Android runs on atom based smartphones without fuss. No application faces compatibility issues. How could be so different when it comes to windows?
I'm really interested on knowing this. It's known that google never made x86 version of android officially. So did Atom start reading ARM instruction set out of the blue?
Windows 8 honestly is what Microsoft Deserves. It's what they get for not listening to their own in-house test engineers for all of those years, their own developers, etc. Their design engineers do NOT know better. They sometimes do have great ideas sure but as in this case; way left field. Might be great in strictly the RT standpoint but they pushed so many people out of it that they don't even wanna try it. Plus Android is so well established right now, I really wounder why they even want to try to compete in that water. I actually have an RT tablet. They gave them away as door prizes once at Best Buy I think it was, maybe some other store, for something... Cause they couldn't sell them. I booted it up. Ehh... Even my grandparents don't want it. Now that's bad. Eventually I'll get around to wiping it and putting some flavor of something else on it but... If I can.
I'm so pissed at MS these days. I was one of their biggest supporters and after the crap Win8 and initial Xbox plans I just can't stand by them any longer. Yea, they changed their mind but DAMAGE done. Why the heck isn't there a fix out for Win8 start screen and start menu yet? Why are they dumbing things down to the point I don't even want to use the OS any more? I live to customize and enhance my system. They are brining computing to the idiots and throwing out the power users.....DONE with it.
Agreed with the above comments.
There is a perfect middle ground but instead they straddled it losing their strengths. I was excited that maybe they used some real talent and developed a true breakthrough that used one extremely well written and virtualized OS to span multiple hardware types. Instead of true innovation we got four ecosystems out of Win8. I think Canical's Ubuntu, a company with 1/1000th the budget is bridging this gap better.
I also purchased a windows RT device (Lenovo Yoga 11) and i do have to say im extremely happy with it. Who the hell uses anything that cant be run within a web browser these days on a portable device anyways? Its battery life is unbeatable and the flexibility of a hybrid laptop-tablet is awesome to have. Im definitely in the upper echelon of power users which is why i have a monster rig to handle my heavy computing needs, but as for mobile and what most people use laptops/tablets for anyways (web/youtube, word processing, movie playback) they are great devices.
[I also purchased a windows RT device (Lenovo Yoga 11) and i do have to say im extremely happy with it. Who the hell uses anything that cant be run within a web browser these days on a portable device anyways? Its battery life is unbeatable and the flexibility of a hybrid laptop-tablet is awesome to have.]
Actually Atom based W8 tablet can do everything RT tablet does, has same or better battery life, extremely light (lighter than ipad2), has equal or better processing power than RT tablet, and has x86 compatibility. There is really no place for a RT tablet unless RT devices can do things a lot more better, or sells at a price a lot cheaper. MS should have offer RT OS for free so that RT devices sells at price range compatibile than the $200 segment Android tablets.
Microsoft should have executed their launch of RT and W8 like this:
(1) Launch x86 W8 tablet first in the market, let the customers have a more useful tablets that can run all existing applications, and then wait for the "Metro" apps to be developed.
(2) Create a Surface tablet based on Atom to address the battery life and weight concerns for the x86 W8 tablet. For those who wants ipad like battery life and weight, this is the model they can go for. Sell this at price comparable to iPad.
(3) When there are enough useful "Metro" apps already available (including MS own, such as Outlook), then launch the ARM based variant of Surface. This segment should target the $200 Android segment, which should be achievable as they use the same hardware. This will mean RT OS is likely to be free of charge.
You do not want your competitors to be able to entrenched in any price segment. Especially the low end if you want your OS to be the dominant OS, not a niche OS. I am sure some MS executive would have thought of this, but the leadership in MS must have thought otherwise. And this shows MS leadership is making huge business mistakes and there is still no sign of they will change their mind. As of now, the future of MS does not look so great.