4 ms·

> Because MS is not a premium product. In your opinion... I'd be willing to pay extra to be able to run a full OS, specifically...Windows, on my iPad instead

by WayneDB 14y ago

> Because MS is not a premium product. In your opinion... I'd be willing to pay extra to be able to run a full OS, specifically...Windows, on my iPad instead of iOS. Being able to do what I want easily: that's premium to me. Locked down hardware, locked down OS, locked down everything: that's not premium, that's Apple.

sixothree 14y ago
At minimum you'll be paying $300 extra since you won't be running a "full OS" on any tablet costing < $800.
ralfn 14y ago
>I'd be willing to pay extra to be able to run a full OS, specifically...Windows, on my iPad instead of iOS. That version is going to cost 800 dollars according to the article, and thats without a keyboard/dock. Also, the "full OS" experience, may not be as full as you would think. They make a logical (IMHO) trade-off between performance, battery life, weight and price. This thing wont run Photoshop, Crysis, etc in a useable way. So, you're essentially paying 200+ dollars extra for the ability/freedom to side-load. The target audience of this is limited to corporate use (classic desktop as backwards compatibility) and developpers. And this is the strategy of both MS and Apple now. They are moving the low-end and mid-range to walled-gardens, while charging premium to professionals, who can afford it. The cheapest win8 device with the ability to side-load? 800$ .. The cheapest OSX device? 999$ dollars. It will get even more expensive as the transition closes. The current price point of a laptop didnt aim at us: it aimed at the casual market. They are now turning the freedom to sideload (and to pirate, btw) into an expensive niche. They are going to milk us for the fat cows we are. This is in no way limited to Apple, unfortunately. Our best bet for an open platform, is Android, because of its opensource nature, but be wary of the bootlocks.
- WayneDB 14y ago
  I wasn't planning on running Photoshop or Crysis. I don't even run them on my half-dozen other computers, but I do run hundreds of low-requirement programs. The "full OS" experience, to me, is not simply side-loading either. I want an OS that was built for general purpose computing from the get-go. The target audience for this does not seem to be limited to corporate use and developers. It seems to be for anyone who just wants general purpose computing in a highly portable format. That's me. Furthermore, corporate users is not a small market - so I wouldn't say "limited", even if that were the case. > The cheapest win8 device with the ability to side-load? 800$ .. The cheapest OSX device? 999$ dollars. Right, but it's a bad comparison because one of them is Windows and the other is OS X. One of them is a touch enabled transformer, the other a laptop. > Our best bet for an open platform, is Android... Maybe what you want is an open platform. That's fine, but I don't care about how open the platform is. I just want Microsoft's new premium device with their premium OS because it seems to do exactly what I want it to. We'll see though, maybe I'll be disappointed.

by WayneDB 14y ago

sixothree 14y ago

At minimum you'll be paying $300 extra since you won't be running a "full OS" on any tablet costing < $800.

ralfn 14y ago

>I'd be willing to pay extra to be able to run a full OS, specifically...Windows, on my iPad instead of iOS. That version is going to cost 800 dollars according to the article, and thats without a keyboard/dock. Also, the "full OS" experience, may not be as full as you would think. They make a logical (IMHO) trade-off between performance, battery life, weight and price. This thing wont run Photoshop, Crysis, etc in a useable way. So, you're essentially paying 200+ dollars extra for the ability/freedom to side-load. The target audience of this is limited to corporate use (classic desktop as backwards compatibility) and developpers. And this is the strategy of both MS and Apple now. They are moving the low-end and mid-range to walled-gardens, while charging premium to professionals, who can afford it. The cheapest win8 device with the ability to side-load? 800$ .. The cheapest OSX device? 999$ dollars. It will get even more expensive as the transition closes. The current price point of a laptop didnt aim at us: it aimed at the casual market. They are now turning the freedom to sideload (and to pirate, btw) into an expensive niche. They are going to milk us for the fat cows we are. This is in no way limited to Apple, unfortunately. Our best bet for an open platform, is Android, because of its opensource nature, but be wary of the bootlocks.

WayneDB 14y ago
I wasn't planning on running Photoshop or Crysis. I don't even run them on my half-dozen other computers, but I do run hundreds of low-requirement programs. The "full OS" experience, to me, is not simply side-loading either. I want an OS that was built for general purpose computing from the get-go. The target audience for this does not seem to be limited to corporate use and developers. It seems to be for anyone who just wants general purpose computing in a highly portable format. That's me. Furthermore, corporate users is not a small market - so I wouldn't say "limited", even if that were the case. > The cheapest win8 device with the ability to side-load? 800$ .. The cheapest OSX device? 999$ dollars. Right, but it's a bad comparison because one of them is Windows and the other is OS X. One of them is a touch enabled transformer, the other a laptop. > Our best bet for an open platform, is Android... Maybe what you want is an open platform. That's fine, but I don't care about how open the platform is. I just want Microsoft's new premium device with their premium OS because it seems to do exactly what I want it to. We'll see though, maybe I'll be disappointed.