Pretty stupid, I gather. Funny how Apple bashers harp that Apple is just good at marketing. What they don't realize is a) they're not just good at marketing, but it is essential, especially as it impacts customer satisfaction and product success and b) how really, really bad Microsoft and Google can be at marketing. A key part of marketing success can/should be being honest with your customers about what your product can and cannot do:
"Doing a side by side with the new iPad in a consistently lit room, we have had many people see more detail on Surface RT than on the Ipad [sic] with more resolution," Bathiche said.
I guess that sounds better than the first draft:
"Doing a side by side comparison with the new iPad in a locked room we have many people claim to see more detail on the Surface RT than on the original iPad," Bathiche said before letting those poor folks go free.
Pretty stupid, I gather. Funny how Apple bashers harp that Apple is just good at marketing. What they don't realize is a) they're not just good at marketing, but it is essential, especially as it impacts customer satisfaction and product success and b) how really, really bad Microsoft and Google can be at marketing. A key part of marketing success can/should be being honest with your customers about what your product can and cannot do:
All Microsoft have to say is that Surface only runs the new Windows App Store apps. Simple. Job done.
Back on topic, this display guy is the same display guy that recently said a Kindle HD screen outperforms the iPad3 in many categories. And he actually had a real device to look at that time. Here, he's making it all up as he doesn't even have a product to look at.
Gets him good press though, all this talk about nothing.
I seriously hope you are joking. The fact that you think that it is "inexcusably pathetic" for it to be running windows is ignorant. The real truth is that Windows RT is a platform created specifically for a tablet. It yields great battery life as it's power management is derived for a tablet. I personally think it's inexcusably pathetic for it to be 2012 and current tablets are running operating systems derived from cell phones. Enjoy your 10 inch iphones and galaxys!
Give me a break, if Windows RT was really so carefully crafted for tablet why it weight as much as Windows 7 (over 9Gb installed) while being totally incompatible with Windows 8 and Windows 8 phone apps?
Surface is a fallacious device, there is so many false assumption with Surface being a Windows compatible devices.
Hope you enjoy running childish metro apps on your Surface
I seriously hope you are joking. The fact that you think that it is "inexcusably pathetic" for it to be running windows is ignorant. The real truth is that Windows RT is a platform created specifically for a tablet. It yields great battery life as it's power management is derived for a tablet. I personally think it's inexcusably pathetic for it to be 2012 and current tablets are running operating systems derived from cell phones. Enjoy your 10 inch iphones and galaxys!
You do know that iOS was originally envisioned for a tablet first right? It was only when Apple considered building a phone did they realize they could adapt the tablet based OS/UI into a smaller package (ala iPhone).
Also, if Windows RT is built specifically for a tablet, why do I always see the surface attached to a keyboard, and why do I never see it in portrait mode? More like RT is built to run laptops with detachable keyboards on ARM architecture.
Digging into iOS shows that outside of screen size and the removal of telephone functions the iOS underpinnings are virtually the same from iphone to ipad.
Explain how this is a bad thing. Digging into iOS shows that outside of the screen size and the removal of touchscreen functions, it's virtually identical to OS X. Your entire argument is completely ruined.
…Windows RT, Windows phone 8 and Windows 8 are based off of a new Kernal with specific instruction sets for X86, Arm tablet and Arm mobile phone.
But… they're not.
The OS size differs greatly from each iteration. As a person who researches each product greatly I'm sure you knew that.
Yes, I knew that. I fail to see how it is a "benefit" in any way or why you would bring that up at all.
I'm assuming that you and I will probably clash when it comes to this particular subject so I will let you have the last word and check this forum for other interesting subjects.
Only because you're completely and utterly wrong about everything you've said.
And here again, someone runs away when they don't have an argument. It's really sad.
I wish Microsoft would clear the air that it isn't better than the ipad.
Good luck with that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trunks817
I also wish Apple would clear the air that 2,048 × 1,536 is overkill on a 9.7 inch screen. If you think you can spot a noticeable difference between 2,048 × 1,536 and 1024×768 on a 9.7 inch screen from an arms length distance I have a bridge I can sell you.
I'm afraid you don't have a good understanding of this. First of all, you need to take a look at an iPad and an iPad 3 before making such a condescending statement. Second, who uses an iPad at arm's length? Third, high res is not just about comparing the same website side by side and seeing which one is better.
Yes. Hardware-wise, it's really similar to the iPad. The pooch is only screwed in the fact that it's running Windows, which is inexcusably pathetic, and the design is unusable. Windows has a domino effect whereby its laughable power management will ruin the battery life (neither model's is even stated yet), etc.
You guys are confusing gyroscopes with accelerometers.
Comments
"Metal Impacts is a leading Manufacturers & Suppliers of Mobile Compactor, Mobile Compactors Racks, Heavy Duty Pallet Racks, Heavy Duty Rack and Compactors Racks in Bangalore, India."
for more details
http://www.metalimpacts.in
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbit_Coach
This brings it really to the point!
How stupid does MSFT think their consumers are?
Pretty stupid, I gather. Funny how Apple bashers harp that Apple is just good at marketing. What they don't realize is a) they're not just good at marketing, but it is essential, especially as it impacts customer satisfaction and product success and b) how really, really bad Microsoft and Google can be at marketing. A key part of marketing success can/should be being honest with your customers about what your product can and cannot do:
http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/17/3514556/windows-8-vs-windows-rt-surface-confused-microsoft-store-employees
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
"Doing a side by side with the new iPad in a consistently lit room, we have had many people see more detail on Surface RT than on the Ipad [sic] with more resolution," Bathiche said.
I guess that sounds better than the first draft:
"Doing a side by side comparison with the new iPad in a locked room we have many people claim to see more detail on the Surface RT than on the original iPad," Bathiche said before letting those poor folks go free.
All Microsoft have to say is that Surface only runs the new Windows App Store apps. Simple. Job done.
Back on topic, this display guy is the same display guy that recently said a Kindle HD screen outperforms the iPad3 in many categories. And he actually had a real device to look at that time. Here, he's making it all up as he doesn't even have a product to look at.
Gets him good press though, all this talk about nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trunks817
I seriously hope you are joking. The fact that you think that it is "inexcusably pathetic" for it to be running windows is ignorant. The real truth is that Windows RT is a platform created specifically for a tablet. It yields great battery life as it's power management is derived for a tablet. I personally think it's inexcusably pathetic for it to be 2012 and current tablets are running operating systems derived from cell phones. Enjoy your 10 inch iphones and galaxys!Give me a break, if Windows RT was really so carefully crafted for tablet why it weight as much as Windows 7 (over 9Gb installed) while being totally incompatible with Windows 8 and Windows 8 phone apps?
Surface is a fallacious device, there is so many false assumption with Surface being a Windows compatible devices.
Hope you enjoy running childish metro apps on your Surface
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trunks817
I seriously hope you are joking. The fact that you think that it is "inexcusably pathetic" for it to be running windows is ignorant. The real truth is that Windows RT is a platform created specifically for a tablet. It yields great battery life as it's power management is derived for a tablet. I personally think it's inexcusably pathetic for it to be 2012 and current tablets are running operating systems derived from cell phones. Enjoy your 10 inch iphones and galaxys!You do know that iOS was originally envisioned for a tablet first right? It was only when Apple considered building a phone did they realize they could adapt the tablet based OS/UI into a smaller package (ala iPhone).
Also, if Windows RT is built specifically for a tablet, why do I always see the surface attached to a keyboard, and why do I never see it in portrait mode? More like RT is built to run laptops with detachable keyboards on ARM architecture.
Originally Posted by Trunks817
Digging into iOS shows that outside of screen size and the removal of telephone functions the iOS underpinnings are virtually the same from iphone to ipad.
Explain how this is a bad thing. Digging into iOS shows that outside of the screen size and the removal of touchscreen functions, it's virtually identical to OS X. Your entire argument is completely ruined.
…Windows RT, Windows phone 8 and Windows 8 are based off of a new Kernal with specific instruction sets for X86, Arm tablet and Arm mobile phone.
But… they're not.
The OS size differs greatly from each iteration. As a person who researches each product greatly I'm sure you knew that.
Yes, I knew that. I fail to see how it is a "benefit" in any way or why you would bring that up at all.
I'm assuming that you and I will probably clash when it comes to this particular subject so I will let you have the last word and check this forum for other interesting subjects.
Only because you're completely and utterly wrong about everything you've said.
And here again, someone runs away when they don't have an argument. It's really sad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trunks817
I wish Microsoft would clear the air that it isn't better than the ipad.Good luck with that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trunks817
I also wish Apple would clear the air that 2,048 × 1,536 is overkill on a 9.7 inch screen. If you think you can spot a noticeable difference between 2,048 × 1,536 and 1024×768 on a 9.7 inch screen from an arms length distance I have a bridge I can sell you.I'm afraid you don't have a good understanding of this. First of all, you need to take a look at an iPad and an iPad 3 before making such a condescending statement. Second, who uses an iPad at arm's length? Third, high res is not just about comparing the same website side by side and seeing which one is better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Yes. Hardware-wise, it's really similar to the iPad. The pooch is only screwed in the fact that it's running Windows, which is inexcusably pathetic, and the design is unusable. Windows has a domino effect whereby its laughable power management will ruin the battery life (neither model's is even stated yet), etc.
You guys are confusing gyroscopes with accelerometers.
Originally Posted by balsy2001
You guys are confusing gyroscopes with accelerometers.
And the Surface and iPad have both. What's your point?