| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| 'What is Windows RT? Redmond, we have a problem' |
| By Thom Holwerda, submitted by MOS6510 on 2012-10-21 16:13:31 |
| "I've been writing about Windows for almost 20 years, and I feel like I've kind of seen it all. But for the past several days, I've been struggling under the weight of the most brutal email onslaught I've ever endured over these two decades. And if my email is any indication, and I believe it is, the majority of people out there have absolutely no idea what Windows RT is. This is a problem." When even Paul Thurrot is worried, you can be sure it is, actually, a problem. We're going to see and hear about a lot of frustrated customer who can't load up their 1997 copy of Awesome Garden Designer 2.0 Deluxe. |
|
| Welcome to the reality people |
| By Dekonega on 2012-10-21 16:35:42 |
|
Rude wakening for the people: Welcome to the world where every single consumer device is a PC. Even the devices which you don't call or usually think could be PCs, and in most cases, definitely are PCs. For a long time I've really hated that people who say "PC" only mean 100% IBM-PC compatible personal computers running Microsoft Windows. If the computer is running GNU/Linux, or OS X, it's not a PC any more for those people. Or if it has slightly different hardware it's not a PC any more despite having the same OS. (facepalm) PCs are huge category of devices which includes work and gaming devices like the Playstation 3 (even the NES is a PC), tablets inc. the iPad, various desktops and workstations like the Amiga and the Macintosh branded PCs (doesn't matter what architecture m68k, ppc, or x86) running latest iteration of the (Mac) OS X, Smartphones (which are PCs with a phone feature) (arm, intel, what difference does it make?), and not least the generic hardware of any sort running for example any sort of GNU/Linux which is intended for end users but hidden so that end user doesn't know he is using GNU/Linux, etc. The sole reason there won't be a "Post-PC Era" soon is that there cannot be "Post-PC Era" in the first place with the current level of consumer technology available. The "Post-PC Era" might happen after the "Personal Nano Computer" revolution happens in next 50 years or something. And the joke in "PC v.s. Mac" ads is that both machines are one and same hardware. Only difference is operating system, which all can and do suffer similar problems at times no matter what environment you're using. Edited 2012-10-21 16:44 UTC |
 - Score: 8 |
| RE: Welcome to the reality people |
| By kurkosdr on 2012-10-21 17:02:01 |
| Well, "PC" was what IBMs original IBM PC was called. It was the first device to use the term. So, home computers with non-IBM PC compatible architecture are not really PCs. They are home computers. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE: Welcome to the reality people |
| By stooovie on 2012-10-21 17:02:58 |
|
With this logic, gender, religion, race, politics and god knows what else are irrelevant. We do need to discern and not over-generalize. For the purpose of the pre- and post-PC discussion, PC is a category of versatile devices that aren't really mobile. The kind that does it all but is ill-suited to majority of tasks that aren't typing and precision intensive. Edited 2012-10-21 17:06 UTC |
| - Score: 5 |
| ARM going mainstream |
| By p13. on 2012-10-21 17:03:03 |
|
This could've been the much-needed shot in the arm the hobbyist PC market needs. Too bad it's locked down and dead before it even started. I think this will seriously confuse people. People think they're buying a computer. To them, a computer is this box that should just run awesome garden designer 2.0 Deluxe. But it won't. I've bought an SGI octane2 off of someone that didn't want it once someone told him it wouldn't run windows ... If anything could validify apple's original assault case on samsung, then it should be this. People will buy a product, expecting it to be something ... but it will be something else entirely. Anyway, we'll see ... interesting times. |
| - Score: 1 |
| Comment by Luminair |
| By Luminair on 2012-10-21 17:12:00 |
|
windows was never confusing like this. you could not miss the transition to 95 and xp. this time it is utterly baffling. NO internet hyperbole either. I get it, but nobody else will. you have to assume that all the normal computer companies think the same way most of us do. thus why microsoft had to make surface rt on its own. and when it bombs, possibly surprising even the eldest retail goons with the horrifying return rates, there will be only one outcome: microsoft will soldier on. bring on surface 2 rt. |
| - Score: 8 |
| Comment by MOS6510 |
| By MOS6510 on 2012-10-21 17:25:44 |
|
When the PocketPC still roamed the earth with Windows CE it was not unusual to come across people who claimed it was "Windows" and ran Internet Explorer, Word, Excel. Now we have one Microsoft tablet that runs a real version of Windows that isn't a real version of Windows and a Microsoft tablet that runs their other mobile OS. I think keeping their two tablets apart will pose a difficult task for some, but even worse is having Windows RT and figuring out what you can and can't run on it. Now it would be cool even they made some desktop PCs running on ARM (and allow us to install Linux). |
| - Score: 2 |
| Comment by sagum |
| By sagum on 2012-10-21 17:39:47 |
|
We're going to see and hear about a lot of frustrated customer who can't load up their 1997 copy of Awesome Garden Designer 2.0 Deluxe. I had the same problem trying to load up Photoshop on my ipod touch! I personally think Microsoft dropped the ball when they made Office a desktop App for RT. It should really have been Metro (apps for windows 8 ofc), metro only and the desktop itself should have been disabled for RT devices. It makes sense on so many levels, mostly for ease of use flow, falling back to the desktop on a touch device is a real pain to use, its the reason why windows never took off on them. Hopefully either Pro tablets drop in price and are released or people cotton on to using Metro apps we move forward (eek) into a metro workspace... *sigh* |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE[2]: Welcome to the reality people |
| By Dekonega on 2012-10-21 17:48:49 |
|
IBM-PC wasn't the first device to use the acronym "PC". There were many others before that including the IBM themselves. I believe the first actual device marketed as PC was HP's 9100A. HP marketed it as a personal computer actively, and used the acronym "PC" for it. However the first actual PC was probably according to some guys this device called "SIMON"... http://www.blinkenlights.com/pc.... |
| - Score: 6 |
| A fool and... |
| By quackalist on 2012-10-21 17:57:21 |
|
Windows RT is a fools errand at the moment and anyone buying it either is or will think themselves a fool after. "Metro" and the few apps available are half-baked and not fit for purpose. Yes, perhaps maybe, in a couple of years it'll all come together and make sense. For now, at the price, you'd be a fool not to buy an iPad, can't stand the OS myself, or some sort of Android tablet. The Pro is something else and though, for me anyway, it'll be very expensive (still think "Metro" not ready) I can see the point. There's going to be an awful lot of disappointed and annoyed users/customers of Win RT. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[2]: Welcome to the reality people |
| By Dekonega on 2012-10-21 18:11:48 |
|
> For the purpose of the pre- and post-PC discussion, PC is a category of versatile devices that aren't really mobile. The kind that does it all but is ill-suited to majority of tasks that aren't typing and precision intensive. Actually it's exactly the opposite. PCs are versatile devices which are mobile. At least when we compare personal computers against the other major computer classifications such as the super computers, mainframes, mini computers, etc. Another way to classify personal computers is to use term "micro computers" but that does't really describe the whole variety of them, and gives wrong image of the size also. So majority of the computer scientists I know have given up on the term "micro computers" and use "personal computers" instead. Do we want to say that this group of devices which includes some smaller mini computers, micro computer and calculators are personal computers or something else? This is not making things like gender, religion, race, politics irrelevant. To continue your analogy to humans... I'm merely saying that you're all racists for only seeing that certain kinds of devices are worth the title "PC". When in fact there are so much more of them. We also could think this the other way, and look not from the consumer side of the things but also from the side of the manufacturer. The computer on your desktop and on your tablet both can have the exactly same CPU, exactly same RAM, exactly same GPU. The Only major difference is the form-factor. Both of your devices the desktop and the tablet could be running the exactly same operating system also. And they run the same applications. Why on earth wouldn't you call both of them both same kind of PCs then? Is form factor enough to warrant a change of the computer class? I think not. It does require something more than that. You'd have to change the whole concept of the personal computer interaction to something else to warrant for that. For example you'd probably not see a screen. Instead you'd "sense" the information or you'd "imagine" it inside your head. That way the personal computer would be more than just a personal computer, it would be you, with enhanced capabilities of a personal computer. But if you're just watching a screen, of a device you can have on your finger tips, processing your personal data externally, and separately from you, it's a computer that belongs to you, and that makes it personal device. I want that all of you people challenge your view of what a PC really is. Please think about this subject few moments. |
| - Score: 1 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |