It's one thing to have iOS or Android on a tablet, but neither of them can compete with the X86 version of Windows 8.1.
Starting later this year and on into 2014, companies such as Intel, AMD, and NVIDIA are all starting to bring their flagship hardware to the mobile/tablet market.
If Apple want's to compete (and not just from a sales perspective), they'll need to bring OS X to tablet form.
IOS doesn't need to compete, because many people are neither looking for, nor desiring, desktop functionality on tablets to begin with. Or at least, not the sort that Windows is currently offering.
If I want to get serious work done, I will use a laptop, not a tablet. I have just finished reviewing a Windows 8 tablet (the acer iconia w510) for my school and my conclusion is that it sucks for most forms of productivity, mainly because the UI and screen ratio make any form of meaningful work practically impossible.
What Microsoft fails to mention in their ads, is how their onscreen keyboard takes up half the vertical width of the screen (thanks to its 16:9 ratio), compared to a smaller proportion of the ipad's 4:3 width, result in a lot less viewing area. Or how their apps don't always resize properly when you dismiss the virtual keyboard (did you know it doesn't automatically pop up? You have to press a tiny icon on the taskbar for that). Throw in a not-very responsive touchscreen, a crappy trackpad (on their bundled keyboard dock) and apps whose UI are not optimised for touch, and you have a recipe for frustration and inefficiency.
Or how that 16:9 screen is wholly unsuited for reading, because your screen is either too short or too narrow. And that kickstand doesn't support portrait mode either. Or how I can get a cheap pdf-reader / annotation app on my ipad for just $2 (notability). In addition, while the Surface sports a type keyboard, the reality is that as a tablet, I should be able to use it fully without the need for additional peripherals, because the whole draw is its portability and form factor compared to a laptop.
And good luck trying to use a full-fledged windows tablet on your lap. The back of mine grew so hot, I believed for a moment it would burn my leg.
Basically, everything I did on a Windows 8 tablet seemed to involve a few extra (and unnecessary) steps compared to the ipad. It just doesn't work, because the ability to do this or that means squat if you can't do them properly.
For nearly 20 years, full fledged x86 Windows has been offered on tablet hardware (Tablet PC, UMPC), and has failed to make a dent in the market. Along comes iPad in 2010. Pundits make fun of the name, call it a giant iPod touch, even Eric Schmidt told Steve Jobs he thought Apple was crazy to sell a tablet, precisely because tablets had done so poorly in the market. Well guess what...? Steve Jobs made all of them his bitches.
What are Windows 8 "tablets" if nothing but Tablet PCs all over again? Ooh, now with Start Screen. You know what? They haven't even beaten Apple yet and you're seriously saying Apple has to follow the Tablet PC formula of shoveling a touch screen onto a Mac OS laptop to compete with Windows 8? VERY FUNNY! I think Apple knows how to compete by playing the game on its own terms, not Microsoft's.
The difference between now and the past 20 years are the technological advances and changes in infrastructure. These are the key developments that can allow Windows to play a major role in the tablet market.
The difference between now and the past 20 years are the technological advances and changes in infrastructure. These are the key developments that can allow Windows to play a major role in the tablet market.
Really? Name one.
The reason PC tablets failed all along has nothing to do with hardware (though certainly longer battery life, better performance is always welcome). The reason they failed was that Microsoft didn't have the vision or guts to say "a tablet needs it own touch-based operating system." No one wants to use a stylus or a horrible mini track-pad when using a tablet. It's a user interface issue. No "technological advances" can make up for crappy UI design.
The difference between now and the past 20 years are the technological advances and changes in infrastructure. These are the key developments that can allow Windows to play a major role in the tablet market.
Oh, how about the Android/iPad sales figures versus the Surface Pro sales figures? That's pretty good proof.
Here's the thing: If it's running desktop software, it is simply not a tablet. You need a keyboard and a mouse, or at least a stylus to use desktop software. This destroys the tablet experience. If you want to run desktop software, buy an ultra-book. If it's a tablet, it should be purely touch based. This is pretty obvious if you've spent any time with the Surface Pro after using Android or iOS tablets. The Surface Pro is not really a tablet at all.
The Surface Pro is giant and costs 2 to 3 times that of an Android or iOS tablet, how is that proof? They're not even in the same class.
A stylus is an easy fix for complex software. Look at the $480 ThinkPad Tablet 2 for example. Thinner and lighter than an iPad 4 and it has a Wacom stylus that tucks away into the top.
If a user wishes to use a keyboard or mouse they can just dock it into one. I'm not saying all OEMs are going to produce outstanding devices with perfect form and function, but companies such as Lenovo and ASUS are definitely on the right track.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
Um. Tablets sold with windows in the last 13 years <<<<< iPads sold in the last qtr/half.
Have any of these future products been released?
Why does that mean no one wants a modern Windows based tablet? There are very few tablets with the same form as the iPad 4 on the market.
The Surface Pro is giant and costs 2 to 3 times that of an Android or iOS tablet, how is that proof? They're not even in the same class.
A stylus is an easy fix for complex software. Look at the $480 ThinkPad Tablet 2 for example. Thinner and lighter than an iPad 4 and it has a Wacom stylus that tucks away into the top.
If a user wishes to use a keyboard or mouse they can just dock it into one. I'm not saying all OEMs are going to produce outstanding devices with perfect form and function, but companies such as Lenovo and ASUS are definitely on the right track.
Why does that mean no one wants a modern Windows based tablet? There are very few tablets with the same form as the iPad 4 on the market.
It's proof because it's failing. Surface Pro is a horrible product. It's not a good laptop and its not a good tablet. Consumers realize this when they try to use the thing. It's no fun at all. Microsoft somehow thought they were clever attaching a keyboard to a tablet, but they just re-invented an ultra-book. It's kind of sad really.
Do you use tablets at all? Because no one wants to use a stylus. Microsoft keeps pushing styli down our throats. We keep spitting them out. What is the last successful product that required the use of a stylus? I think it was probably the Palm Pilot back in the late 90s/early 2000s.
Tablets are for casual use. They should be light, easy to hold, have great battery life, and require a minimum of system administration. They should not require a keyboard or a stylus or any other peripherals.
IOS doesn't need to compete, because many people are neither looking for, nor desiring, desktop functionality on tablets to begin with. Or at least, not the sort that Windows is currently offering.
If I want to get serious work done, I will use a laptop, not a tablet. I have just finished reviewing a Windows 8 tablet (the acer iconia w510) for my school and my conclusion is that it sucks for most forms of productivity, mainly because the UI and screen ratio make any form of meaningful work practically impossible.
What Microsoft fails to mention in their ads, is how their onscreen keyboard takes up half the vertical width of the screen (thanks to its 16:9 ratio), compared to a smaller proportion of the ipad's 4:3 width, result in a lot less viewing area. Or how their apps don't always resize properly when you dismiss the virtual keyboard (did you know it doesn't automatically pop up? You have to press a tiny icon on the taskbar for that). Throw in a not-very responsive touchscreen, a crappy trackpad (on their bundled keyboard dock) and apps whose UI are not optimised for touch, and you have a recipe for frustration and inefficiency.
Or how that 16:9 screen is wholly unsuited for reading, because your screen is either too short or too narrow. And that kickstand doesn't support portrait mode either. Or how I can get a cheap pdf-reader / annotation app on my ipad for just $2 (notability). In addition, while the Surface sports a type keyboard, the reality is that as a tablet, I should be able to use it fully without the need for additional peripherals, because the whole draw is its portability and form factor compared to a laptop.
And good luck trying to use a full-fledged windows tablet on your lap. The back of mine grew so hot, I believed for a moment it would burn my leg.
Basically, everything I did on a Windows 8 tablet seemed to involve a few extra (and unnecessary) steps compared to the ipad. It just doesn't work, because the ability to do this or that means squat if you can't do them properly.
Yet the line a windows laptop and tablet is going to disappear soon. Why do you think companies like Intel are pushing Bay Trail towards 2-in-1 computers?
Most current Windows 8 tablets are either a work in progress or (in the W510's case) a mess. There are also quite a number of fixes to UI in version 8.1.
Many Windows 8 tablets on the market use Intel's Clover Trail, which is essentially a dual core Atom (based on an architecture from 2008), 2GB LPDDR2 RAM, and a way outdated single core PowerVR SGX545 GPU. This GPU could hardly push the already low resolution displays (1366x768).
Hardware such as Bay Trail uses an Ivy Bride tri-gate based architecture with 4 out-of-order cores, up to 4GB LPDDR3, and an Ivy Bridge based Intel GPU with complete API support (Direct X 11, OpenGL 4.x, OpenGL ES 3.0, etc.). The GPU allows for high resolution output (something 8.1 has been optimized for).
At Computex 2013, Bay Trail was spotted running a Windows tablet with a 9.7inch with a 2,048x1,536 resolution (4:3) [same as the iPad 4].
So it shouldn't be hard to see how the advancement in hardware + software changes can go a long way to creating a useful tablet.
The difference between now and the past 20 years are the technological advances and changes in infrastructure. These are the key developments that can allow Windows to play a major role in the tablet market.
Hardware has improved, no doubt (though it still seems that only Apple can make decent trackpads), but the UI still sucks, and it is clearly not suitable for a touch-centric interface.
Apple has shown that you need both solid hardware and great software to create that good user experience. All the specs in the world won't save a product that is hard to use because its UI sucks. How do you think the ipad outsold every tablet in the market, despite its first iteration having just 256mb of ram and a single-core 1GHZ processor?
Yet the line a windows laptop and tablet is going to disappear soon. Why do you think companies like Intel are pushing Bay Trail towards 2-in-1 computers?
Most current Windows 8 tablets are either a work in progress or (in the W510's case) a mess. There are also quite a number of fixes to UI in version 8.1.
Many Windows 8 tablets on the market use Intel's Clover Trail, which is essentially a dual core Atom (based on an architecture from 2008), 2GB LPDDR2 RAM, and a way outdated single core PowerVR SGX545 GPU. This GPU could hardly push the already low resolution displays (1366x768).
Hardware such as Bay Trail uses an Ivy Bride tri-gate based architecture with 4 out-of-order cores, up to 4GB LPDDR3, and an Ivy Bridge based Intel GPU with complete API support (Direct X 11, OpenGL 4.x, OpenGL ES 3.0, etc.). The GPU allows for high resolution output (something 8.1 has been optimized for).
At Computex 2013, Bay Trail was spotted running a Windows tablet with a 9.7inch with a 2,048x1,536 resolution (4:3) [same as the iPad 4].
So it shouldn't be hard to see how the advancement in hardware + software changes can go a long way to creating a useful tablet.
Because Intel doesn't have a choice.
The PC market has always been more or less dictated by whatever version of Windows Microsoft throws out. Since Microsoft is trying to push its own frankenstein of a desktop-tablet hybrid OS, Intel has to more or less support Microsoft the best they can, because they know that the manufacturers are going to be making laptop / tablet hybrids of their own anyways, and so they had better have the chips ready.
If you read my comment above, I believe that specs alone only go so far in creating a pleasurable user experience on a mobile device. You can give me all the ram and the fastest SSD in the world, it still doesn't change the fact that my app isn't coded to take advantage of a touchscreen, the touchscreen still isn't very responsive, or that underneath all those brightly coloured tiles, you are still running windows, with all the legacy problems and limitations of a desktop OS.
I am not outrightly dismissing the concept of a surface-pro like device. I believe that anything is possible, if implemented right. And I still maintain that Windows 8 is still not the right OS for such an endeavour.
The Microsoft Surface sucks. The whole Surface contraption (awful keyboard, out of place looking kickstand) is just a mess if you compare it to a normal functional laptop. Steve Jobs once said that Microsoft have "no style", and that is absolutely true. Apple has set the standard of how a tablet should be made, and I do not think Microsoft will ever be able to catch up.
I don't think anything Microsoft does will help at this point.
They are known to dump products that aren't successful (as any company should), but with such high-profile failures such as the Zune and Kin, folk are wary about signing on with something that could disappear at any moment. And without sales it becomes increasingly likely that MS will dump it. Sort of a vicious circle.
You are looking at this upside down. Its OS X cannot even do half the things iOS can. Likewise, Windows OS 8.1 can not even do 1/4 things iOS can.
If you don't understand what I mean by this then you will never understand why people are liking tablets more than laptops.. and it has nothing do to with price or doing all the same things laptops can do. Recall, Windows XP Netbooks were about the same price with similar sized screens as tablets. again, not a price thing.
By your same reasoning a car can not do half the things a heavy-duty pickup can do. The engine is not as powerful, it can't tow, it can't go off road, it cant haul plywood, it does a body on frame construction to be stiff and haul heavy loads in the cargo area, etc, etc. To someone else the truck can not do 1/2 the things the car can do. Travel in comfort, get good gas milage, handle better around the corners, easier to park, etc, etc.
do you get it? they are not the same thing. You don't need to have one thing do everything well.. there are trade offs. You cant mix the two together and get the best of both worlds. You just create crappy solutions to both problems like a Chevy El' Camino. Build a great car and you have built a crappy truck.. build a great truck and you have built a crappy car. Likewise. build a great laptop and you have built a crappy tablet. Build a great tablet and you have built a crappy laptop. Steve Jobs had it right.. tablets will be cars.. PC's will be trucks. Can you end this stupid goal of "it does everything better" of the Surface device? The Surface is a Chevy El' Camino. It takes a special kind of stubborn person who wants the comforts of a car but can not let go of his need for a truck. Not a very good seller that El' Camino.. but pretty.
The PC market has always been more or less dictated by whatever version of Windows Microsoft throws out. Since Microsoft is trying to push its own frankenstein of a desktop-tablet hybrid OS, Intel has to more or less support Microsoft the best they can, because they know that the manufacturers are going to be making laptop / tablet hybrids of their own anyways, and so they had better have the chips ready.
Intel...what can you say. They had the StrongARM and could have been very competitive.... instead they got greedy and decided they did not want to compete with others in the ARM architecture. They wanted to dominate using their own architecture, thus sold off StrongARM to Marvell and trying pushed Atom into mobile. The gamble did not pay off. They have flounder for years trying to get the power budget under control. All the time saying people will want the horsepower of the x86 in their phones and tablets and rerunning existing legacy apps designed for x86. Meanwhile, others in the mobile industry put focus into offloading high horse power functions away from the CPU and into GPU and other CPU offloading devices like H264 encoders/decoders.
Also, Intel has not been standing still trying to wait for Windows to get its act together in mobile. Actually more like spinning in circles. Moblin, Moblin 2, Meego (w/ Nokia), and now Tizen (w/Samsung). Its all the same open source guys at Intel Open Technology Center (OTC) chasing their tails. Android was a dirty word for them because it was a synonymous with ARM. Finally, they broke down and started to secretly work on Android porting to hedge their bets.
I have yet to see the Samsung Android tablet with the x86 core in it. Which was Intel's big HW win this year. Lets see if it will sell.
I have yet to see the Samsung Android tablet with the x86 core in it. Which was Intel's big HW win this year. Lets see if it will sell.
Yes, it's another strange iteration of the hybrid idea... Windows 8 + Android. The demo looked pretty slick, but you never know until you actually feel one in your hands. It's also supposed to be pricey ($1500 or so was one estimate I saw based on the German pricing). I kind of like all these funny hybrid experiments that manufacturers are spinning out. Maybe one or two of them will actually catch on. Another variation that I'm interested in is an Android ultra-book.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAKings33
It's one thing to have iOS or Android on a tablet, but neither of them can compete with the X86 version of Windows 8.1.
Starting later this year and on into 2014, companies such as Intel, AMD, and NVIDIA are all starting to bring their flagship hardware to the mobile/tablet market.
If Apple want's to compete (and not just from a sales perspective), they'll need to bring OS X to tablet form.
IOS doesn't need to compete, because many people are neither looking for, nor desiring, desktop functionality on tablets to begin with. Or at least, not the sort that Windows is currently offering.
If I want to get serious work done, I will use a laptop, not a tablet. I have just finished reviewing a Windows 8 tablet (the acer iconia w510) for my school and my conclusion is that it sucks for most forms of productivity, mainly because the UI and screen ratio make any form of meaningful work practically impossible.
What Microsoft fails to mention in their ads, is how their onscreen keyboard takes up half the vertical width of the screen (thanks to its 16:9 ratio), compared to a smaller proportion of the ipad's 4:3 width, result in a lot less viewing area. Or how their apps don't always resize properly when you dismiss the virtual keyboard (did you know it doesn't automatically pop up? You have to press a tiny icon on the taskbar for that). Throw in a not-very responsive touchscreen, a crappy trackpad (on their bundled keyboard dock) and apps whose UI are not optimised for touch, and you have a recipe for frustration and inefficiency.
Or how that 16:9 screen is wholly unsuited for reading, because your screen is either too short or too narrow. And that kickstand doesn't support portrait mode either. Or how I can get a cheap pdf-reader / annotation app on my ipad for just $2 (notability). In addition, while the Surface sports a type keyboard, the reality is that as a tablet, I should be able to use it fully without the need for additional peripherals, because the whole draw is its portability and form factor compared to a laptop.
And good luck trying to use a full-fledged windows tablet on your lap. The back of mine grew so hot, I believed for a moment it would burn my leg.
Basically, everything I did on a Windows 8 tablet seemed to involve a few extra (and unnecessary) steps compared to the ipad. It just doesn't work, because the ability to do this or that means squat if you can't do them properly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
For nearly 20 years, full fledged x86 Windows has been offered on tablet hardware (Tablet PC, UMPC), and has failed to make a dent in the market. Along comes iPad in 2010. Pundits make fun of the name, call it a giant iPod touch, even Eric Schmidt told Steve Jobs he thought Apple was crazy to sell a tablet, precisely because tablets had done so poorly in the market. Well guess what...? Steve Jobs made all of them his bitches.
What are Windows 8 "tablets" if nothing but Tablet PCs all over again? Ooh, now with Start Screen. You know what? They haven't even beaten Apple yet and you're seriously saying Apple has to follow the Tablet PC formula of shoveling a touch screen onto a Mac OS laptop to compete with Windows 8? VERY FUNNY! I think Apple knows how to compete by playing the game on its own terms, not Microsoft's.
The difference between now and the past 20 years are the technological advances and changes in infrastructure. These are the key developments that can allow Windows to play a major role in the tablet market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAKings33
The difference between now and the past 20 years are the technological advances and changes in infrastructure. These are the key developments that can allow Windows to play a major role in the tablet market.
Really? Name one.
The reason PC tablets failed all along has nothing to do with hardware (though certainly longer battery life, better performance is always welcome). The reason they failed was that Microsoft didn't have the vision or guts to say "a tablet needs it own touch-based operating system." No one wants to use a stylus or a horrible mini track-pad when using a tablet. It's a user interface issue. No "technological advances" can make up for crappy UI design.
Ballmer, is that you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by graxspoo
Oh, how about the Android/iPad sales figures versus the Surface Pro sales figures? That's pretty good proof.
Here's the thing: If it's running desktop software, it is simply not a tablet. You need a keyboard and a mouse, or at least a stylus to use desktop software. This destroys the tablet experience. If you want to run desktop software, buy an ultra-book. If it's a tablet, it should be purely touch based. This is pretty obvious if you've spent any time with the Surface Pro after using Android or iOS tablets. The Surface Pro is not really a tablet at all.
The Surface Pro is giant and costs 2 to 3 times that of an Android or iOS tablet, how is that proof? They're not even in the same class.
A stylus is an easy fix for complex software. Look at the $480 ThinkPad Tablet 2 for example. Thinner and lighter than an iPad 4 and it has a Wacom stylus that tucks away into the top.
If a user wishes to use a keyboard or mouse they can just dock it into one. I'm not saying all OEMs are going to produce outstanding devices with perfect form and function, but companies such as Lenovo and ASUS are definitely on the right track.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
Um. Tablets sold with windows in the last 13 years <<<<< iPads sold in the last qtr/half.
Have any of these future products been released?
Why does that mean no one wants a modern Windows based tablet? There are very few tablets with the same form as the iPad 4 on the market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAKings33
The Surface Pro is giant and costs 2 to 3 times that of an Android or iOS tablet, how is that proof? They're not even in the same class.
A stylus is an easy fix for complex software. Look at the $480 ThinkPad Tablet 2 for example. Thinner and lighter than an iPad 4 and it has a Wacom stylus that tucks away into the top.
If a user wishes to use a keyboard or mouse they can just dock it into one. I'm not saying all OEMs are going to produce outstanding devices with perfect form and function, but companies such as Lenovo and ASUS are definitely on the right track.
Why does that mean no one wants a modern Windows based tablet? There are very few tablets with the same form as the iPad 4 on the market.
It's proof because it's failing. Surface Pro is a horrible product. It's not a good laptop and its not a good tablet. Consumers realize this when they try to use the thing. It's no fun at all. Microsoft somehow thought they were clever attaching a keyboard to a tablet, but they just re-invented an ultra-book. It's kind of sad really.
Do you use tablets at all? Because no one wants to use a stylus. Microsoft keeps pushing styli down our throats. We keep spitting them out. What is the last successful product that required the use of a stylus? I think it was probably the Palm Pilot back in the late 90s/early 2000s.
Tablets are for casual use. They should be light, easy to hold, have great battery life, and require a minimum of system administration. They should not require a keyboard or a stylus or any other peripherals.
Like getting it turned in the right direction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by abazigal
IOS doesn't need to compete, because many people are neither looking for, nor desiring, desktop functionality on tablets to begin with. Or at least, not the sort that Windows is currently offering.
If I want to get serious work done, I will use a laptop, not a tablet. I have just finished reviewing a Windows 8 tablet (the acer iconia w510) for my school and my conclusion is that it sucks for most forms of productivity, mainly because the UI and screen ratio make any form of meaningful work practically impossible.
What Microsoft fails to mention in their ads, is how their onscreen keyboard takes up half the vertical width of the screen (thanks to its 16:9 ratio), compared to a smaller proportion of the ipad's 4:3 width, result in a lot less viewing area. Or how their apps don't always resize properly when you dismiss the virtual keyboard (did you know it doesn't automatically pop up? You have to press a tiny icon on the taskbar for that). Throw in a not-very responsive touchscreen, a crappy trackpad (on their bundled keyboard dock) and apps whose UI are not optimised for touch, and you have a recipe for frustration and inefficiency.
Or how that 16:9 screen is wholly unsuited for reading, because your screen is either too short or too narrow. And that kickstand doesn't support portrait mode either. Or how I can get a cheap pdf-reader / annotation app on my ipad for just $2 (notability). In addition, while the Surface sports a type keyboard, the reality is that as a tablet, I should be able to use it fully without the need for additional peripherals, because the whole draw is its portability and form factor compared to a laptop.
And good luck trying to use a full-fledged windows tablet on your lap. The back of mine grew so hot, I believed for a moment it would burn my leg.
Basically, everything I did on a Windows 8 tablet seemed to involve a few extra (and unnecessary) steps compared to the ipad. It just doesn't work, because the ability to do this or that means squat if you can't do them properly.
Yet the line a windows laptop and tablet is going to disappear soon. Why do you think companies like Intel are pushing Bay Trail towards 2-in-1 computers?
Most current Windows 8 tablets are either a work in progress or (in the W510's case) a mess. There are also quite a number of fixes to UI in version 8.1.
Many Windows 8 tablets on the market use Intel's Clover Trail, which is essentially a dual core Atom (based on an architecture from 2008), 2GB LPDDR2 RAM, and a way outdated single core PowerVR SGX545 GPU. This GPU could hardly push the already low resolution displays (1366x768).
Hardware such as Bay Trail uses an Ivy Bride tri-gate based architecture with 4 out-of-order cores, up to 4GB LPDDR3, and an Ivy Bridge based Intel GPU with complete API support (Direct X 11, OpenGL 4.x, OpenGL ES 3.0, etc.). The GPU allows for high resolution output (something 8.1 has been optimized for).
At Computex 2013, Bay Trail was spotted running a Windows tablet with a 9.7inch with a 2,048x1,536 resolution (4:3) [same as the iPad 4].
So it shouldn't be hard to see how the advancement in hardware + software changes can go a long way to creating a useful tablet.
The touch keyboard is the future. Apple goes forward Microsoft, you go backward.
Just like your sales go backward.
Your price is to high even if yours was free I still would not want it because it is old technology.
I don't want to pay another $150 for your keyboard that falls apart in a month.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAKings33
The difference between now and the past 20 years are the technological advances and changes in infrastructure. These are the key developments that can allow Windows to play a major role in the tablet market.
Hardware has improved, no doubt (though it still seems that only Apple can make decent trackpads), but the UI still sucks, and it is clearly not suitable for a touch-centric interface.
Apple has shown that you need both solid hardware and great software to create that good user experience. All the specs in the world won't save a product that is hard to use because its UI sucks. How do you think the ipad outsold every tablet in the market, despite its first iteration having just 256mb of ram and a single-core 1GHZ processor?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAKings33
Yet the line a windows laptop and tablet is going to disappear soon. Why do you think companies like Intel are pushing Bay Trail towards 2-in-1 computers?
Most current Windows 8 tablets are either a work in progress or (in the W510's case) a mess. There are also quite a number of fixes to UI in version 8.1.
Many Windows 8 tablets on the market use Intel's Clover Trail, which is essentially a dual core Atom (based on an architecture from 2008), 2GB LPDDR2 RAM, and a way outdated single core PowerVR SGX545 GPU. This GPU could hardly push the already low resolution displays (1366x768).
Hardware such as Bay Trail uses an Ivy Bride tri-gate based architecture with 4 out-of-order cores, up to 4GB LPDDR3, and an Ivy Bridge based Intel GPU with complete API support (Direct X 11, OpenGL 4.x, OpenGL ES 3.0, etc.). The GPU allows for high resolution output (something 8.1 has been optimized for).
At Computex 2013, Bay Trail was spotted running a Windows tablet with a 9.7inch with a 2,048x1,536 resolution (4:3) [same as the iPad 4].
So it shouldn't be hard to see how the advancement in hardware + software changes can go a long way to creating a useful tablet.
Because Intel doesn't have a choice.
The PC market has always been more or less dictated by whatever version of Windows Microsoft throws out. Since Microsoft is trying to push its own frankenstein of a desktop-tablet hybrid OS, Intel has to more or less support Microsoft the best they can, because they know that the manufacturers are going to be making laptop / tablet hybrids of their own anyways, and so they had better have the chips ready.
If you read my comment above, I believe that specs alone only go so far in creating a pleasurable user experience on a mobile device. You can give me all the ram and the fastest SSD in the world, it still doesn't change the fact that my app isn't coded to take advantage of a touchscreen, the touchscreen still isn't very responsive, or that underneath all those brightly coloured tiles, you are still running windows, with all the legacy problems and limitations of a desktop OS.
I am not outrightly dismissing the concept of a surface-pro like device. I believe that anything is possible, if implemented right. And I still maintain that Windows 8 is still not the right OS for such an endeavour.
The Microsoft Surface sucks. The whole Surface contraption (awful keyboard, out of place looking kickstand) is just a mess if you compare it to a normal functional laptop. Steve Jobs once said that Microsoft have "no style", and that is absolutely true. Apple has set the standard of how a tablet should be made, and I do not think Microsoft will ever be able to catch up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAKings33
It's one thing to have iOS or Android on a tablet, but neither of them can compete with the X86 version of Windows 8.1.
remind me again why tablet sales are going up, while X86 versions of Windows 8.1 are going down?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAKings33
Since when has Windows been vaporware?
does the word Longhorn help refresh your memory?
Written on my iPad mini!!!!
I don't think anything Microsoft does will help at this point.
They are known to dump products that aren't successful (as any company should), but with such high-profile failures such as the Zune and Kin, folk are wary about signing on with something that could disappear at any moment. And without sales it becomes increasingly likely that MS will dump it. Sort of a vicious circle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAKings33
iOS cannot even do half the things OS X can.
You are looking at this upside down. Its OS X cannot even do half the things iOS can. Likewise, Windows OS 8.1 can not even do 1/4 things iOS can.
If you don't understand what I mean by this then you will never understand why people are liking tablets more than laptops.. and it has nothing do to with price or doing all the same things laptops can do. Recall, Windows XP Netbooks were about the same price with similar sized screens as tablets. again, not a price thing.
By your same reasoning a car can not do half the things a heavy-duty pickup can do. The engine is not as powerful, it can't tow, it can't go off road, it cant haul plywood, it does a body on frame construction to be stiff and haul heavy loads in the cargo area, etc, etc. To someone else the truck can not do 1/2 the things the car can do. Travel in comfort, get good gas milage, handle better around the corners, easier to park, etc, etc.
do you get it? they are not the same thing. You don't need to have one thing do everything well.. there are trade offs. You cant mix the two together and get the best of both worlds. You just create crappy solutions to both problems like a Chevy El' Camino. Build a great car and you have built a crappy truck.. build a great truck and you have built a crappy car. Likewise. build a great laptop and you have built a crappy tablet. Build a great tablet and you have built a crappy laptop. Steve Jobs had it right.. tablets will be cars.. PC's will be trucks. Can you end this stupid goal of "it does everything better" of the Surface device? The Surface is a Chevy El' Camino. It takes a special kind of stubborn person who wants the comforts of a car but can not let go of his need for a truck. Not a very good seller that El' Camino.. but pretty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by abazigal
Because Intel doesn't have a choice.
The PC market has always been more or less dictated by whatever version of Windows Microsoft throws out. Since Microsoft is trying to push its own frankenstein of a desktop-tablet hybrid OS, Intel has to more or less support Microsoft the best they can, because they know that the manufacturers are going to be making laptop / tablet hybrids of their own anyways, and so they had better have the chips ready.
Intel...what can you say. They had the StrongARM and could have been very competitive.... instead they got greedy and decided they did not want to compete with others in the ARM architecture. They wanted to dominate using their own architecture, thus sold off StrongARM to Marvell and trying pushed Atom into mobile. The gamble did not pay off. They have flounder for years trying to get the power budget under control. All the time saying people will want the horsepower of the x86 in their phones and tablets and rerunning existing legacy apps designed for x86. Meanwhile, others in the mobile industry put focus into offloading high horse power functions away from the CPU and into GPU and other CPU offloading devices like H264 encoders/decoders.
Also, Intel has not been standing still trying to wait for Windows to get its act together in mobile. Actually more like spinning in circles. Moblin, Moblin 2, Meego (w/ Nokia), and now Tizen (w/Samsung). Its all the same open source guys at Intel Open Technology Center (OTC) chasing their tails. Android was a dirty word for them because it was a synonymous with ARM. Finally, they broke down and started to secretly work on Android porting to hedge their bets.
I have yet to see the Samsung Android tablet with the x86 core in it. Which was Intel's big HW win this year. Lets see if it will sell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova
I have yet to see the Samsung Android tablet with the x86 core in it. Which was Intel's big HW win this year. Lets see if it will sell.
Yes, it's another strange iteration of the hybrid idea... Windows 8 + Android. The demo looked pretty slick, but you never know until you actually feel one in your hands. It's also supposed to be pricey ($1500 or so was one estimate I saw based on the German pricing). I kind of like all these funny hybrid experiments that manufacturers are spinning out. Maybe one or two of them will actually catch on. Another variation that I'm interested in is an Android ultra-book.