Bill Gates: Android and iOS tab users will eventually switch to Windows

[TheHateMachine]

Done. Atom powered tablets. Granted the horsepower isn't the same, but in day to day use you will never notice it.

I am interested to see what Silvermont will do with the Atom line. It looks like they are going to merge Atom and Medfield into the same line, sub in HD Integrated 4000+ instead of PowerVR and get even more power/less wattage. Sounds exciting... if the marketing data Intel has provided is actually true and not just smoke then Silvermont will shape up to be quite the big deal in Windows and Android devices.

 

[Renzatic]

Yes I agree about it being only half done, but by the same token I don't really see why Metro needs to exist when all they needed to do was work on making their desktop touch friendly. As for WinRT it needs to die a quick death, it will confuse consumers and fragment the market, it is a failed experiment that is dragging MS down.

WinRT the platform ended up being a giant waste of everyone's time. Now that Atom processors can just about match ARM chips in battery power, I can't think of a hugely compelling reason for MS to keep it around.

But I was talking about the WinRT API, which could eventually be the modern replacement for the still solid, but getting kinda long in the tooth Win32 API. Right now (much like everything to do with MS' tablet strategy) it's only halfway done, but it could end up being the true bridging point between mobile and the desktop. One API used for everything from dinky mobile apps on cheap phones all the way up to high end desktops using content creation programs.

MS already has all their platforms running the same core OS now, but to complete the unification, they need an API flexible enough to do everything from Angry Birds to 3DS Max. This could...should...be WinRT.

I think Metro was their attempt to "look" mobile, to look similar to their windows phones, to have a fresh and modern "mobile" look. But they needed to fully make the leap, not just put a "mobile" wrapper over the desktop.

Yup. The biggest problem with Win8 is that it's got the two environments that only interact with each other in the most basic ways. Thing is, as much as they should try to unify desktops, laptops, tablets, and phones together with the same OS and APIs, they shouldn't try to make one UI that fits all of them.

...because it can't be done.

The desktop as it is right now on Windows 8 is great for a keyboard and mouse on a big screen. Probably one of the best they've done. But it sucks on a tablet. All the UI bits and pieces are too small to see comfortably on an 8-10" screen, and are too little to hit with your finger. You can do it with a stylus, but that should be a productivity tool, not a necessary bit to navigate your UI.

Inversely, Metro sucks on desktop machines. Everything's too large, the apps are full screen, everything's generally a giant waste of space being used on a machine that can comfortably flit between applications nested on a single monitor.

So should they make the desktop more touch friendly? What could they do? Make the title bars huge, so you can hit the min/max/close buttons more easily with a fingertip? That'd be about as much a waste of space on a tablet as Metro is for a desktop machine. Windowed environments in general just don't work with touch.

Whatever the answer to the great mobile-PC divide is, it won't be a unified UI. I've come to realize that if you want the best experience possible, each platform has to have it's own way of interacting with it. Implementing a setup so that flipping from one platform to the other, being able to use the same app in two different environments comfortably, is MS' biggest challenge.

Honestly, I'm kinda interested in seeing what they come up with.

 

[spinedoc77]

I am interested to see what Silvermont will do with the Atom line. It looks like they are going to merge Atom and Medfield into the same line, sub in HD Integrated 4000+ instead of PowerVR and get even more power/less wattage. Sounds exciting... if the marketing data Intel has provided is actually true and not just smoke then Silvermont will shape up to be quite the big deal in Windows and Android devices.

Yeah I just read about Silvermont, I'm totally salivating for that to get here. IMO MS should have been smoking Android and iOS, but they made so many key mistakes. MS did not release an Atom tablet, they let the OEM's do it, and the OEM's in typical fashion took their time and ruined the buzz around windows 8 launch along with very buggy drivers and a chip on their shoulders. MS released the surface pro which is neither a good laptop nor a good tablet, and lets not forget the atrocity of a mistake with Windows RT. Couple all that with the Metro "wrapper" on the legacy desktop that is Win8 and it's no wonder that they are in the position they are in now.

I've stated right since the beginning, MS should have just released a kick ass Atom powered windows tablet and priced it exactly the same as an ipad then went on a marketing blitz about the differences between the 2, but still having the same thinness, weight, battery time, etc.

But back to silvermont, that's going to be incredible. Having a tablet the thinness and battery life of an ipad (or thinner with better battery life by then) AND having the horsepower of something like the surface pro.

 

[TheHateMachine]

Yeah I just read about Silvermont, I'm totally salivating for that to get here. IMO MS should have been smoking Android and iOS, but they made so many key mistakes. MS did not release an Atom tablet, they let the OEM's do it, and the OEM's in typical fashion took their time and ruined the buzz around windows 8 launch along with very buggy drivers and a chip on their shoulders. MS released the surface pro which is neither a good laptop nor a good tablet, and lets not forget the atrocity of a mistake with Windows RT. Couple all that with the Metro "wrapper" on the legacy desktop that is Win8 and it's no wonder that they are in the position they are in now.

I've stated right since the beginning, MS should have just released a kick ass Atom powered windows tablet and priced it exactly the same as an ipad then went on a marketing blitz about the differences between the 2, but still having the same thinness, weight, battery time, etc.

But back to silvermont, that's going to be incredible. Having a tablet the thinness and battery life of an ipad (or thinner with better battery life by then) AND having the horsepower of something like the surface pro.

I own the Surface RT and I like it but if it had an Atom that would be all the much better. That slick Surface design and build plus all the benefits of x86. However there is still a benefit to Windows RT devices. They are typically cheaper and they make great machines that have office and aren't under any threat of malicious software.

I honestly think Microsoft decided to go with an ARM based machine because it was cheaper and they were looking for a high margin iPad competitor. Plus they probably were under the impression that an Arm based Surface would cut into their sales of the Pro model (This is probably very true) I'm sure Atom chips would cost them more than the Tegra chips they got. I think I read somewhere that Nvidia stated they were let go at like $13 bucks per chip. We all know Intel isn't in the business of nearly giving their stuff away.

----------

The desktop as it is right now on Windows 8 is great for a keyboard and mouse on a big screen. Probably one of the best they've done. But it sucks on a tablet. All the UI bits and pieces are too small to see comfortably on an 8-10" screen, and are too little to hit with your finger. You can do it with a stylus, but that should be a productivity tool, not a necessary bit to navigate your UI.

Inversely, Metro sucks on desktop machines. Everything's too large, the apps are full screen, everything's generally a giant waste of space being used on a machine that can comfortably flit between applications nested on a single monitor.

So should they make the desktop more touch friendly? What could they do? Make the title bars huge, so you can hit the min/max/close buttons more easily with a fingertip? That'd be about as much a waste of space on a tablet as Metro is for a desktop machine. Windowed environments in general just don't work with touch.

Whatever the answer to the great mobile-PC divide is, it won't be a unified UI. I've come to realize that if you want the best experience possible, each platform has to have it's own way of interacting with it. Implementing a setup so that flipping from one platform to the other, being able to use the same app in two different environments comfortably, is MS' biggest challenge.

Honestly, I'm kinda interested in seeing what they come up with.

Supposedly they will be solving some nags with 8.1. I have heard of a few thing such as changing the scale in modern to having up to 4 metro applications tiled at once.

They could easily do a few things here or there to solve modern problems. It's new and it could be easy with them if they made the proper code concessions.

Desktop however is an aging beast that has just been ported and adapted and added on top of. They need to work on the resolution independence they have on modern and bring it to the archiac desktop. That, I believe would solve a lot of people's gripes.

 

[spinedoc77]

WinRT the platform ended up being a giant waste of everyone's time. Now that Atom processors can just about match ARM chips in battery power, I can't think of a hugely compelling reason for MS to keep it around.

But I was talking about the WinRT API, which could eventually be the modern replacement for the still solid, but getting kinda long in the tooth Win32 API. Right now (much like everything to do with MS' tablet strategy) it's only halfway done, but it could end up being the true bridging point between mobile and the desktop. One API used for everything from dinky mobile apps on cheap phones all the way up to high end desktops using content creation programs.

MS already has all their platforms running the same core OS now, but to complete the unification, they need an API flexible enough to do everything from Angry Birds to 3DS Max. This could...should...be WinRT.



Yup. The biggest problem with Win8 is that it's got the two environments that only interact with each other in the most basic ways. Thing is, as much as they should try to unify desktops, laptops, tablets, and phones together with the same OS and APIs, they shouldn't try to make one UI that fits all of them.

...because it can't be done.

The desktop as it is right now on Windows 8 is great for a keyboard and mouse on a big screen. Probably one of the best they've done. But it sucks on a tablet. All the UI bits and pieces are too small to see comfortably on an 8-10" screen, and are too little to hit with your finger. You can do it with a stylus, but that should be a productivity tool, not a necessary bit to navigate your UI.

Inversely, Metro sucks on desktop machines. Everything's too large, the apps are full screen, everything's generally a giant waste of space being used on a machine that can comfortably flit between applications nested on a single monitor.

So should they make the desktop more touch friendly? What could they do? Make the title bars huge, so you can hit the min/max/close buttons more easily with a fingertip? That'd be about as much a waste of space on a tablet as Metro is for a desktop machine. Windowed environments in general just don't work with touch.

Whatever the answer to the great mobile-PC divide is, it won't be a unified UI. I've come to realize that if you want the best experience possible, each platform has to have it's own way of interacting with it. Implementing a setup so that flipping from one platform to the other, being able to use the same app in two different environments comfortably, is MS' biggest challenge.

Honestly, I'm kinda interested in seeing what they come up with.

WinRT needs to die IMO, all aspects of it. Games and mobile apps can be programmed for windows, although it's true they may want to have some commonality for windows phone and windows tablets with full windows.

As for the UI I have no trouble whatsoever using my finger on the desktop on a 10.6" screen, but I do think the desktop needs to be a bit more finger friendly, but I don't think iOS or Android are necessarily "that" much better in terms of finger navigation, and if they are then the app/program suffers in functionality because of it.

BUT.... the caveat here is that 7-8" windows tablets are on the horizon, now the desktop on those will be completely horrible for touch navigation. It's another disaster waiting to happen because of MS constant shortsightedness.

I kind of agree, that a unified OS might just be unfeasible, I'm not quite sure how I feel about it either way. I know that on my windows tablet I very rarely touch Metro, using the windows desktop 99.999% of the time and am quite happy that way. My only gripes are the onscreen keyboard functionality and the overall DPI, especially with higher resolution screens like on the Pro. But yes I think not just resizing, but rethinking taskbar menus and such would go a VERY long way in making win8 useable on a touchscreen instead of junk like Metro.

----------

I own the Surface RT and I like it but if it had an Atom that would be all the much better. That slick Surface design and build plus all the benefits of x86. However there is still a benefit to Windows RT devices. They are typically cheaper and they make great machines that have office and aren't under any threat of malicious software.

I honestly think Microsoft decided to go with an ARM based machine because it was cheaper and they were looking for a high margin iPad competitor. Plus they probably were under the impression that an Arm based Surface would cut into their sales of the Pro model (This is probably very true) I'm sure Atom chips would cost them more than the Tegra chips they got. I think I read somewhere that Nvidia stated they were let go at like $13 bucks per chip. We all know Intel isn't in the business of nearly giving their stuff away.

The atom tablets are not much more than the RT ones, actually if memory serves me correctly they are at least about the same and in some cases even cheaper. I believe Asus, for example, had a very nice Atom tablet for $499, I owned it for a couple of weeks and it was a little beast.

I don't know, maybe RT would have made sense if it was priced at a MUCH lower price point, but then again maybe not. For better or for worse MS chief competition was and is iOS and Android and they were not going to come even close to beating them with RT. Now a full iteration of Windows, that's something to talk about. But MS did not capitalize on that incredible strength, if anything it seems they completely ignored it and continue to do so.

 

[maxosx]

Coming from Bill Gates I'm a bit taken aback. However they do have massive staying power, enabling them to ride things out. Yet I don't see it happening. I do hope I'm wrong and that at least MS becomes a third choice at some point.

But then again, no one expected IE to have the market share it has today. That's a browser I use on a PC, the same way I use Safari on my Macs. To visit the respective OEM's sites for downloads and such.

Otherwise for both platforms I use daily, nothing beats the speed and reliability of Google Chrome as my default browser.

 

[mib1800]

This kind of post is disturbing. I just love how some people seem to be upset at Apple dominating space in the tech world but here we are with a post like this that spells out that MS domination is the only domination that SHOULD exists.
You as a consumer you should be happy that there are other choices outside of Microsoft. The world has gotten tired of being forced to use Windows and you are in another world if you think MS will always be dominant. They've monopolized the world enough. "Mac OS hasn't made a dent in Windows domination." Are you listening to yourself with a post like that? Windows comes preinstalled on any PC that is not a Mac. It's certainly isn't about choice, it's about cheap and if a person wants cheap Windows is the only option.

Take your Mac (running on MacOS) and plug into to a typical office environment. Can it still function when interfacing to office, ERP, finance, HR systems etc etc?

Well people are realizing that they don't need Windows to fulfill their needs and the iPad is the one that is being chosen by businesses, hospitals, banks, insurance agencies and the ever popular home user.

iPAD can replace Windows entirely?? Really? I ask again REALLY?

See, unlike MS who pushes Windows in the users face in order to maintain domination, Apple offers a product that people CHOOSE to use and it earns itself domination that way.

I am not that supportive of MS either. But the reality is that Windows is too entrenched. Sometimes it is just not about choosing what you like. It is about choosing what can work.

 

[tech4all]

You have actually describe buying mac, hilarious.

Guess it doesn't take much to amuse you.

 

[HenryDJP]

Take your Mac (running on MacOS) and plug into to a typical office environment. Can it still function when interfacing to office, ERP, finance, HR systems etc etc?

Hilarious post from you. Congrats to you for thinking it requires a Windows machine to run an office. The only reason a Mac couldn't interface with any of that would be due to the software being only written for Windows. But thanks, I don't need my Mac to run boring spreadsheets and Word docs like virtually all business environments do daily.
I just love how you Windows fans always get defensive and make this about Mac. I never brought up Mac. The discussion is about Tablets. It must really bother you to know that Bill Gates is not only delusional but a complete non-visionary for future tech.

No problem though, since you brought up Mac I'll just use mine where no professional uses Windows, in a recording studio. You know? The place that record companies use to remaster ALL the commercial music you listen to? Yeah, that place, the place that only uses Macs and not Windows machines? Yeah, that place.

 

[ReanimationN]

The atom tablets are not much more than the RT ones, actually if memory serves me correctly they are at least about the same and in some cases even cheaper. I believe Asus, for example, had a very nice Atom tablet for $499, I owned it for a couple of weeks and it was a little beast.

Is that the Vivotab Smart (me400c)? I bought one this week and am quite disappointed in it. It's so frustratingly close to what I want... but it's just not quite there yet. I bought it hoping for a decent trade-off between size and portability, performance and x86 compatibility. I definitely got a nice, light tablet, but the Vivotab struggles so much with desktop apps that I may as well have bought an RT device. It runs Windows 8 apps pretty well (other than some apps that wouldn't start at all- e.g. one of the Youtube apps I tried), but desktop apps struggled big time. Accessing the iTunes Store effectively froze the tablet for a whole minute. I know iTunes is a ridiculous resource hog, but that seemed really poor, even for an Atom processor. Flash videos on some sites also struggle playing at resolutions beyond 360p. I suspect I may have a dud unit though in terms of performance though- it definitely has a dud screen (it's really yellow), so I'm going to exchange it and see if the next one I get is any better. It definitely misses quite a few of my taps in Windows 8 apps, plus some of my taps on the home button (one of the biggest reasons why I hate capacitive buttons).

I think Windows 8 tablets with the next generation Atom processors are going to be absolutely epic. The Atom just needs a performance boost and it will be perfect for tablets.

 

[HenryDJP]

I am not that supportive of MS either. But the reality is that Windows is too entrenched. Sometimes it is just not about choosing what you like. It is about choosing what can work.

Uh no, nice try though, for you it's about giving in an taking what's pushed at you when you as the consumer can easily vote with your own wallet. Since you seem to choose not to then you're just allowing yourself to be forced when there's plenty of ways out.
Other than any specific pieces of software for the particular environment you happen to be in there's nothing a Windows machine is more capable of than a Mac and as far as Office, most documents are being presented on cross platform documents such as PDF's. I know you desperately wish for the world to stay Windows dominant but it's no longer 1995 when Windows appeared to be the only system the world would be forced to use forever but that time has successfully began to fade.

 

[Renzatic]

Supposedly they will be solving some nags with 8.1. I have heard of a few thing such as changing the scale in modern to having up to 4 metro applications tiled at once.

Yeah...I dunno about the 4 Metro apps side by side thing. The current ratio works alright for multitasking between two apps, because it's easy to just side from one to the other without any effort. More than that, and the screen will become way too crowded without any one app being usable.

They could easily do a few things here or there to solve modern problems. It's new and it could be easy with them if they made the proper code concessions.

Other than expanding upon WinRT (the API just to clarify), I'd say most of the problems are UI related. The biggest problem most people have with Windows 8 is that it bounces you around to different versions of the same apps and settings depending on how you call them up. If you go to the settings from the charms menu, or call it from inside the new Start screen, it calls up the Metro version of the app. Do a search, and you'll get a mix of the old desktop versions, and the Metro ones. It's confusing as hell for people just starting out with it. MS needs to bring it all together and make the UI feel much more cohesive.

And the first way they'll do that is to not use fullscreen apps as the defaults on a desktop machine.

Desktop however is an aging beast that has just been ported and adapted and added on top of. They need to work on the resolution independence they have on modern and bring it to the archiac desktop. That, I believe would solve a lot of people's gripes.

The desktop could use some updating and a little TLC, but the concepts themselves are as fine now as they have been for the last 20 odd years. The only problem with it is it doesn't work well with touchscreens. I'll answer why, and what I think could be done when I reply to Spinedoc down below.

 

[Renzatic]

WinRT needs to die IMO, all aspects of it. Games and mobile apps can be programmed for windows, although it's true they may want to have some commonality for windows phone and windows tablets with full windows.

Having an API that can work just as well for building a mobile app as it does a full on high end desktop program would be a pretty nice thing to have. WinRT has the potential to be just that. It's only capable of cheesy mobile apps right now, but if MS expands upon it, it could be the perfect catch all solution, and a great replacement for Win32.

As for the UI I have no trouble whatsoever using my finger on the desktop on a 10.6" screen, but I do think the desktop needs to be a bit more finger friendly, but I don't think iOS or Android are necessarily "that" much better in terms of finger navigation, and if they are then the app/program suffers in functionality because of it.

...

I kind of agree, that a unified OS might just be unfeasible, I'm not quite sure how I feel about it either way. I know that on my windows tablet I very rarely touch Metro, using the windows desktop 99.999% of the time and am quite happy that way. My only gripes are the onscreen keyboard functionality and the overall DPI, especially with higher resolution screens like on the Pro. But yes I think not just resizing, but rethinking taskbar menus and such would go a VERY long way in making win8 useable on a touchscreen instead of junk like Metro.

I just don't think that a windows based UI works with fingers. All that dragging, docking, and resizing works great with a mouse, but doing all that on a small screened tablet is way too cumbersome.

You, I, and most everyone else on here are old hand computer geeks. We'll be willing to put up with the quirks and hiccups for the sake of added functionality. But it's still not ideal. A good UI needs to be both functional and easy to use. A desktop UI on a tablet is more the former, less the latter.

In my opinion, metro snapping is a great first step towards multitasking on a tablet. Being able to quarter dock (or half dock) two apps side by side is a handy feature to have. The only downside to it is you have to use a 16:9 screen to give all your apps the most room.

Take makes it easier to multitask between two apps, but what about people who use more? You could fix that with a virtual desktop type setup. Something sorta like mission control. You could have Metro Office and IE docked on one screen, and a file explorer opened on another.

And you launch apps or switch desktops by using the good old fashioned Windows taskbar. You know, I've always been of the option that if MS kept the taskbar visible at all times, no one would have any problems going to a separate screen to launch apps. It and the Start screen could be the bridging points between a desktop UI a touched based one. The only difference between the two would be how it treats apps. Desktops launch windows when you click on an icon (or tile), tablets launch them fullscreen and dockable. Both of them manage open apps or launch new ones using the taskbar, and both go to the Start screen when you click the Windows button.

This way, you'd have the same OS running the same programs, but the UI is tailored slightly different depending on what it's running on. With a bit of polish and shine, it could work fairly well. You'd have something that functions a little differently, but still has enough of the same anchor points so it doesn't feel like you're moving to an entirely different OS.

Or in short, it's unified where it needs to be unified, different where it needs to be different.

edit: If you want to know what I'm getting at, just look at Gnome 3.8 on Linux. It's just shy of being a perfect touch/mouse unified OS.

BUT.... the caveat here is that 7-8" windows tablets are on the horizon, now the desktop on those will be completely horrible for touch navigation. It's another disaster waiting to happen because of MS constant shortsightedness.

Yeah, I'm not getting the 8" tablet thing at all. I just don't see it working unless people stick to Metro 100% of the time. The only good point about it is MS is making Win 8.1 run even thinner so it'll still be smooth on lower end hardware. That's a bonus at least, but...ehhh...

 

[spinedoc77]

Is that the Vivotab Smart (me400c)? I bought one this week and am quite disappointed in it. It's so frustratingly close to what I want... but it's just not quite there yet. I bought it hoping for a decent trade-off between size and portability, performance and x86 compatibility. I definitely got a nice, light tablet, but the Vivotab struggles so much with desktop apps that I may as well have bought an RT device. It runs Windows 8 apps pretty well (other than some apps that wouldn't start at all- e.g. one of the Youtube apps I tried), but desktop apps struggled big time. Accessing the iTunes Store effectively froze the tablet for a whole minute. I know iTunes is a ridiculous resource hog, but that seemed really poor, even for an Atom processor. Flash videos on some sites also struggle playing at resolutions beyond 360p. I suspect I may have a dud unit though in terms of performance though- it definitely has a dud screen (it's really yellow), so I'm going to exchange it and see if the next one I get is any better. It definitely misses quite a few of my taps in Windows 8 apps, plus some of my taps on the home button (one of the biggest reasons why I hate capacitive buttons).

I think Windows 8 tablets with the next generation Atom processors are going to be absolutely epic. The Atom just needs a performance boost and it will be perfect for tablets.

That's very odd, the vivotab I had was a little monster, it ate up youtube and anything on the desktop I threw at it, including PDF editing, photoshop, firefox with 10-15 tabs open, etc etc. I had iTunes installed, but honestly only opened it once or twice but it seemed to run ok. Flash was quite nice as well, no issues other than the issues Flash brings to any PC.

I ended up with a Lenovo thinkpad though, as I needed the 3g connectivity and wanted the pen/digitizer. I've tried/owned almost all the current Atom tablets out there and I owned the surface pro for a couple of weeks as well. It's pretty transparent having an Atom tablet for the most part, you would never know you aren't on a desktop. The times you do it's mostly writing large files where the Atom does slow down quite a bit, and of course gaming is pretty bad.

But hopefully these and your issues will be addressed soon with the new Atom and Ivy Bridge CPU's that are coming out soon, these are just growing pains of a new market. It's like picking up an ipad 1 or 2 and trying to run certain apps on them.

----------

Having an API that can work just as well for building a mobile app as it does a full on high end desktop program would be a pretty nice thing to have. WinRT has the potential to be just that. It's only capable of cheesy mobile apps right now, but if MS expands upon it, it could be the perfect catch all solution, and a great replacement for Win32.



I just don't think that a windows based UI works with fingers. All that dragging, docking, and resizing works great with a mouse, but doing all that on a small screened tablet is way too cumbersome.

You, I, and most everyone else on here are old hand computer geeks. We'll be willing to put up with the quirks and hiccups for the sake of added functionality. But it's still not ideal. A good UI needs to be both functional and easy to use. A desktop UI on a tablet is more the former, less the latter.

In my opinion, metro snapping is a great first step towards multitasking on a tablet. Being able to quarter dock (or half dock) two apps side by side is a handy feature to have. The only downside to it is you have to use a 16:9 screen to give all your apps the most room.

Take makes it easier to multitask between two apps, but what about people who use more? You could fix that with a virtual desktop type setup. Something sorta like mission control. You could have Metro Office and IE docked on one screen, and a file explorer opened on another.

And you launch apps or switch desktops by using the good old fashioned Windows taskbar. You know, I've always been of the option that if MS kept the taskbar visible at all times, no one would have any problems going to a separate screen to launch apps. It and the Start screen could be the bridging points between a desktop UI a touched based one. The only difference between the two would be how it treats apps. Desktops launch windows when you click on an icon (or tile), tablets launch them fullscreen and dockable. Both of them manage open apps or launch new ones using the taskbar, and both go to the Start screen when you click the Windows button.

This way, you'd have the same OS running the same programs, but the UI is tailored slightly different depending on what it's running on. With a bit of polish and shine, it could work fairly well. You'd have something that functions a little differently, but still has enough of the same anchor points so it doesn't feel like you're moving to an entirely different OS.

Or in short, it's unified where it needs to be unified, different where it needs to be different.

edit: If you want to know what I'm getting at, just look at Gnome 3.8 on Linux. It's just shy of being a perfect touch/mouse unified OS.



Yeah, I'm not getting the 8" tablet thing at all. I just don't see it working unless people stick to Metro 100% of the time. The only good point about it is MS is making Win 8.1 run even thinner so it'll still be smooth on lower end hardware. That's a bonus at least, but...ehhh...

Yeah maybe it's just my old computer geek side of me that doesn't mind using the desktop on a tablet, I can see that being part of the truth. Honestly I don't mind it that much, even working with files in file manager and such, but that may still just be the tech side of me and years of training. Some things you don't even know until they are invented, who would ever have thought that some of the ways we do things on the iPad would be so intuitive before they were invented?

But things like metro snapping don't make sense to me in that they seem like steps backwards. I mean we have windows snapping on the desktop already, and if I want I can have 10 windows open, arguably useless but still I can do it if I want to, why limit myself?

Don't get me started on the Metro start screen, it's one step away from being useless IMO. Hey look, I'm more than willing to give Metro a chance, but it is just so badly thought out, and you know I'm a self admitted windows fan boy and I still hate Metro. The start button/menu system is so much superior when you have dozens if not hundreds of programs and each program has it's own subprograms, and also for organizing media, documents, shortcuts, etc. Doubly so for the concept of the desktop which was invented as a "desktop", something to mimic your physical desktop where you might have documents and files laid out in front of you. You can't get by simple human functionality, no matter where tech goes our physical needs and functionality remain the same.

Great discussion BTW.

edit: Just to add, if MS simply added something as incredibly stupidly simple as folders in the Metro start screen I think much of my disgust would go away. You just can't organize anything efficiently there, and this seems like a common theme in Metro, another example would be "pinning"favorites in Metro internet explorer.

 

[APlotdevice]

Yeah maybe it's just my old computer geek side of me that doesn't mind using the desktop on a tablet, I can see that being part of the truth. Honestly I don't mind it that much, even working with files in file manager and such, but that may still just be the tech side of me and years of training. Some things you don't even know until they are invented, who would ever have thought that some of the ways we do things on the iPad would be so intuitive before they were invented?

But things like metro snapping don't make sense to me in that they seem like steps backwards. I mean we have windows snapping on the desktop already, and if I want I can have 10 windows open, arguably useless but still I can do it if I want to, why limit myself?

Don't get me started on the Metro start screen, it's one step away from being useless IMO. Hey look, I'm more than willing to give Metro a chance, but it is just so badly thought out, and you know I'm a self admitted windows fan boy and I still hate Metro. The start button/menu system is so much superior when you have dozens if not hundreds of programs and each program has it's own subprograms, and also for organizing media, documents, shortcuts, etc. Doubly so for the concept of the desktop which was invented as a "desktop", something to mimic your physical desktop where you might have documents and files laid out in front of you. You can't get by simple human functionality, no matter where tech goes our physical needs and functionality remain the same.

I agree with most of this. IMO the "modern" interface (ie metro) should have been an enhanced desktop... as in the icon space that appears below folders and application windows... not a start menu replacement.

 

[SlCKB0Y]

For me iOS and Android were stop gap measures before we had hardware capable of running a real OS like windows or OSx.

I've read a lot of these kinds of posts from you and I would argue that your requirements are relatively rare. The single purpose nature of the apps, simplicity, and always-on nature associated with these devices is what made them ridiculously popular in the first place. A lot of the things that you want in a tablet seem either to run counter to this or could only exist in a perfect world.

Don't forget, Microsoft had nearly a decade of attempts to do this stuff before Apple released the iPad and they failed not just on the hardware side but also on the software side.

Bottom line is it is not possible to make an OS or app which deals with both touch and mouse input without some kind of compromise.

The same kinds of compromise need to be made with hardware. For what you're suggesting to work, MS is going to need to make the hardware requirements of their desktop OS remain absolutely static (or reduce significantly) for a good number of years whilst x86 hardware catches up to ARM in terms of power consumption and heat emission as even todays Atoms are not even close yet.

The x86 OS which is most close today to what is required would be ChromeOS. I'm pretty interested to see what happens with this over the next few years.

 

[spinedoc77]

I've read a lot of these kinds of posts from you and I would argue that your requirements are relatively rare. The single purpose nature of the apps, simplicity, and always-on nature associated with these devices is what made them ridiculously popular in the first place. A lot of the things that you want in a tablet seem either to run counter to this or could only exist in a perfect world.

Don't forget, Microsoft had nearly a decade of attempts to do this stuff before Apple released the iPad and they failed not just on the hardware side but also on the software side.

Bottom line is it is not possible to make an OS or app which deals with both touch and mouse input without some kind of compromise.

The same kinds of compromise need to be made with hardware. For what you're suggesting to work, MS is going to need to make the hardware requirements of their desktop OS remain absolutely static (or reduce significantly) for a good number of years whilst x86 hardware catches up to ARM in terms of power consumption and heat emission as even todays Atoms are not even close yet.

The x86 OS which is most close today to what is required would be ChromeOS. I'm pretty interested to see what happens with this over the next few years.

Great discussion. IMO you are correct, MS got this wrong for many years, although we can't necessarily blame MS without also blaming technology, the form factor and battery life just wasn't there. Apple changed the game by concentrating on these things, but make no mistake, iOS was invented in part due to hardware limitations, it was an OS which could be instant on and use very little battery life.

My main point is that if you can have a full OS, one that can connect and interface with the vast majority of technology, can do things like run any of the millions of USB devices out there, can run any of the tens of millions of legacy software programs, can hook up to very propietary systems like for example in healthcare, etc etc. If you can have an OS like that AND have the battery life, form factor, instant on, etc etc of iOS, then why wouldn't you? I mean if Apple came out with OSx for the ipad tomorrow would you argue against it?

I think that future is here today, there is no more need for iOS, it has served its purpose. iOS not being absorbed into OSx has more to do with not cannibalizing laptop sales IMO. Also if what you say is true, that we don't need a full OS for our mobile needs, to some degree the question that begs to be asked is why didn't Laptops develop with more simple OS'? I know it's a more complex question, and of course technology plays a role in it, but it's still interesting to consider, heck why didn't Apple put iOS on all of their laptops? This whole "but tablets fill a different need than a laptop" cries don't make sense to me, my windows tablet has replaced my laptop FULLY, I have absolutely no need for a laptop, that's something the ipad could never do, the ipad was always a "third device".

I won't make believe Windows 8 is ready to marry mouse and touch, it's not, but it's also not as bad as many make it out to be and I disagree, being able to switch between a mouse and touch depending on my need is incredibly incredibly powerful IMO and for my uses.

 

[Essenar]

There's been a lot of stones thrown, so let's see if we can take the stones back and get some real facts in the air:

Walk around any professional or industrial climate with thousands of workstations. Tell me what operating system is on those workstations and then sit there and tell me he's wrong.

The money in any technology industry isn't in consumers but in large scale business and industry use. A new school decides to open a lab inside a newly built library, they're going to need potentially thousands of workstations. Student accessed, facility, staff workstations and machines for an IT department. What do they use? Windows.

Point out Apple OSX Server and show me how effective it is. Or Google Android server. Show me, physically, how an iPad will be a useful device in those circumstances.

The future of tablet use is in a lot more dynamic uses for a tablet. You think Google Drive is a sufficient replacement for Excel? The hard drive cable in my MacBook fried and I had to survive on Numbers and Google Drive for a few days (iOS and Google Docs from a computer I had an extra of that didn't have Office) and I almost died. Trying to do linear regression or standard deviations or XY scatter plots with those applications was a headache. It took hours.

Trying to type a lab report on Google Drive? It's useful for collaboration but when you get to formatting and columns, you'd better copy that text over to Word 2010 or 2011 or your paper is going to look like crap.

Professional and industrial use is going to change the demand in tablets. People are going to need more functions to use a tablet for work and that influence is going to carry over to the mainstream market.

Eventually, people are going to want windowed multi-tasking on a tablet, a full on Office experience with formulas, plotting, XY scattering and copy/paste capabilities. People are going to want a single file system that's accessible by multiple applications. Android is closer to that, WAY closer to that than iOS but the problem with Android is fragmented third party support. Applications just aren't as good on Android as they are on iOS. And iOS is too 'dumb' of a tablet OS.

I love my iPad but it feels like a child's toy compared to Android tablets. Compared to Windows? It's like an 8" iPod Touch. And people don't want an 8-10" MP3 player with Candy Crush on it. At least, not in the future they won't. In 2014-2015, when people pay $500 for a tablet, if they get an oversized iPod Touch they're going to be very disappointed. Especially when you have a 10" tablet from Microsoft that has full Microsoft Office, the ability to code Java/Python, edit photos with Photoshop.

 

[ravenvii]

Eventually, people are going to want windowed multi-tasking on a tablet, a full on Office experience with formulas, plotting, XY scattering and copy/paste capabilities. People are going to want a single file system that's accessible by multiple applications. Android is closer to that, WAY closer to that than iOS but the problem with Android is fragmented third party support. Applications just aren't as good on Android as they are on iOS. And iOS is too 'dumb' of a tablet OS.

I love my iPad but it feels like a child's toy compared to Android tablets. Compared to Windows? It's like an 8" iPod Touch. And people don't want an 8-10" MP3 player with Candy Crush on it. At least, not in the future they won't. In 2014-2015, when people pay $500 for a tablet, if they get an oversized iPod Touch they're going to be very disappointed. Especially when you have a 10" tablet from Microsoft that has full Microsoft Office, the ability to code Java/Python, edit photos with Photoshop.

Tablets with a full-featured OS has been out for 10 years before the iPad. Yes, they were heavy and clunky in the early years, but they got pretty decent, hardware-wise about a year before the iPad was introduced.

You and I know what happened.

What you think people want aren't facts -- they're your opinions.

Careful when you start your post with a "I'm telling the facts, and they are..."

 

[0dev]

The problem with that is most people don't need a traditional PC for their needs. And those that do own one or are issued one for work. That is not to say that PCs will ever go away, but it'll be tough for them to 'make a comeback.'

Another issue is that PCs will never be more mobile than smartphones or tablets. But if consumer interest shifts to creating documents and serious typing, all these fancy companies will come up w/ a suitable solution to typing.

But if you're carrying around a 10 inch tablet with a keyboard... why not just get a laptop? You can get one for the same price and it has a lot more utility. If what you want is proper computer functionality a laptop will obviously deliver that a lot better than any tablet.

 

[APlotdevice]

But if you're carrying around a 10 inch tablet with a keyboard... why not just get a laptop? You can get one for the same price and it has a lot more utility. If what you want is proper computer functionality a laptop will obviously deliver that a lot better than any tablet.

As I've probably said half a billion times now, with a tablet the keyboard is only there if and when you need it.

And since who you were quoting said "most people", a physical keyboard probably isn't even going to be present in the first place. The overwhelming majority of consumers are not power users. They don't program, write long documents, etc etc. Tablets like the iPad are perfectly adequate for them.

 

[0dev]

As I've probably said half a billion times now, with a tablet the keyboard is only there if and when you need it.

And since who you were quoting said "most people", a physical keyboard probably isn't even going to be present in the first place. The overwhelming majority of consumers are not power users. Tablets like the iPad are perfectly adequate for them.

Yes but the appeal of these Windows tablets is that they do both the light media and internet functionality and the heavy proper computing stuff. That's why Gates thinks people will switch. I'm questioning why he thinks that when customers who want that functionality can just buy laptops. Especially since they tried Windows tablets back in the early 2000's and look at how well that went.

And having to detach and reattach your keyboard just seems like an unnecessary hassle to me.

 

[spinedoc77]

But if you're carrying around a 10 inch tablet with a keyboard... why not just get a laptop? You can get one for the same price and it has a lot more utility. If what you want is proper computer functionality a laptop will obviously deliver that a lot better than any tablet.

This is kind of insane that people really keep asking this. Would a laptop with "more utility" function as a tablet? I find it hard to find any increased utility from a laptop, at least comparing apples to apples which would be an ultrabook to a tablet as I'm not talking about comparing a Razer Blade to a tablet. But I sure can list a long list of increased utility from a tablet.

----------

Yes but the appeal of these Windows tablets is that they do both the light media and internet functionality and the heavy proper computing stuff. That's why Gates thinks people will switch. I'm questioning why he thinks that when customers who want that functionality can just buy laptops. Especially since they tried Windows tablets back in the early 2000's and look at how well that went.

And having to detach and reattach your keyboard just seems like an unnecessary hassle to me.

Why wouldn't a consumer want a device that acts BOTH as a tablet and a laptop instead of just a laptop? Windows tablets back in the 2000s are not a valid comparison IMO, they were slow, had poor battery life, bad UI, thick and heavy. It took Apple genius to show us what a true modern tablet was in terms of hardware. But now that we have crossed that technological hurdle it's a different story. Hopefully MS capitalizes on that this year and next though and they don't screw it up.

 

[aneftp]

Bill Gated has got to realize its a different world now.

Everything has gone mobile the past 3-4 years. Consoles like the Wii U are struggling. I imagine the new Xbox 720 and ps4 will meet the same fate.

Windows phone has been out 2.5 years are barely made a dent. Windows phone is so locked down like iOS. And apple fans are loyal. I cannot imagine many iOS users switching to windows phone cause they trade one locked down OS for another.

Android users like to customize and won't switch cause windows phone os is locked down.

I believe blackberry users and windows users are competing for a distant 3rd place.

 

[0dev]

This is kind of insane that people really keep asking this. Would a laptop with "more utility" function as a tablet? I find it hard to find any increased utility from a laptop, at least comparing apples to apples which would be an ultrabook to a tablet as I'm not talking about comparing a Razer Blade to a tablet. But I sure can list a long list of increased utility from a tablet.

Tablets have no real extra functionality over laptops, they're just more convenient and fun for content consumption and they do that well. But everything a tablet can do can be done better on a proper laptop and like I said, if a user doesn't want just content consumption, but also professional computing features, they're better off with a laptop.

Windows tablets back in the 2000s are not a valid comparison IMO, they were slow, had poor battery life, bad UI

Which is different from Windows 8 tablets how?