3 ms·
Problem #1, where everything is starting to break down: Microsoft trying to put "Windows on everything". That may not be a huge problem if it was only the core
by higherpurpose 13y ago
Problem #1, where everything is starting to break down: Microsoft trying to put "Windows on everything". That may not be a huge problem if it was only the core base (although needing 16GB of space, something that's still the default for "high-end mobile devices" today, just for Windows alone, still sucks), but it gets much worse when they also want to have the "same UI on everything", which just doesn't work and never has. Even on the web, we still get to talk about "responsive design", because the same UI doesn't work on mobile devices, and it needs to be adapted for that form factor.
Problem #2: Having basically 2 operating systems in one, and forcing the user to switch from one to the other, by nagging him with all sorts of bad UX elements (charms on the desktop has always been a terrible idea to me, for example, and the UI looks completely out of place, too).
Problem #3: Price. I don't know if they're "feeling" this yet or not, but I think they are. If Windows for tablets cost $90 to license, then Windows tablets are simply not competitive from the get go. Yes, you may see some $300 Windows tablet, but it usually has much worse specs and quality than a $300 Android tablet. As I said, not competitive. This may be the reason why Microsoft may exist the consumer market eventually (3-5 years from now), and focus on enterprise, where they have much more lock-in and it's a lot more profitable/unit.
- vacri 13y agoalthough needing 16GB of space, something that's still the default for "high-end mobile devices" today, just for Windows alone, still sucks Not to mention virtual machines. Backing up and transferring around virtual machine images of vista and beyond really sucks hard. I know one ops guy who is keeping his XP install simply because it's base install size is about 3% the size of Vista an onward; much better for VMs.
- bitwize 13y agoI recently bought a Windows 8.1 tablet for about $250. Specs-wise it's a lot better than my 2013 Nexus 7. 2 GiB RAM, a quad-core Atom, and 64 GiB of onboard storage. And it runs full Windows. Hell, I put VS on it and started writing C# apps with it. It's pretty nice. The two different GUIS are pretty jarring if you're running a desktop PC, but they make perfect sense with a touchscreen laptop or tablet. The tablet game is about to change. Android may find itself crowded out of the mobile computer space.
- higherpurpose 13y agoDid it have a 1080p high-quality IPS screen, too? As I said, either the specs or the quality of the specs/materials suffer, to account for the Windows license.
- bitwize 13y agoIt has a 1280x800 high-quality IPS screen.
- josteink 13y agoSpecs-wise it's a lot better than my 2013 Nexus 7. 2 GiB RAM, a quad-core Atom, and 64 GiB of onboard storage. Followed by It has a 1280x800 high-quality IPS screen. So spec-wise, it has more storage, but apart from that, it has the same amount of RAM, and a display completely inferior to the 2013 Nexus 7. I don't know about you, but I would trade storage for display anytime. You can always download/stream content from the cloud, but it's hard to stream a better display.
- bitwize 13y agoMore storage and a more powerful CPU. Those actually count for a lot. I don't actually notice the low resolution of the display unless I look hard.
- mercer 13y agoI think this clearly shows that different people have different needs, and that perhaps Microsoft needs to pick a crowd. Most 'regular' users I know care a great deal more about a great display than storage. My mom would pay a premium for the former (although perhaps she specifically would actually not care and just want an intuitive interface so she can get to her games and email).