Microsoft to Impose Hardware Restrictions for Windows 8 Tablets

[dalethepcman]

As long as microsoft doesn't impose maximum hardware specs (no more than 2GB of ram, or only allow single core CPU's) then this won't be that bad. Seeing as how windows 8 is ARM compatible, they would have to implement certain restrictions depending on the ARM processors that were tested when windows 8 was being developed.

 

[tlmck]

They are sure to be hot sellers like the Windows phones.

 

[iam2thecrowe]

? i dont see the problem. they are giving minimum specs, like all OS's have. Otherwise some company will put it on something with crap specs and it will run like crap.

 

[nebun]

[citation][nom]otacon72[/nom]After seeing the ridiculous amount of Android tablets flooding the market with all kinds of different specs I don't blame Microsoft one bit.[/citation]
agreed....android is on every pos hardware

 

[speedemon]

[citation][nom]TheCapulet[/nom]Wait, you're talking about system requirements, right? The very same thing any software manufacturer ever has announced? The comments here are mostly just the same old cliche hate M$ crap, and it's boring. Don't you guys get tired of it?[/citation]

yeah, name a few other "good" tech sites for me to go to.

 

[DjEaZy]

... Microsoft to Impose Hardware Restrictions for Windows 8 Tablets... and it is good... a seen so many crappy android tablets recently... no quality control...

 

[zybch]

[citation][nom]11796pcs[/nom]Yeah minimum specs are actually a really good thing to do for a product. Because if Microsoft hadn't put in place minimum requirements for Vista (1GB was still too low- 2 GB would have been better) we would have probably seen some 512MB Vista laptops and riots in the streets. Most consumers will pick the cheapest options and ask themselves later why their device is so slow.[/citation]
We DID see 512Mb Vista notebooks. In fact I saw a lot that had LESS tahn 512Mb after the integrated GPU stole 64-128Mb from system RAM. Those machines were all dogs and even though they had specs well below what MS mandated in order to have the Designed for Vista sticker, they all had the sticker anyway.
Apparent;y MS reduced the minimum specs at the behest of Intel who had a heap of crappy CPUs and GPUs lying about they needed to get rid of.

 

[HappyBB]

I think Google should also have tighter restrictions, or better yet, standards, on all future android devices. However much I hate Apple for their totalitarian control over their devices, they have a unified platform, which saves developers a lot of hassles and troubles from trouble-shooting their apps. I believe this is one of the main reasons why a lot of developers develop for Apple and not for Android. Google needs to consider this to surpass Apple.

 

[Pherule]

Screw XP on 64MB, it's even unusable on 512MB. You need at least 768MB before XP will run smoothly, unless you're running notepad (lol)

Good move Microsoft, very good move.

 

[back_by_demand]

[citation][nom]scout62[/nom]Sounds like MS is taking pages from Apple's playbook.[/citation]
I thought the Playbook was RIM?

Anyhoo, I don't see it as hardware restriction, it is setting minimum requirements, and considering those minimum requirements for WP7 were relatively modest and most manufacturers exceed those minimums anyway then what's the problem?

It's in the best interest of the vendors to do this because if they release a crappy hardware product and Windows 8 runs like a dog then people will just not buy that tablet, so if you want to succeed then produce a quality product.

MS should be lauded for dragging the quality standards up a notch instead of putting up with the same sub-standard crap that vendors have been pumping out since year dot.

 

[climber]

[citation][nom]scout62[/nom]Sounds like MS is taking pages from Apple's playbook.[/citation]
Sorry the "Playbook" is Blackberry's product!

 

[climber]

Indeed MS is following Apple's business plan, in tablets, trying to control every little nuance of the process to get the best user experience, performance and stability for their tablet OS variant. Well, what 90% of the computing market probably likes about the non-apple world is that we have choice and are not treated as cult members or sheeple, that a certain (cough-cough) company treats its followers.

 

[nukemaster]

Min requirements are a GOOD thing. Saw too many systems underpowered for the OS they had(Vista and even many XP netbooks).

I would rather know that at least the damn thing will work as expected and not that i just picked up a cheap low end device that will not work as intended.

From the consumer side, this is also good. Everyone wants there hardware to work smoothly.

 

[waethorn]

XP will run on 512MB if you keep it clean and use a lightweight antivirus software (MSE).

Vista and 7 require twice as much for the same experience, or twice that again if you run 64-bit (ie. 1GB or 2GB respectively).

I see many systems come in for service and things like printer drivers really cut into that minimal amount of RAM. HP is one of the worst companies for this - and I'm NOT just talking about the junk software: it's the DRIVERS themselves!

If you just have standard video and audio drivers (and their respective tray icon software), MSE, and not much else in startup, Windows will work OK for basic stuff like surfing and email. Try to multitask or game, and it's not enough. For XP, 1GB should be fine for just about any (older) productivity application multitasking with others, or for better browser experience. Likewise, Vista & 7 should run fine with 2GB on 32-bit or 64-bit, but DDR2 and DDR3 RAM is extremely cheap, so upgrading a 64-bit machine to 4GB is a good option. I don't see much use in upgrading from 2GB to 3GB or 4GB on 32-bit since almost the whole top GB of RAM is wasted by hardware address, and only installing a 1GB stick as an upgrade when you already have 2GB means that you won't be running dual-channel. Using a 32-bit OS just doesn't make sense in this day and age.

That said, I'd like to know if the ARM versions of Windows 8 are custom-tailored (ie. recompiled) to each family of chips (TI, NVIDIA, Snapdragon), and whether they support 64-bit instructions on those platforms. Actual RAM usage on ARM versions is another question.

And what about product edition SKU's? Home Premium? Professional? Ultimate? Will those translate into ARM SKU's too?

I would bet money that there will be no ARM server version either.

 

[hp79]

[citation][nom]TheCapulet[/nom]Wait, you're talking about system requirements, right? The very same thing any software manufacturer ever has announced? [/citation]

No, they are not the same thing. If XP's minimum requirement is 512 MB RAM, I would welcome MS to enforce 2GB minimum requirement for the manufacturer for better experience with that software. This way we won't see any XP machines with 512 MB RAM, and users complaining how slow XP is.

 

[Khimera2000]

its odd hearing people say that this looks like something out of apples play book. Did you see tablets that are running IOS that are not made by apple??? I want to see these tablets, pleas for all those people saying it post a link. I want to see who apple is partnering up with, and what the min specs they put in place for IOS on there hardware I cant wait to see the reviews. Send the link over to toms im sure they would love to review the new APPLE OS tablets, and there partners. Will it be made by Acer, HTC, Asus, Samsung maybe? When did apple decide to drop[ the wall garden?

If this is confusing to you, and IF your one of those people that spoke about what MS is doing as something out of there play book, then you should be able to answer all these questions I asked above. If not... then get back on the small yellow bus, because you just droped alot of people IQ's because of your ignorance on all things electronics.

 

[koga73]

thats why windows has always been the best OS... because there are NO hardware restrictions other than minimum requirements (and there is a difference!).

dont ruin what you have going for u microsoft

 

[rohitbaran]

The idea is that the restrictions will limit the variations of Windows tablets and, by having a tighter control, Microsoft will be able to deliver Windows 8 tablets that much faster.

Microsoft is trying to an Apple here. Copying won't help you MS. Look at Google. The android market is not unified, but still it is giving iPhone competition.

 

[Khimera2000]

[citation][nom]rohitbaran[/nom]Microsoft is trying to an Apple here. Copying won't help you MS. Look at Google. The android market is not unified, but still it is giving iPhone competition.[/citation]

cool show me the other companies coming out with apple tablets then otherwise read my comment above. Apple only makes one brand, apple. They also only do products for apple. M$# is restricting hardware to improve quality, but themsleves are not building the tablets.

So your telling me a company making only one product, and updating it is the exact same as another company controlling quality, still alowing partners to team up, but pushing for better quality across the line with all there partners?

Last time i checked IOS wasent licenced out to any company. last time i checked M$ can work on any computer including mac. last time I checked there was only one IPhone being developed at time, and there was only one apple tablet being developed at the time.

So your saying that developing one tablet with partners in house from hardware and softwear is the same as having multiple computer manufacturers partner up with there respective distributers to apply for discounts and get a better product to market?

let me see here... I see the chance for more then one win8 tablet to be released at the same time, and i see the chance for the OS to spread across multiple architectual setups.

so your saying that apple, who had to rip of linux to get there OS to work on X86 has more compatibility then windows 8 will from a hardware standpoint? can you provide proof that IOS will natively run on other tablets legaly, and will be supported by there venders?

Tell me your sources, tell me how there the same. Tell me how MS is trying to do an apple here? there is no IPad by samsung, ther is no IMac by motorola, apple still lives in a closed garden. M$ is still letting hardware manufactuers have some flexability in there desing, there just insuring quality by making sure venders partner up. Last time i checked that wasent exclusive to apple, in fact that wasent exclusive to computers.

Unless your telling me that other incdustries are coppying apple. maybe the military since there FLIR uses one manufacturer but has tightly controlled partners... I mean there is quality controll, and there are restrictions just like here. If that dosent work we can also say the same for car makers... they must be coppying apple since there stuck with specific partners with each componant, and quality is a must.

 

[dioxholster]

awesome im all for it. this is a vital step or else thy users will continue blaming windows for slowing down their computer.

 

[TeraMedia]

Acer probably purchased options on a few hundred future trays of Atoms for their low-end tablets, only to find out that those would not be supported in Win 8 tablets. Oops.

 

[millerm84]

Acer is complaining about MS's assertion that each tablet maker should limit themselves to a singular CPU vender, which is absurd and Acer has every right to point that out. Now creating minimum specs for a device to run your hardware is both savvy and SOP, as long as MS doesn't go the "Vista Capable" path that led to PCs being sold with 512MB of RAM and that Vista Certified badge right on the case.

Hardware vendors should read the minimum specs laugh and make the recommended specs the baseline specs.

And yes XP will run on 128MB of RAM, I've seen it done with 64MB (that I upgraded to 256MB to the joy of the PC's owner), but I wouldn't recommend it. I might recommend trying to jam your head through a 4x4 inch square hole if you wanted to experience running any MS OS on the minimum specs.

 

[robochump]

This is a way for MS to make sure their mobile OS is not installed into some POS which will make MS look bad by default.

 

[eddieroolz]

This is a very good idea. Without control, it would become Android.

 

[livebriand]

[citation][nom]rottingsheep[/nom]a right move for microsoft. i think they don't want windows 8 based tablets to be generalized as slow. different flavors, same experience... or the other way around.[/citation]
Maybe they won't have the fragmentation issues of Android this way.