| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| Lenovo Windows 8 ThinkPad Tablet 2 announced |
| By Thom Holwerda on 2012-08-09 13:12:12 |
| "It'll be a full x86 device - Lenovo calls a 'joint effort' with Intel and Microsoft - that clocks in at 1.3 pounds with a 10.1-inch 1366 x 768 display. It's billed to have 10-hour battery life, which would be impressive for a device only 9.8mm thick. The standard model is Wi-Fi-only, but there will also be carrier versions including one with AT&T's LTE connectivity." If you see a 1366x768 resolution on a 10.1" display, they blew it. |
|
| RE[7]: Comment by shmerl |
| By shmerl on 2012-08-09 20:37:43 |
|
Market is controlled by aware people (if there are a lot of them), i.e. if they boycott something for example for some reason. For most it's hard to be aware of the technicalities, that's why sales don't reflect anything about what's proper or what should be. Edited 2012-08-09 20:38 UTC |
 - Score: 1 |
| RE[8]: Comment by shmerl |
| By Nelson on 2012-08-09 20:41:18 |
| That's a paragraph long way of rationalizing people just not caring. Its not important to them. They don't even know what Linux is. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[9]: Comment by shmerl |
| By shmerl on 2012-08-09 20:45:04 |
| Again - it should cost nothing for OEMs to sell their computers without any OS. But it'll undermine MS interests (too easy to use alternatives in such case), that's why MS "convinces" them with offering discounts on condition of prohibiting a no OS option. It's totally irrelevant what number of users would want that. They want to prevent it altogether, and that's oppressive. |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE[10]: Comment by shmerl |
| By Nelson on 2012-08-09 20:47:23 |
| I think its rather naive to assume it'll cost nothing. You're just upset they don't sell you their product packaged up the way you want it. Oppressive is just the crutch you use. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[11]: Comment by shmerl |
| By shmerl on 2012-08-09 20:56:51 |
| May be not nothing, but less than what they pay for Windows anyway. So the only one who is loosing from a no OS option is MS. OEMs do offer a no OS option for corporate buyers, since MS has less control over that. |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE[4]: Comment by shmerl |
| By MollyC on 2012-08-09 21:25:19 |
|
> > Next you'll want a refund for the OS that runs on your microwave oven. You know very well it's not the same thing at all. Comparing hard-coded firmware to user-uninstallable software is misleading and beneath you. Can I play Socrates for a moment? If I flash my own firmware onto a microwave oven, why should I not then be able to legitimately demand a refund for the firmware that was bundled, according to the logic of the commenter that started this discussion? Second Socratic query: This Lenovo device is being sold, not as a "general purpose computer that just happens to have a particular OS bundled with it", it's being sold as a "Windows 8 tablet computer". That is, Windows 8 is part of the device being sold, just as the track nipple is part of the device being sold. Is that way of looking at it wrong, and if so, why? |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[2]: That is why I don't bother with tablets |
| By moondevil on 2012-08-09 21:29:12 |
|
Yep, I almost bought one. But around the same time Asus had netbooks with Linux here in Germany, using the AMD Fusion E-450 with 4GB RAM/500GB disk costing around 300€ vs 500€ for the Asus Transformer. With a battery time of around 6hours, if you don't abuse the GPU or wireless. I decided to save 200€ and be able to use a plain Linux distribution without Android's restrictions. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[9]: Comment by shmerl |
| By Morgan on 2012-08-10 00:52:22 |
| All I'm saying is, I'm used to better from you. You say that it's "wrong" to seek redress under the law, yet in this one instance the law actually works for the benefit of the people rather than the government or big corporations. Not only is it morally just for a customer to be able to get their money back for a defective software product, in this case it's also legally enforceable. I really don't see the problem here. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[6]: Comment by shmerl |
| By moondevil on 2012-08-10 07:03:39 |
|
> Tablets are absolutely not an appliance. They are mobile computers. They are appliances that happen to make use of a computing system to work, exactly the same way a GPS system, a fridge or games console. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE[10]: Comment by shmerl |
| By moondevil on 2012-08-10 07:09:29 |
|
> Again - it should cost nothing for OEMs to sell their computers without any OS. But it'll undermine MS interests (too easy to use alternatives in such case), that's why MS "convinces" them with offering discounts on condition of prohibiting a no OS option. It's totally irrelevant what number of users would want that. They want to prevent it altogether, and that's oppressive. Oppression is what people in countries with dictatorships regimes have to suffer everyday. What Microsoft does is called business, no one from Microsoft is pointing guns to OEM workers forcing them to make decisions to use Windows on their products. Any OEM company is free to licentiate another OS, or even make their own. If instead, they prefer to get in bed with Microsoft is because what they gain out of the deal brings them more money home. |
| - Score: 3 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |