4 ms·

Exactly. And what's really sad is all this talk of "Windows on ARM" when they've already got a new ARM-based OS that's quite nice for phones (WP7). I just don't

Exactly. And what's really sad is all this talk of "Windows on ARM" when they've already got a new ARM-based OS that's quite nice for phones (WP7). I just don't understand why WP7 isn't their flagship "mobile" OS (phones, tablets, and beyond). It just seems like a no-brainer.

skymt 16y ago
I'm guessing the ARM development focus started around the time smartbooks[1] were the Next Big Thing. Smartbooks have a form factor closer to netbooks than smartphones, so it would make sense for MS to try squeezing proper Windows onto them. Now that the iPad has stolen that market segment, MS has re-purposed the already-started ARM port for tablets. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartbook http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartbook
contextfree 16y ago
IIRC they get something like $15 for each Windows Phone OEM license and something like $50 for each full Windows OEM license. That's probably a big part of the reason they'd prefer to stick with full Windows in as many markets as possible.
- rbanffy 16y ago
  I think it's important to note they could sell more than 3x more $15 licenses than $50 licenses. You have a potential success with a low margin and certain doom with a high margin. Which one would you choose?
  - cstross 16y ago
    Apple: 12% of the total personal computer market in the USA. 92% of the high-end (over $999) personal computer market, which is around 10% of the total. If you're going to have 10% of the market, which would you rather have -- the bottom 10% or the top 10%? (I'll concede your point about the choice between potential success/certain doom for Microsoft in the tablet field, but Microsoft obviously doesn't see it that way: they see it as a choice between success and success, and obviously they want the more lucrative version.)
    - rbanffy 16y ago
      > they see it as a choice between success and success And that is absolutely baffling. It will be studied for decades after Microsoft is gone and be the ground upon countless doctoral theses are built.
      - cstross 16y ago
        Two words: "corporate groupthink". Microsoft won't be the first huge company to succumb as a result of adhering to the very outlook that made them big in the first place. (Anyone else remember IBM in the run-up to 1994?)
eli 16y ago
Interesting that Google seems to be struggling with the same thing with Chrome OS vs Android.
Splines 16y ago
The problem is that Microsoft is dragging behind it thousands (millions?) of existing applications. The argument that they should not support their existing application base (for better or worse) is a difficulty one to make. It took several tries in the Windows Mobile world for MS to give up homogenizing the PDA and the desktop. By throwing manpower at it they think the tablet is "close enough" to a desktop that it can be solved. I don't know if it can or not, but I believe that's the mentality.

skymt 16y ago

I'm guessing the ARM development focus started around the time smartbooks[1] were the Next Big Thing. Smartbooks have a form factor closer to netbooks than smartphones, so it would make sense for MS to try squeezing proper Windows onto them. Now that the iPad has stolen that market segment, MS has re-purposed the already-started ARM port for tablets. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartbook http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartbook

contextfree 16y ago

IIRC they get something like $15 for each Windows Phone OEM license and something like $50 for each full Windows OEM license. That's probably a big part of the reason they'd prefer to stick with full Windows in as many markets as possible.

rbanffy 16y ago
I think it's important to note they could sell more than 3x more $15 licenses than $50 licenses. You have a potential success with a low margin and certain doom with a high margin. Which one would you choose?
- cstross 16y ago
  Apple: 12% of the total personal computer market in the USA. 92% of the high-end (over $999) personal computer market, which is around 10% of the total. If you're going to have 10% of the market, which would you rather have -- the bottom 10% or the top 10%? (I'll concede your point about the choice between potential success/certain doom for Microsoft in the tablet field, but Microsoft obviously doesn't see it that way: they see it as a choice between success and success, and obviously they want the more lucrative version.)
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    > they see it as a choice between success and success And that is absolutely baffling. It will be studied for decades after Microsoft is gone and be the ground upon countless doctoral theses are built.
    - cstross 16y ago
      Two words: "corporate groupthink". Microsoft won't be the first huge company to succumb as a result of adhering to the very outlook that made them big in the first place. (Anyone else remember IBM in the run-up to 1994?)

eli 16y ago

Interesting that Google seems to be struggling with the same thing with Chrome OS vs Android.

Splines 16y ago

The problem is that Microsoft is dragging behind it thousands (millions?) of existing applications. The argument that they should not support their existing application base (for better or worse) is a difficulty one to make. It took several tries in the Windows Mobile world for MS to give up homogenizing the PDA and the desktop. By throwing manpower at it they think the tablet is "close enough" to a desktop that it can be solved. I don't know if it can or not, but I believe that's the mentality.