Microsoft Charging OEMs $85 for Windows RT

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]With Medfield, why make any ARM Windows tablets at all?[/citation]
As Intel refuses to lower their prices, ARM chips are a much more cost effective solution.
Additionally, even with Intel's manufacturing lead, ARM based SOC's still have a lead in power consumption.

Current prices for the 3.5W N2600, without an accompanying chipset, is $42.
If memory serves, nVidia prices their Tegra 3 SOC's at around $25 and their competition should be somewhat comparable.
 
[citation][nom]element1981[/nom]There could be some sort of back end rebate for the device manufacturer that reduces the overall cost significantly, and it would likely be based on sales volume to create an incentive to sell the devices. Who knows? It would be ludicrous for them to charge that much for each individual license and not offer a program like that.[/citation]

I can't see OEMs subsidizing the cost for a rebate on top of the fact that they already had the rug pulled from under them about the pricing to begin with.
 
That price is astonishing...

I guess if you are gonna fail, you might as well fail as hard as you can?

Charge 20$ for the OS (drop office if needed), and take a cut from app sales... at least then you have a chance of actually gaining some traction in the market...

But being the class clown is a close second to actually being successful, I guess.
 
[citation][nom]outlw6669[/nom]As Intel refuses to lower their prices, ARM chips are a much more cost effective solution.Additionally, even with Intel's manufacturing lead, ARM based SOC's still have a lead in power consumption.Current prices for the 3.5W N2600, without an accompanying chipset, is $42.If memory serves, nVidia prices their Tegra 3 SOC's at around $25 and their competition should be somewhat comparable.[/citation]

Yet, Windows RT costs $85, far worse than a $20-$30 jump in the processor/chipset cost. Also, keep in mind that Medfield doesn't win in power consumption because it is based off of Core 2... An IB-based version on 22nm would probably double power efficiency. That, and the compatibility with current software should matter.
 
[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]Yet, Windows RT costs $85, far worse than a $20-$30 jump in the processor/chipset cost.[/citation]
True, but to get a true budget device, manufacturers will be cutting costs in every way possible.
Having an ARM based Windows machine also leaves open interesting possibilities like dual booting Android, gaining access to their entire app database.
In the end, considering the intended form factor, I highly doubt the majority of users will ever be able to tell the difference between a x86 and ARM based laptop, other than a $50+ price difference (you forget the price of the chipset 😉).
 
I think they are conditioning people, making them think the worst of Microsoft with these rumors, so that when they finally do set the price to $50 or so, everyone will feel a wave of relief and euphoria and have nothing but good thoughts about how benevolent Microsoft is. That way when everyone spends a ton of money on the product, they think they are getting a good deal because they COULD HAVE been spending a lot more, while Microsoft is happy that they got the price they wanted AND everyone thanks them for it 🙂
 


Yes, because $50 for an OS competing against tablets with a free OS is really benevolent.
 


Android is getting an X86 port and since most of the code for apps and such is Java, it should be compatible with X86, so no need for ARM there. X86 also could have compatibility with many preexisting X86 Windows programs, other X86 operating systems (such as Linux), and software for those operating systems. Anyone who couldn't tell the difference between all of that and tablet with an ARM CPU if they had one of both such tablets side-by-side is beyond ignorant. They often wouldn't know why there is a difference, but when you load up full Windows or whatever one one and run a few current programs compared to the simpler apps on the other, that there is a difference will be obvious.
 



People THINK it is benevolent, because they thought they would have to pay $85 😀
 
Would rather buy a cheap Android tablet (as long as it's x86) and make it a hackintosh for mere 20 bucks. I only use Windows because of games and since Win8 (and tablets in general) aren't quite appropriate...
 
[citation][nom]K2N hater[/nom]Would rather buy a cheap Android tablet (as long as it's x86) and make it a hackintosh for mere 20 bucks. I only use Windows because of games and since Win8 (and tablets in general) aren't quite appropriate...[/citation]

What's that supposed to mean? Windows 8 x86 is better than Windows 7. If you don't like Metro, then don't use it. Classic Shell it away. Besides, wouldn't making a Hackintosh out of it require that Apple have driver support for both Medfield CPUs and compatible chipsets?
 
Who the hell is deciding these things, because microsoft is on a roll these days... rolling towards a precipice.

Also microsoft seems to forget its own past, since bundling Office with Windows brings memories of the old Internet Explorer antitrust lawsuit in Europe. If Microsoft bundles Office with WIndows RT there's a high possibility of another lawsuit.
 
[citation][nom]belardo[/nom]...Office 365 will run on anything.[/citation]
Office 365 cost per user: $4/mo [$48/yr] (Exchange only) to $20/mo [$240/yr] (Online + Desktop), and while the Business $6/mo [$72/yr] is the best 'deal' the FREE Google App Business (10 user) is a no brainer.
 
[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]What's that supposed to mean? Windows 8 x86 is better than Windows 7. If you don't like Metro, then don't use it. Classic Shell it away. Besides, wouldn't making a Hackintosh out of it require that Apple have driver support for both Medfield CPUs and compatible chipsets?[/citation]
It's been told here the final release won't allow the registry trick to disable Metro. Concerning Medfield I assume the stock driver would allow it out of the box but if it doesn't... Hackintosh is all about hacking Mac files, right?
 
[citation][nom]K2N hater[/nom]It's been told here the final release won't allow the registry trick to disable Metro. Concerning Medfield I assume the stock driver would allow it out of the box but if it doesn't... Hackintosh is all about hacking Mac files, right?[/citation]

Classic Shell isn't a registry hack, lol. It's a UI shell and Metro can't bypass that. Classic Shell still works with every version of Windows 8 and will work with the released version because it is not a get rid of Metro hack, it is a UI program. MS can't block that without cutting off support for a large list of many different kinds of programs and that would piss many people off far more than Metro ever could.

If OSX doesn't support the Medfield platforms, then you don't need to hack anything... You need to write entire drivers for OSX on Medfield. That's not hacking preexisting files, that's creating new and fairly complex ones.

Also, there are many other ways to not use Metro, or to at least get a start menu (among other stuff) back, even in the release candidate and what will be the completed release versions. These aren't hacks that can be disabled by MS changing the registry.
 
When are people going to realize tablets are also computers.

If you price it too low people are going to think it sucks because it's cheap.
If you price it too high people are not going to buy it. (But at least they pirate it and make everyone need to have the thing too for compatibility!)

The big point for Windows RT and x86 on tablets is compatibility with ways (people and corporation habits) and software from the desktop world. This is what most corporations and people want. Familiar interface and more importantly familiar brand!
 
[citation][nom]outlw6669[/nom]True, but to get a true budget device, manufacturers will be cutting costs in every way possible.Having an ARM based Windows machine also leaves open interesting possibilities like dual booting Android, gaining access to their entire app database.In the end, considering the intended form factor, I highly doubt the majority of users will ever be able to tell the difference between a x86 and ARM based laptop, other than a $50+ price difference (you forget the price of the chipset ).[/citation]

Oh boy. Most people don't know computers have different processing capabilities.
(true, seriously, I mean average people buying tablets.)
They will expect their old software to run on he tablet, ARM is going to get something!
 
[citation][nom]annymmo[/nom]When are people going to realize tablets are also computers.If you price it too low people are going to think it sucks because it's cheap.If you price it too high people are not going to buy it. (But at least they pirate it and make everyone need to have the thing too for compatibility!)The big point for Windows RT and x86 on tablets is compatibility with ways (people and corporation habits) and software from the desktop world. This is what most corporations and people want. Familiar interface and more importantly familiar brand![/citation]

Windows 8RT is ARM... What was that about compatibility with desktop software? Besides that, just having a low price does not make everyone think that it's cheap and why would someone pirate a tablet/smartphone OS? That doesn't make much sense at all. Any devices that it is made to be compatible with would almost definitely already have it.
 
How are they going to compete with Android/iPad tablets for $500 or less? From a consumer perspective, with an ARM Windows tablet you won't be getting that much more than you would with Android/iPad:
1) Office. Yes Office is good, but will the average consumer be prepared to spend that much more for it?
2) Legacy application support: most apps are x86/x64 right now so no benefit there.
3) Better compatibility with devices. This is not a benefit yet but I imagine it could be once Windows 8 tablets hit the market IF everyone starts writing ARM drivers for their peripherals.
4) Printing. This is a big one in Microsoft's favor assuming all of the printer companies start writing ARM drivers (another big IF). Currently iPad and Android both have problems with this unless you buy specific printers.
5) Enterprise. I'm not sure how well Windows for ARM will interact with Enterprise but I expect it to be better than Android/iPad. Unfortunately this is a small subset of all consumers.

IMHO, the only solution I see is for heavy subsidies by Microsoft (at least initially). Looking at the success of the Kindle Fire, it appears that a $200 tablet is within many consumers' price range but a $500 tablet is about the limit. Making a $750+ tablet will only appeal to a small subset of the population.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom