IMHO Your references to these articles has only demonstrated why MS Windows 7 and 8 although better attempts to design Windows correctly (20 years too late) are ultimately going to be limited in their impact. Most growth will be in the Mobile space. The windows desktop will be around for a long time to come. But the market for it, i.e.: PC/x86 systems is a diminishing market and some argue more than that. There have been many articles written about this phenomenon, but suffice to say, history is full of examples of companies similar to Microsoft clinging to the belief that having a 95% market share will keep them in business. 95% of a declining channel is not a way to stay in business long term. You might as well say "We, the horse and carriage world leader have 95% of the market. The automobile is irrelevent." Understanding how important this is and simply listen to what the major shareholders have been communicatuing to the MS board. They at least understand this relevency.
The majority of consumers honestly could not care any less about what kind of hardware or software is running their tablets. How much longer must we keep rehashing the same story?
The tech minority continues to imply that they know what the joe-consumer looks out for, and time again they are proven wrong.
Did iPad consumers buy the iPad because it was ARM and not Intel? No. Did they care that iOS is OSX and not Windows? No.
They bought it because it works well, it's polished, and it's a toaster. Period.
Writing "period" does not make what you say any truer.
iPad consumers did not, in fact, buy the iPad because of the ARM vs Intel, and they didn't care much about OSX vs Windows vs iOS (three different operating systems btw)
But when they bought it, they did realize several things:
That the battery would last for many hours. This is not possible with any current Intel processor, so while they don't care, Apple's choice does affect their value.
That it would not run MS-Office, and this stems directly from the OS not being Windows or OSX.
That most office applications and some web applications would be weird and hard to operate without a mouse and keyboard
So they knew they were getting a toaster. Those of us who don't want a toaster will look elsewhere from the iPad.
IMHO Your references to these articles has only demonstrated why MS Windows 7 and 8 although better attempts to design Windows correctly (20 years too late) are ultimately going to be limited in their impact. Most growth will be in the Mobile space.
Windows 8 (and the sandboxed WinRT apps) will run on x86 and ARM.
If you count ARM tablets as the "mobile space" Windows 8 will be there from day 1.
Comments
Please read the following (then if you like we can have a conversation
IMHO Your references to these articles has only demonstrated why MS Windows 7 and 8 although better attempts to design Windows correctly (20 years too late) are ultimately going to be limited in their impact. Most growth will be in the Mobile space. The windows desktop will be around for a long time to come. But the market for it, i.e.: PC/x86 systems is a diminishing market and some argue more than that. There have been many articles written about this phenomenon, but suffice to say, history is full of examples of companies similar to Microsoft clinging to the belief that having a 95% market share will keep them in business. 95% of a declining channel is not a way to stay in business long term. You might as well say "We, the horse and carriage world leader have 95% of the market. The automobile is irrelevent." Understanding how important this is and simply listen to what the major shareholders have been communicatuing to the MS board. They at least understand this relevency.
The majority of consumers honestly could not care any less about what kind of hardware or software is running their tablets. How much longer must we keep rehashing the same story?
The tech minority continues to imply that they know what the joe-consumer looks out for, and time again they are proven wrong.
Did iPad consumers buy the iPad because it was ARM and not Intel? No. Did they care that iOS is OSX and not Windows? No.
They bought it because it works well, it's polished, and it's a toaster. Period.
Writing "period" does not make what you say any truer.
iPad consumers did not, in fact, buy the iPad because of the ARM vs Intel, and they didn't care much about OSX vs Windows vs iOS (three different operating systems btw)
But when they bought it, they did realize several things:
- That the battery would last for many hours. This is not possible with any current Intel processor, so while they don't care, Apple's choice does affect their value.
- That it would not run MS-Office, and this stems directly from the OS not being Windows or OSX.
- That most office applications and some web applications would be weird and hard to operate without a mouse and keyboard
So they knew they were getting a toaster. Those of us who don't want a toaster will look elsewhere from the iPad.IMHO Your references to these articles has only demonstrated why MS Windows 7 and 8 although better attempts to design Windows correctly (20 years too late) are ultimately going to be limited in their impact. Most growth will be in the Mobile space.
Windows 8 (and the sandboxed WinRT apps) will run on x86 and ARM.
If you count ARM tablets as the "mobile space" Windows 8 will be there from day 1.
Smartphones will take until 2013 most likely.