Running a dual boot mode would have been even more confusing if that's possible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac
The only hope this tablet had to succeed is if it could run in dual boot mode to allow a real Windows experience and not a crippled one. That might at least offer some benefit to former netbook customers looking for the portability of a tablet but also needing to use it just like a laptop as well. The 2.0 version will probably address this shortcoming and could fill a niche.
The iPad is a far superior option on many levels and so are pretty much all the android tablets as well. This device will fly first class on a one way trip to the island of misfit toys.
Does it matter? No one wanted to pay a license for it because they would be competing directly with Microsoft which owned the technology in the first place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
There were versions of NT for Alpha, Sun, x86 (both 32 and 64 bit, I believe), and PPC. Not all of them made it to market, but the reports at the time indicated that they were ready to go. How much more portable do you want?
But I'm not talking about system settings but app settings which are easy to access in OS X because its always under the same tab no matter what app you're in, even 3rd party apps. In iOS app settings are hidden in the settings app which you have to first switch to, leaving the app you were in, in order to get to anything.
Check in the app for a "gearwheel" icon, which has been the iOS symbol for 'Settings' in an app. Usually, if not a gear, there is another icons in the upper bar which offers access to settings. Unfortunately, too many apps use the the "Settings" app as well.
Does it matter? No one wanted to pay a license for it because they would be competing directly with Microsoft which owned the technology in the first place.
I don't think that is known.
All we know is that NT was never available for those other platforms. It could have been:
1. It was never ready in spite of the rumors.
2. MS chose not to offer it for sale.
3. Potential OEMs refused to license it.
No one outside of Microsoft knows what really happened.
There were versions of NT for Alpha, Sun, x86 (both 32 and 64 bit, I believe), and PPC. Not all of them made it to market, but the reports at the time indicated that they were ready to go. How much more portable do you want?
NT for Alpha was a possibility, because the NT programming team had begun as the Alpha team at DEC. MS sold the "NT on Alpha" idea to DEC, which terminated their OS efforts for Alpha, and the team moved directly to MS and began NT for x86. In turn, MS announced versions of NT for the other major CPU designs, but none ever emerged from the lab. For the most part, it's just people remembering the MS announcement and overlooking the vapourware indicators.
On the other hand, rumours of x86 versions of Mac OS were circulating after the arrival of System 8. During the days of Apple's Slough of Despair, many 'analysts' were quite sure that Mac on the x86 was imminent, or that Apple was about to license NT for PPC, which did not exist outside a press release.
The only hope this tablet had to succeed is if it could run in dual boot mode to allow a real Windows experience and not a crippled one. That might at least offer some benefit to former netbook customers looking for the portability of a tablet but also needing to use it just like a laptop as well. The 2.0 version will probably address this shortcoming and could fill a niche.
Hate to tell you this, but if it had a ghost of a chance of running a "real" Windows experience, it would have been released that way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullhead
cant blame samesung on this one. Windows RT is a complete abomination. Only an idiot would buy something that bad.
Don't underestimate the number of idiots in this country. RT is secret code for Republican Teabaggers...
I am going to go out on a limb and predict that the stock will enter a death spiral in 2013, with cash flows from Office being the floor for the company's value.
While I did give you a "thumbs up" I do think their stock will drop and Microsoft will be around for a long time albeit no longer as powerful as before.
Enterprise and government will probably upgrade to Win 7 and sit there. Other competitors are already decimating Microsoft's server business wile Apple has done a great job of filling the hole left by Microsoft's absence in the phone and tablet business. Microsoft has shown that they cannot be relied on to be there with product for enterprise and government. Six years MIA in the phone business and not even yet to market with the "real" Windows tablet, while Apple is on version 6 of a unified phone and tablet OS, and on version 4 of tablet hardware.
The people in the "C" suites have demanded that IT figure out a way to incorporate MBAs into the company networks along with the iPad and iPhone. It's now a done deal. Once the pooch is screwed there's no reason to go back. Plus, the MS tax is higher than the alternative.
Finally, iWorks has proven to be "good enough" to bulk of the enterprise and government workers. MS Office still has a place, but it is no longer a "given" like it had been. Enterprise and government have seen that they can operate successfully on less demanding hardware and less costly general office software. The curtain has been pulled aside and the myth has been exposed.
The only hope this tablet had to succeed is if it could run in dual boot mode to allow a real Windows experience and not a crippled one. That might at least offer some benefit to former netbook customers looking for the portability of a tablet but also needing to use it just like a laptop as well. The 2.0 version will probably address this shortcoming and could fill a niche.
Hate to tell you this, but if it had a ghost of a chance of running a "real" Windows experience, it would have been released that way.
One thing I dislike is that when you swipe right to get to search that page is empty. I'd like buttons there for many quick access functions. The search area still up top and the buttons instantly vanish when you start to type.
But if a search query has results those remain visible after returning to the search page. Though they could change the Apps in the Dock with predefined, customizable Settings, like Brightness, Airplane Mode, WiFi & Bluetooth. Like so:
Yeah yeah, shyte mockup, but you get the picture.
Maybe a better solution to quickly access Settings is a Swipe-Up, just like the NC Swipe-Down. But I presume Android has this and would therefore be prior art ¡
I just hope that Apple makes iOS more like OS X. It's nice seeing features move from iOS to OS X but when will we see more foundational practical features move from OS X to iOS?
The facts tell that's not the case:
a) Apart from the initial kernel, has any OSX concept or functionality been added to iOS after the first iOS release? Nope.
b) Has any iOS concept or functionality been added to OSX in a way that OSX needs to be used like if it was iOS? Plenty: Launchpad, autosave+versions (which effectively changes the file paradigm and needs re-learning, because now every file is always open and it's not possible to close files), nonsense Calendar textures, inverted scrolling by default (which is very comfortable for touch interfaces, but completely absurd and nonintuitive for mouse/trackpad interfaces), hidden scrollbars by default, and I guess I'm forgetting something but I don't remember now.
Funnily, I never used any of such "imported from iOS" concepts, because I don't want to use my computer like if it was a phone. I want to use it like it is: a Mac.
So, from all these facts, we can reasonably guess that it's likely to expect to see more iOS concepts introduced into OSX in the future, but it is unlikely that we'll see the power and flexibility of OSX brought into iOS.
I believe we'll closer to see a fully sandboxed OSX (without direct access to the filesystem), than an hypothetical "Files app" for iOS.
People arguing OSX is greater when it becomes more and more like iOS, please... can you enlighten me how are you supposed to use iOS for efficiently design iOS apps, write their code, debug it, and compile it?
Or maybe Apple users aren't expected to write Objective C?
I've used a Surface for a day or two and while the hardware is beautifully designed, overall it's a big fail on many, many counts. Had Microsoft avoided the idea of including RT and just gone with the Metro part on a tablet without all of the extra laptop-like baggage, they might have had something people are interested in. As it stands, the Surface is basically a stunted laptop (or a beefed-up netbook) selling at a premium price. While I was testing out the Surface, I ended up ditching the keyboard and using the Metro interface exclusively as Windows RT turned out to be an overly complicated legacy-style OS which doesn't even give you the benefit of running Windows apps. So why include it? I think Microsoft was worried about selling a "Windows" laptop/netbook/tablet that didn't actually have any windows. I suppose they could rename their new OS "Microsoft Tiles" and be done with it, but it's a good thing that when they entered into the GUI business back in the 1980s they didn't opt to call their OS "Microsoft Mouse" or "Microsoft Menus," that might have caused even more problems for Metro/RT, naming-wise.
I'm a huge fan of Linnaeus's efforts in designing a modern method to cataloging every living thing on earth in a standard way and yet that jerk Melvil Dewey** is a known name and Linnaeus's isn't.
* Linguistics is a branch of anthropology.
** I have nothing against Dewey or his decimal system. Just being flippant for the sake of it.
Check in the app for a "gearwheel" icon, which has been the iOS symbol for 'Settings' in an app. Usually, if not a gear, there is another icons in the upper bar which offers access to settings. Unfortunately, too many apps use the the "Settings" app as well.
Comments
Samsung nixes plans for Windows RT tablets in US, citing 'modest' demand
Wow! Really? I'm...I'm shocked. Shocked I tell you. I thought consumers would go wild for a Windows device that can't run Windows software.
Who could have possibly seen this coming?
Running a dual boot mode would have been even more confusing if that's possible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac
The only hope this tablet had to succeed is if it could run in dual boot mode to allow a real Windows experience and not a crippled one. That might at least offer some benefit to former netbook customers looking for the portability of a tablet but also needing to use it just like a laptop as well. The 2.0 version will probably address this shortcoming and could fill a niche.
The iPad is a far superior option on many levels and so are pretty much all the android tablets as well. This device will fly first class on a one way trip to the island of misfit toys.
Does it matter? No one wanted to pay a license for it because they would be competing directly with Microsoft which owned the technology in the first place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
There were versions of NT for Alpha, Sun, x86 (both 32 and 64 bit, I believe), and PPC. Not all of them made it to market, but the reports at the time indicated that they were ready to go. How much more portable do you want?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullhead
cant blame samesung on this one. Windows RT is a complete abomination. Only an idiot would buy something that bad.
I hear every Microsoft employee is getting an RT tablet.
A Microsoft store was robbed and the thief stole iPads that were there but not a single RT tablet. LOL
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook
Apple should hire you haha.
But I'm not talking about system settings but app settings which are easy to access in OS X because its always under the same tab no matter what app you're in, even 3rd party apps. In iOS app settings are hidden in the settings app which you have to first switch to, leaving the app you were in, in order to get to anything.
Check in the app for a "gearwheel" icon, which has been the iOS symbol for 'Settings' in an app. Usually, if not a gear, there is another icons in the upper bar which offers access to settings. Unfortunately, too many apps use the the "Settings" app as well.
Cheers
I don't think that is known.
All we know is that NT was never available for those other platforms. It could have been:
1. It was never ready in spite of the rumors.
2. MS chose not to offer it for sale.
3. Potential OEMs refused to license it.
No one outside of Microsoft knows what really happened.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
There were versions of NT for Alpha, Sun, x86 (both 32 and 64 bit, I believe), and PPC. Not all of them made it to market, but the reports at the time indicated that they were ready to go. How much more portable do you want?
NT for Alpha was a possibility, because the NT programming team had begun as the Alpha team at DEC. MS sold the "NT on Alpha" idea to DEC, which terminated their OS efforts for Alpha, and the team moved directly to MS and began NT for x86. In turn, MS announced versions of NT for the other major CPU designs, but none ever emerged from the lab. For the most part, it's just people remembering the MS announcement and overlooking the vapourware indicators.
On the other hand, rumours of x86 versions of Mac OS were circulating after the arrival of System 8. During the days of Apple's Slough of Despair, many 'analysts' were quite sure that Mac on the x86 was imminent, or that Apple was about to license NT for PPC, which did not exist outside a press release.
Cheers
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleSauce007
I hear every Microsoft employee is getting an RT tablet.
And this will be the mandatory image on the login screen:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwmac
The only hope this tablet had to succeed is if it could run in dual boot mode to allow a real Windows experience and not a crippled one. That might at least offer some benefit to former netbook customers looking for the portability of a tablet but also needing to use it just like a laptop as well. The 2.0 version will probably address this shortcoming and could fill a niche.
Hate to tell you this, but if it had a ghost of a chance of running a "real" Windows experience, it would have been released that way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullhead
cant blame samesung on this one. Windows RT is a complete abomination. Only an idiot would buy something that bad.
Don't underestimate the number of idiots in this country. RT is secret code for Republican Teabaggers...
I remember the transaction being referred to it as "NeXT bought Apple for a negative $400M"
I never bought that PPC rumor...
Mandatory; good one! How about this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
This is the beginning of the end for Microsoft.
I am going to go out on a limb and predict that the stock will enter a death spiral in 2013, with cash flows from Office being the floor for the company's value.
While I did give you a "thumbs up" I do think their stock will drop and Microsoft will be around for a long time albeit no longer as powerful as before.
Enterprise and government will probably upgrade to Win 7 and sit there. Other competitors are already decimating Microsoft's server business wile Apple has done a great job of filling the hole left by Microsoft's absence in the phone and tablet business. Microsoft has shown that they cannot be relied on to be there with product for enterprise and government. Six years MIA in the phone business and not even yet to market with the "real" Windows tablet, while Apple is on version 6 of a unified phone and tablet OS, and on version 4 of tablet hardware.
The people in the "C" suites have demanded that IT figure out a way to incorporate MBAs into the company networks along with the iPad and iPhone. It's now a done deal. Once the pooch is screwed there's no reason to go back. Plus, the MS tax is higher than the alternative.
Finally, iWorks has proven to be "good enough" to bulk of the enterprise and government workers. MS Office still has a place, but it is no longer a "given" like it had been. Enterprise and government have seen that they can operate successfully on less demanding hardware and less costly general office software. The curtain has been pulled aside and the myth has been exposed.
Resurgent Transvestites...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
And this will be the mandatory image on the login screen:
How about this one: "Who Knows what evil lurks in the hears of men? The Shadow knows!!"
'Microsoft. To boldly fail where no one has taken failure before.'
But if a search query has results those remain visible after returning to the search page. Though they could change the Apps in the Dock with predefined, customizable Settings, like Brightness, Airplane Mode, WiFi & Bluetooth. Like so:
Yeah yeah, shyte mockup, but you get the picture.
Maybe a better solution to quickly access Settings is a Swipe-Up, just like the NC Swipe-Down. But I presume Android has this and would therefore be prior art ¡
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook
That's pretty much true.
I just hope that Apple makes iOS more like OS X. It's nice seeing features move from iOS to OS X but when will we see more foundational practical features move from OS X to iOS?
The facts tell that's not the case:
a) Apart from the initial kernel, has any OSX concept or functionality been added to iOS after the first iOS release? Nope.
b) Has any iOS concept or functionality been added to OSX in a way that OSX needs to be used like if it was iOS? Plenty: Launchpad, autosave+versions (which effectively changes the file paradigm and needs re-learning, because now every file is always open and it's not possible to close files), nonsense Calendar textures, inverted scrolling by default (which is very comfortable for touch interfaces, but completely absurd and nonintuitive for mouse/trackpad interfaces), hidden scrollbars by default, and I guess I'm forgetting something but I don't remember now.
Funnily, I never used any of such "imported from iOS" concepts, because I don't want to use my computer like if it was a phone. I want to use it like it is: a Mac.
So, from all these facts, we can reasonably guess that it's likely to expect to see more iOS concepts introduced into OSX in the future, but it is unlikely that we'll see the power and flexibility of OSX brought into iOS.
I believe we'll closer to see a fully sandboxed OSX (without direct access to the filesystem), than an hypothetical "Files app" for iOS.
People arguing OSX is greater when it becomes more and more like iOS, please... can you enlighten me how are you supposed to use iOS for efficiently design iOS apps, write their code, debug it, and compile it?
Or maybe Apple users aren't expected to write Objective C?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I'm a huge fan of Linnaeus's efforts in designing a modern method to cataloging every living thing on earth in a standard way and yet that jerk Melvil Dewey** is a known name and Linnaeus's isn't.
* Linguistics is a branch of anthropology.
** I have nothing against Dewey or his decimal system. Just being flippant for the sake of it.
Not sure who Dewey is, but I know Linnaeus...
Quote:
Originally Posted by minicapt
Check in the app for a "gearwheel" icon, which has been the iOS symbol for 'Settings' in an app. Usually, if not a gear, there is another icons in the upper bar which offers access to settings. Unfortunately, too many apps use the the "Settings" app as well.
Cheers
As Apple guidelines invite developers to...