of the support headache, or the developers, they've got to ask WHICH interface is being used -- and was the intent "desktop style or tablet usage". Choose between the keyboard, the mouse, or the touch screen -- that's great. But what's on screen and is ONE always available?
With the iOS system, the latest iPhone 5 is the first break in having the same consistent aspect ratio -- and they deal with that by having a black band, or an extra row of icons. So really, it's the same dimension except when watching a movie. But Developers are probably still going to design for the "standard aspect." iOS still has a HUGE advantage over Android because of the testing, development and interface are all consistent. Most Android users do not update their OS and some vendors don't even bother with support after the first year. They got their 2 year contract and they are done.
Now Microsoft doesn't have to go down that road because they are selling the hardware -- but they've already split the OS interface on two paths, just so they can keep that one foot back on the desktop. Truly -- they don't believe in "Pads" at all. If they can't commit to the "best design for the use" of the machine -- how can the user? One mediocre interface that performs well is better than two mediocre interfaces that perform slightly worse, and then you write software and target it as if it were two platforms. The developers have to test against a dozen reference platforms, aspect ratios, versions of OS and which vendor provides service because certain things have to be turned on or off due to the vagaries of the carrier signals, power consumption, and what it costs to keep "pinging" the phone. So they end up writing to the iPhone FIRST, and if successful, they may decide to port it to Android and spend the resources to make it right.
The raw numbers might make Android look good -- but it's more than one platform when it comes to development and support. You write to iOS and for the most part, it's one contiguous experience.
Sure, everyone says they want choice -- they really mean CONTROL. Give people the best product you can design instead of a choice between mediocre. A company that has millions, perhaps billions to spend on designing a gadget, can do usability testing. Apple agonized over every detail and what they LEFT OUT is more important than all the bells and whistles they left in. Samsung was smart to copy the iPhone and iPad -- they made $26 Billion and only spent $1 billion in fines and court costs, while Blackberry and others went the 'bake your own" path and lost money. Many smart phones had tons of features and bragged about Flash and Multitasking -- that was in every ad they could squeeze out. Apple's ads showed people doing stuff. Raw numbers of RAM and Mhz and things people with "dumb phones" never concern themselves with. "Does it work, and do I have to think about it?" People aren't buying powerful computers anymore -- they are buying "solutions" and ways to get things done.
>> Sorry for the marketing rant -- but it's so obvious, and it's annoying that Microsoft can be such a mighty behemoth and then leave the playing field open like this. It sounds like a fundamental problem with people who look inward at the company, rather than out at the users.
Microsoft is demonstrating that they don't get the tablet, and don't believe in tablets, but they've got a tablet for you, if you HAVE to have one, and by the way, you know how to use it because it's just like Windows. Or that Windows 8 that you are just getting to learn and isn't intuitive. So it's a way to run all those Windows things, if you HAVE no access to a laptop. I can imagine the internal conversation at Microsoft; "I'll just snap on the keyboard, and take advantage of all that expandability that stupid iPad doesn't have, and after a mouse and an external DVD -- I'll have all the power and convenience of a laptop. Bam!"
>> I'm amazed that the Windows 8 phone doesn't come with a parachute to help everyone jump off the MS platform.
what MS cannot grasp, institutionally, is that they are not on top anymore, and thus they can no longer command their user base to follow their dictates. plus they thought/think the users actually want them! (don't we all) inertia is their greatest strength, but with W8 they are throwing that away. because now there are real alternatives - not just Apple - and change is a pain. so this time they will loose a chunk of that base. for good.
and if they don't "woo" any of them back by essentially returning to Windows 7 next year -whatever they call it - it really will be the beginning of the end.
From Anandtech: "Overall battery life is pretty competitive with the iPad. In lighter use cases Apple pulls ahead slightly, but if you look at our updated web browsing test the heavier CPU load pushes Surface ahead of the third gen iPad. It’s not clear how the 4th gen iPad would stack up in this comparison."
9.12 hours of light browsing, compared to iPad3 9.28 hours is not bad really. And this is only MS Surface. Other vendors can push battery life further than that, if they choose to. Asus VivoTab RT comes with keyboard dock housing 2nd battery, and is only 525g without keyboard (iPad 3 is 680g for wifi version).
Yes, CPU is slower and screen is lower res... for now. That is the beauty of standard platform vs. single vendor - things are changing fast. Variations in size, weight, battery life, hardware features... will be covered.
And then, there is Office. Some people here are dismissing importance of this because they dislike it and have managed to find a niche that does not require presence of Office in everyday. But for majority, importance of Office will be higher than importance of Retina display.
Well this is my opinion. Time will tell.
Let's see. With a slower CPU and a screen that has 1/2 the resolution (which has a HUGE impact on power usage), the Windows tablet almost matches the iPad in everyday use. Hmmmm.......
Of course, that ignores the fact that the number of apps you can run - and therefore the number of things you can do with it - is very limited.
I agree with Cook. Microsoft has a very difficult, confusing sell here. The entire Windows 8 RT vs Windows 8 Pro nonsense is going to confuse customers to no end.
You are forgetting the obvious fact that Surface is just one of many tablet and hybrid form factors that will run Win8. Asus, Lenovo, Dell, and numerous others have already announced devices and some of those devices will bring to the market features Surface is missing. 3G, 4G, LTE and all the rest will be available in weeks time - It won't be a 'year' before we see the shortcomings you allege addressed. This same fact is why the Zune comparison is off the mark; Zune wasn't an operating system - it pitched one MS device against one Apple device. That scenario does not fit what is happening now.
I also think you underestimate the potential for the MS app store. The feature that gave the app store so much push - the depth and breadth of its offerings - has become a big liability for it. Developers who are thoughtful realize that it is now almost impossible to get noticed, and that means that developers increasingly have to budget advertising and other efforts to get sales. That makes the app store start to look more and more like any other retail endeavor and it squeezes out the smaller devs. LOTS of developers are going to see the Win8 store as a blank slate upon which they have a new chance to get noticed.
In the past many of the same arguments you make were used about Android tablets, too. Remember all the snide chuckling around here about the Android tabs, and all the mocking and silliness? Well guess what - while last year Apple enjoyed an 81% market share, this year they enjoyed only a 52% market share. Android went from 15% to 48% - in one year. Examined in that context, the increases in Apple sales do not indicate that Apple is in an insurmountable number one position, they indicate that the market size and potential for these device types is huge and Apple is riding that wave. While folks like to use the rising numbers of Apple shipments to argue that Apple is on top, the reality is that the market is growing, and it is growing faster than Apple sales in terms of total volume. That is why Android was able to eat essentially a third of Apple's market share in one year without anybody even noticing - the market is new and expanding. What I find most remarkable about this is that Android was able to accomplish it despite the fact that it (Android) is such a horrid piece of trash (and it is - both for end users and for developers).
Microsoft is positioning itself first and foremost to eat Android's lunch, and frankly, I think the Redmond crew is well positioned to do so. But don't let that fool you into complacently thinking Apple remains unassailable - it most definitely does not. Ultimately these markets - smart phones and tablets - will mature just as the PC market has. When that happens, market share will matter because market growth will not be able to compensate for declining or static market share. What is going to happen to Apple stock when they can't post amazing YOY growth? A sobering question for you to consider.
These reasons above are all why it does matter what MS is up to, and why Apple shouldn't be foolish enough to dismiss MS... as Microsoft was to dismiss Apple.
This discussion is about the Surface tablet, whose problem is that it is NOT competitive with other products running Windows 8. Check out for example the Sony Duo, which is an actual laptop, has an actual keyboard, an actual 1920x1080 screen (11.6"), and Wacom digitizer built in, runs actual Windows and actual Office, and all that for $1K.Oh, it weighs 2.3lb, so only slightly more than the surface. If the surface were an actual tablet, that might not be a problem, but it's not -- it is a laptop with a nod to tablet-hood, and, as such it is completely misbegotten. Now, it is possible that Win 8 will be a dud in other ways, but I would not bet against MS to that extent.
what MS cannot grasp, institutionally, is that they are not on top anymore, and thus they can no longer command their user base to follow their dictates.
Hm. let's see the logic in here:
- So(you are saying) whoever is on top somehow commands their user base to follow whatever they dictate!
- If (by your estimates) MS is not on top anymore - who is?
Comments
You ... you mean ... it could be another Zune? /shock horror disbelief
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb
iOS and OSX don't have the same user interface. They have interfaces best suited for their hardware. I am surprised MS didn't go that way and instead chose one-user-interface-fits-all. I am starting to wonder if Windows 8 will be an epic disaster for Microsoft. And I am a Windows guy.
The OTHER scary thing here is that they promote the idea that "you can interact with the Metro interface, of some other way". I know that the Uber Geeks like the idea of choices, but the practicality of development and design is; consistency rules. Even a bad interface, if it is at least logically consistent, can be useful. Just think of the support headache, or the developers, they've got to ask WHICH interface is being used -- and was the intent "desktop style or tablet usage". Choose between the keyboard, the mouse, or the touch screen -- that's great. But what's on screen and is ONE always available?
With the iOS system, the latest iPhone 5 is the first break in having the same consistent aspect ratio -- and they deal with that by having a black band, or an extra row of icons. So really, it's the same dimension except when watching a movie. But Developers are probably still going to design for the "standard aspect." iOS still has a HUGE advantage over Android because of the testing, development and interface are all consistent. Most Android users do not update their OS and some vendors don't even bother with support after the first year. They got their 2 year contract and they are done.
Now Microsoft doesn't have to go down that road because they are selling the hardware -- but they've already split the OS interface on two paths, just so they can keep that one foot back on the desktop. Truly -- they don't believe in "Pads" at all. If they can't commit to the "best design for the use" of the machine -- how can the user? One mediocre interface that performs well is better than two mediocre interfaces that perform slightly worse, and then you write software and target it as if it were two platforms. The developers have to test against a dozen reference platforms, aspect ratios, versions of OS and which vendor provides service because certain things have to be turned on or off due to the vagaries of the carrier signals, power consumption, and what it costs to keep "pinging" the phone. So they end up writing to the iPhone FIRST, and if successful, they may decide to port it to Android and spend the resources to make it right.
The raw numbers might make Android look good -- but it's more than one platform when it comes to development and support. You write to iOS and for the most part, it's one contiguous experience.
Sure, everyone says they want choice -- they really mean CONTROL. Give people the best product you can design instead of a choice between mediocre. A company that has millions, perhaps billions to spend on designing a gadget, can do usability testing. Apple agonized over every detail and what they LEFT OUT is more important than all the bells and whistles they left in. Samsung was smart to copy the iPhone and iPad -- they made $26 Billion and only spent $1 billion in fines and court costs, while Blackberry and others went the 'bake your own" path and lost money. Many smart phones had tons of features and bragged about Flash and Multitasking -- that was in every ad they could squeeze out. Apple's ads showed people doing stuff. Raw numbers of RAM and Mhz and things people with "dumb phones" never concern themselves with. "Does it work, and do I have to think about it?" People aren't buying powerful computers anymore -- they are buying "solutions" and ways to get things done.
>> Sorry for the marketing rant -- but it's so obvious, and it's annoying that Microsoft can be such a mighty behemoth and then leave the playing field open like this. It sounds like a fundamental problem with people who look inward at the company, rather than out at the users.
Microsoft is demonstrating that they don't get the tablet, and don't believe in tablets, but they've got a tablet for you, if you HAVE to have one, and by the way, you know how to use it because it's just like Windows. Or that Windows 8 that you are just getting to learn and isn't intuitive. So it's a way to run all those Windows things, if you HAVE no access to a laptop. I can imagine the internal conversation at Microsoft; "I'll just snap on the keyboard, and take advantage of all that expandability that stupid iPad doesn't have, and after a mouse and an external DVD -- I'll have all the power and convenience of a laptop. Bam!"
>> I'm amazed that the Windows 8 phone doesn't come with a parachute to help everyone jump off the MS platform.
what MS cannot grasp, institutionally, is that they are not on top anymore, and thus they can no longer command their user base to follow their dictates. plus they thought/think the users actually want them! (don't we all) inertia is their greatest strength, but with W8 they are throwing that away. because now there are real alternatives - not just Apple - and change is a pain. so this time they will loose a chunk of that base. for good.
and if they don't "woo" any of them back by essentially returning to Windows 7 next year -whatever they call it - it really will be the beginning of the end.
Let's see. With a slower CPU and a screen that has 1/2 the resolution (which has a HUGE impact on power usage), the Windows tablet almost matches the iPad in everyday use. Hmmmm.......
Of course, that ignores the fact that the number of apps you can run - and therefore the number of things you can do with it - is very limited.
I agree with Cook. Microsoft has a very difficult, confusing sell here. The entire Windows 8 RT vs Windows 8 Pro nonsense is going to confuse customers to no end.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tt92618
You are forgetting the obvious fact that Surface is just one of many tablet and hybrid form factors that will run Win8. Asus, Lenovo, Dell, and numerous others have already announced devices and some of those devices will bring to the market features Surface is missing. 3G, 4G, LTE and all the rest will be available in weeks time - It won't be a 'year' before we see the shortcomings you allege addressed. This same fact is why the Zune comparison is off the mark; Zune wasn't an operating system - it pitched one MS device against one Apple device. That scenario does not fit what is happening now.
I also think you underestimate the potential for the MS app store. The feature that gave the app store so much push - the depth and breadth of its offerings - has become a big liability for it. Developers who are thoughtful realize that it is now almost impossible to get noticed, and that means that developers increasingly have to budget advertising and other efforts to get sales. That makes the app store start to look more and more like any other retail endeavor and it squeezes out the smaller devs. LOTS of developers are going to see the Win8 store as a blank slate upon which they have a new chance to get noticed.
In the past many of the same arguments you make were used about Android tablets, too. Remember all the snide chuckling around here about the Android tabs, and all the mocking and silliness? Well guess what - while last year Apple enjoyed an 81% market share, this year they enjoyed only a 52% market share. Android went from 15% to 48% - in one year. Examined in that context, the increases in Apple sales do not indicate that Apple is in an insurmountable number one position, they indicate that the market size and potential for these device types is huge and Apple is riding that wave. While folks like to use the rising numbers of Apple shipments to argue that Apple is on top, the reality is that the market is growing, and it is growing faster than Apple sales in terms of total volume. That is why Android was able to eat essentially a third of Apple's market share in one year without anybody even noticing - the market is new and expanding. What I find most remarkable about this is that Android was able to accomplish it despite the fact that it (Android) is such a horrid piece of trash (and it is - both for end users and for developers).
Microsoft is positioning itself first and foremost to eat Android's lunch, and frankly, I think the Redmond crew is well positioned to do so. But don't let that fool you into complacently thinking Apple remains unassailable - it most definitely does not. Ultimately these markets - smart phones and tablets - will mature just as the PC market has. When that happens, market share will matter because market growth will not be able to compensate for declining or static market share. What is going to happen to Apple stock when they can't post amazing YOY growth? A sobering question for you to consider.
These reasons above are all why it does matter what MS is up to, and why Apple shouldn't be foolish enough to dismiss MS... as Microsoft was to dismiss Apple.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }This discussion is about the Surface tablet, whose problem is that it is NOT competitive with other products running Windows 8. Check out for example the Sony Duo, which is an actual laptop, has an actual keyboard, an actual 1920x1080 screen (11.6"), and Wacom digitizer built in, runs actual Windows and actual Office, and all that for $1K.Oh, it weighs 2.3lb, so only slightly more than the surface. If the surface were an actual tablet, that might not be a problem, but it's not -- it is a laptop with a nod to tablet-hood, and, as such it is completely misbegotten. Now, it is possible that Win 8 will be a dud in other ways, but I would not bet against MS to that extent.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr
what MS cannot grasp, institutionally, is that they are not on top anymore, and thus they can no longer command their user base to follow their dictates.
Hm. let's see the logic in here:
- So(you are saying) whoever is on top somehow commands their user base to follow whatever they dictate!
- If (by your estimates) MS is not on top anymore - who is?
Now attach the answer to the previous statement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfiejr
... inertia is their greatest strength ...
Wow, talking about inertia.