Slashdot Mirror


Ballmer Promises Microsoft Tablet By Christmas

judgecorp writes "Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer told an audience at the London School of Economics, that there will be tablets running Microsoft's Windows operating system available by Christmas. 'We as a company will need to cover all form factors,' he told an audience of students and press. 'You'll see slates with Windows on them – you'll see them this Christmas.' Mind you, if he's talking about the rumoured HP Windows 7 slate, he may not be so pleased when it appears. A recent YouTube video showed a supposed prototype which has been described as a 'trainwreck in the making.'"

44 of 356 comments (clear)

  1. Well let's face it... by Hatta · · Score: 4, Funny

    Coal is so old fashioned.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  2. Well, there are a number still available by WillAdams · · Score: 3, Informative

    Motion has 3 models available:

    http://www.motioncomputing.com/

    There's the Archos 9:

    http://www.archos.com/products/tw/archos_9/index.html?country=us&lang=en

    and the Samsung Q1EX:

    http://www.samsung.com/us/computer/laptops/NP-Q1EX-FA01US

    and the Panasonic Toughbook is available as a slate.

    Sadly, Fujitsy quit making slates though (perhaps they'll go back to making them?) --- interestingly the selection of Windows slates has gotten so low that some people who want a larger format slate are purchasing the Axiotron Modbook (a converted Mac laptop) and installing Windows on it.

    William

    --
    Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
  3. But does it run (Android) Linux? by MonsterTrimble · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Or the bigger question - which of the big Linux distros have drivers for touchscreens? I can see Ubuntu being all over this one.

    --
    I call it 'The Aristocrats'
  4. It would have to be in the retail chain already by Animats · · Score: 5, Informative

    To be in the stores for the holiday shopping season, it would already have had to be shown to retailers, the retail space booked and paid for by Microsoft, and the first containers of product on ships in transit from China. It's too late in the retail cycle for this season.

  5. And in typical Ballmer fashion by Iphtashu+Fitz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm betting that the tablet will be running the exact same bloated Windows OS that is meant for PC's. Ballmer still wants to see the same Windows start menu, etc. on every single device no matter how big or small. He should learn a lesson from Apple with the iPhone & iPad. What makes them so popular is that Apple did NOT take the Mac OS-X GUI and try to shoehorn it on a smaller device. The smaller screens necessitated a much simpler and more user friendly interface. Until Ballmer accepts this and lets Microsoft develop a new UI paradigm for portable devices they're doomed to failure over and over again.

    1. Re:And in typical Ballmer fashion by doconnor · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The trouble is Microsoft has to base it on Windows OS, because the ability to run legacy Windows software is the only advantage they have over iOS, Blackberry, Android, WebOS or any other tablet.

    2. Re:And in typical Ballmer fashion by Altus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sadly, in this industry, sometimes just being practical is being revolutionary. Its amazing the degree to which people will throw themselves against the same obstacle over and over again without re-thinking their assumptions.

      This thread is filled with examples of tablets with windows on them and none of them have been serious commercial successes. MS has tried time and time again to enter this market and they have failed every time. One would think by now that they would do the practical thing and consider the platform from the ground up, bu they didn't do that over the last 10 years.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    3. Re:And in typical Ballmer fashion by flooey · · Score: 3, Interesting

      However besides swapping out a stylus for a mouse, MS has put in very little thought or development about optimizing the UI for tablets. There is no sliding. Clicking and dragging on the stylus is the same as with a mouse; however, with a stylus, it's not very as comfortable or elegant.

      One of the very interesting things that was pointed out to me is that scrolling with a mouse wheel and scrolling with a finger both work the way you expect them to, but they work in opposite directions. With a mouse wheel, moving your finger up moves the document up; on touchscreen devices, moving your finger up moves the document down. That's the kind of thing that makes just putting a desktop OS onto a touchscreen device a losing proposition: you need to change fundamental input interactions in order to make it work the way people think it should work.

    4. Re:And in typical Ballmer fashion by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Informative

      Since when was Windows an open development platform?

      Since it was first made available.

      Try writing a decent Windows app using gcc and not making use of frameworks like .Net, MFC, etc.

      For starters, all those frameworks that you've listed (and others which you did not) are layers on top of the core Win32 APIs, which can greatly simplify things, but don't really provide new capabilities. A testament to that is that most apps that ship out of the box in Windows don't use MFC, .NET, or any other framework - they're coded against raw Win32 API. .NET is not even a C/C++ framework, so why it's listed alongside gcc is beyond my comprehension. It's like complaining that you can't write Rails apps with gcc. That said, you can write .NET Windows apps using a fully OSS stack - Mono runs on Windows too.

      MFC is a proprietary Microsoft C++ framework. It's very archaic, too, and you'd have to be a masochist to write a new app using it. Meanwhile, Qt for Windows is available, works great, and comes with a great free IDE.

      This, by the way, is precisely what it means to be an "open development platform" - APIs, ABIs and file formats are all documented, and there are no legal restrictions on their use, so any company can provide development tools and frameworks targeting Windows. Qt SDK is a prominent one, but you can just as well use Java with either of the major IDEs, or any of the dozens of C++ frameworks, or D, or Python/PyGTK, or write your own.

      Note that even if you stick to Microsoft offerings, Windows SDK is free, and includes both command-line C++ compiler and C# / VB compilers. As well as debuggers and other tools. VS Express is free, though somewhat limited. It's all still proprietary, of course, so your point still stands - just wanted to point out that you don't need to pay any $$$ beyond that Windows license to develop for it.

      The vast majority of Windows development is done using Visual Studio because many people consider it the best development environment (at least on Windows). You're not in any way locked into it.

    5. Re:And in typical Ballmer fashion by ratboy666 · · Score: 4, Informative

      What the fuck. Revisionist much?

      Windows 1.03, 2, 286, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, Windows for Workgroups, NT, Windows 95 (and possibly even Windows 98) all did not have a free SDK. And the SDK was needed to program for those platforms.

      Hey, I went and bought a copy of Windows 1.03 -- and even though I also had a licensed copy of Microsoft C 5.1, 6.0, and MASM 4 and 5 I was not able to build an application for Windows. That would require the SDK, which was a considerable expense. I didn't buy the SDK until Windows 3.0.

      And, from 3.0 until Windows 98 (when I finally stopped writing Windows apps), I spent a lot of money on those "free" SDKs. In the Windows 9x/NT timeframe, $3000/year for MSDN, several thousand before MSDN, so make it around 20,000 (or more). Not counting third party tools and libraries.

      --
      Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
    6. Re:And in typical Ballmer fashion by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Windows 1.03, 2, 286, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11, Windows for Workgroups, NT, Windows 95 (and possibly even Windows 98) all did not have a free SDK. And the SDK was needed to program for those platforms.

      They did not have a free Microsoft SDK. They did not preclude you from rolling your own. Calling conventions were known. API calls were documented (in fact, API of Windows circa 3.1 was even "standardized" by Ecma - you can still download a PDF today). Knowing those, you can write your own prototypes for all system APIs that you need (as e.g. MinGW did - their windows.h and related headers are not derived from MS ones, but made from scratch).

      I don't recall where first alternative SDKs appeared, but I do rather vividly recall Borland Pascal and C++ allowing to write very nice GUI apps for Win3.1 without any downloads from MS. In mid-to-late 90s, Delphi was the king of IDEs on Windows 9x, soundly beating anything MS had to offer.

      They're not free? Well, yes, the third parties that developed them figured that they'd like to get paid for the work they've done. It's not cheap, so it took a while before free (in all meanings) MinGW got to the point of being usable. Nonetheless everyone could make their own - and many did.

      And, from 3.0 until Windows 98 (when I finally stopped writing Windows apps), I spent a lot of money on those "free" SDKs. In the Windows 9x/NT timeframe, $3000/year for MSDN, several thousand before MSDN, so make it around 20,000 (or more). Not counting third party tools and libraries.

      It was your choice to use the (rather expensive, indeed) Microsoft development tools. There were other options.

      More generally speaking, the availability of a free "official" (or any other) SDK, and openness of platform for development, are largely orthogonal. iOS is not open in that sense not because Apple charges you for a developer certificate, but because they place legal restrictions on development tools, and do not allow free unrestricted distribution of apps. Windows does not have, and never had, that kind of thing. That's why MinGW was possible, even if it took a while to get there.

    7. Re:And in typical Ballmer fashion by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Which is why they are going to die a slow death. And it started two years or three years ago (if not before). I saw the warning signs in 2003. Windows is a flat stable market, it has nothing "new" to offer, nor can it.

      Putting Windows anything on a tablet, because it can run "legacy" apps is just stupid. It is NOT a legacy product, and if shouldn't be treated as such.

      However, Microsoft COULD have come up with a OS that could be tied to AD (their best product, as bloated as it is) and controlled by Policy that ran on Tablets that wasn't "Windows". But they didn't, and they can't. THEY are WINDOWS. Everything they do is for WINDOWS. And as long as they think in terms of WINDOWS they are doomed to eventual failure, because WINDOWS doesn't do what people need on 4x5 inch screens or 9" tablets.

      In short, they've stopped being a "technology company", or "software company" and have become a "Windows Software Company". This is the same problem "railroad companies" faced, thinking they were in the Railroad business, when in fact, they were in the Transportation business.

      And this is why Apple is the #2 company in the world (Market Cap) and fast approaching #1 (Exxon), they aren't in the "Macintosh" business. If I was on the board of directors with Microsoft, I'd fire Balmer and find someone that had a vision of what kind of company Microsoft could be. I'd volunteer, but I doubt they'd pick a dumb idiot from the sticks like me.

      I am willing to listen to offers ;)

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  6. Re:Once again.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It tickles me how Microsoft turned into a "me too" company. "Where do you want to go today?" is more like "Where were you a few six months ago?"

  7. Several christmasses ago by EdZ · · Score: 3, Informative

    Hasn't Windows been on tablets since tablets were first sold, several years ago? Back when having no keyboard meant half your computer had fallen off, rather than being a selling point.

  8. Re:Doing it just to do it by LBArrettAnderson · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Windows has been on tablets for a decade, and they aren't at all bad.

  9. YouTube video is gone... by sapgau · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Video has been removed, that could be a story in itself...

    1. Re:YouTube video is gone... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
  10. Re:Once again.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Late? To the tablet market? Does the tech world have severe amnesia or something? It was called Windows XP Tablet Edition and there were plenty of devices sold. Microsoft just didn't anticipate that people would prefer having horrifically hobbled environments that can only execute approved farting applications downloaded through official sources.

  11. Re:Once again.... by gbjbaanb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft a few months (years) late and a billion dollars short... and the market analysts noticing at long last

    Shares in Microsoft have already fallen 23% since April this year, with analysts concerned that the computer giant is failing to assert itself in the growing smart phone and tablet computer markets.

    Ballmer's just trying to prop the value of his share options up before they force him out.

  12. Re:Once again.... by Goaway · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft is anything but late to this party. They have been trying to launch a tablet for over a decade now. They've tried again, and again, and again, and they have failed every single time.

    I've lost count of how many times they have tried, but it goes all the way back to Windows 95 for Pen Computing, or whatever it was called.

  13. Re:There never was a Courier by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I submit that a touch device that allowed you to "circle" an object, capture that object into an object clipboard, then drop it into any application which would be able to query the object or act on it in a special app-specific way *could* be developed.

    Indeed, this is what OLE intended before it faded away. If a CLR or JVM underlies the API, it should be possible still. Android seems to hint at this, but no one has the wherewithal to bring it all together. MS could do that, but they won't.

  14. Re:Once again.... by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It tickles me how Microsoft turned into a "me too" company.

    I seems like Microsoft has always been a "me too" company.

    Where do you think "embrace, extend (and extinguish)" came from? Microsoft has always been late to the market with technology, and that technology usually takes a couple of iterations to become really usable. In some cases, the technology is becomes pretty good, in other cases it gets deprecated and thrown out because even they can't make it work.

    Now, some of their stuff has gotten mature and fairly usable, but some rots on the vine and is mostly an expensive transitional technology that people buy and get burned with.

    But, except for Clippy, I am hard pressed to think of many situations where Microsoft felt like it was innovating. Granted, some of that might have been behind the scenes in APIs the the like (eg .NET), but as an end-user, Microsoft has been rolling out features that Mac, UNIX (and now Linux) have all incorporated for a long time.

    I don't hate Microsoft in quite the knee-jerk way I used to, and I honestly find most of their modern products to be pretty damned god and stable ... but it's hard to really think they've ever led the way in consumer technology that makes me say "ooooh, I gotta get me some of that".

    For the last bunch of years, they mostly seem to be watching what others do, come late to the game and then throw resources at it until they get it right (Sharepoint) or throw it away (Zune).

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  15. Re:Once again.... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 3, Insightful

    For the last bunch of years, they mostly seem to be watching what others do, come late to the game and then throw resources at it until they get it right (Sharepoint) or throw it away (Zune).

    I don't anyone who administers Sharepoint will ever claim that MS "got it right." ;)

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  16. Re:Doing it just to do it by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Informative

    From T other FA (eWeek needs better people if they think they can stop me cutting and pasting... sheesh...)

    Why include a "CTRL-ALT-DEL" button on the device's chassis unless you expect the software to crash on a regular basis? What's with having a mechanical button to activate a virtual onscreen keyboard? And yes, the device seems to web-surf pretty quickly, but an unmodified version of Windows 7 on a small touch screen translates into icons roughly the size of theoretical particles: You better have a stylus or small fingers.

    We're not even going to talk about how it takes 25 seconds to boot.

    The rest of the article is not worth looking at, let alone reading.

  17. Wow by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Funny

    Video has been removed, that could be a story in itself...

    Even a video of a Windows product can't stay up for more than a month!

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  18. It's a reaction to Wall Street by jbengt · · Score: 5, Informative

    The investment bank cut its rating of Microsoft shares from "buy" to "neutral".
    It said Microsoft was being threatened by the rise of tablet computers such as Apple's iPad, which do not run Windows software.

    1. Re:It's a reaction to Wall Street by 0123456 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You cut the rating for a billion dollar profit company to neutral? lol

      There are two reasons to buy shares in a company:

      1. Growth, which pushes up the value of those shares.
      2. Dividends, which give you a better return than a savings account.

      Windows may still bring in lots of profits, but the opportunities for growth are far less than a company entering new markets... and most people would rather own shares in growing companies than fat old companies that pay out dividends with a stable or declining share price.

  19. Re:Doing it just to do it by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So what he's saying is, we don't have a great idea for Windows on a tablet, but we know tablets are hot and we would look dumb if we don't make a windows tablet, so we're creating one just to try to look good. Of course, it will be a POS, but hey, we made it!

    Well, that's the thing: Windows' best selling feature is it works on anything. Windows' (arguable) worst feature is that it wasn't designed to work with anything. The bad part of not being in the hardware business (in this context) is that MS doesn't really have the ability to drive the market in that regard. So they seem to be in the position of cajoling some hardware manufacturer into releasing a tablet. Now they can partner with that company to develop features that will work well on a tablet, but it's not the same as Apple deciding "we will make a tablet" and doing everything necessary to make it a success.

    I don't know what the answer is for MS. Could be they need to acquire some sort of high-end, low-volume boutique PC manufacturer to serve as a marketing arm for new toys they want to develop. But for now they still depend on the manufacturers to decide what markets they want to get into.

  20. Re:Once again.... by gander666 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ding, we have a winner. Microsoft has had ample entry points into this market, and frankly the sales and adoption have been pathetic.

    Don't get me wrong, people who have adopted them are satisfied with their pen computers, but the sales have been in the low 200K units per year out of the 40M laptops or so sold per year. A tiny fraction.

    Repackaging WinMo or Win7 into an iPad like form factor will not result in success

    --
    Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress ... but I repeat myself. - Mark T
  21. Re:OMG by larry+bagina · · Score: 5, Informative
    I saw the leaked HP slate video a couple weeks back (I assume this was it). Highlights:
    • mouse pointer is visible when windows starts up then hides
    • you have to press a physical button to toggle the on screen keyboard
    • there's a physical button for alt-control-delete
    • touching performs a mouse click at that location, with a touch indicator/animation.
    • slow/jerky scrolling in internet explorer.

    It's windows 7 with some half-assed touch support bolted on. it will run your existing windows software but your windows software was designed for mouse and keyboard. I think you would need to be really desperate to go anywhere near it (this characterization applies to Microsoft, manufacturers, and consumers)

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  22. Sant's reindeer get the holiday off this year by Megahard · · Score: 3, Funny

    His sled will be propelled by eight flying chairs.

    --
    I eat only the real part of complex carbohydrates.
  23. Re:Once again.... by man_of_mr_e · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Microsoft has always been slow to adopt new technologies until they've been proven. They like to see other peoples mistakes and learn from them (though they don't always do so). As the saying goes, you can tell the pioneers by the arrows in their backs.

    However, addressing the "trainwreck" article.. it's rather stupid comments...

    "Why include a “CTRL-ALT-DEL” button on the device’s chassis unless you expect the software to crash on a regular basis?"

    What century is he living in where c-a-d still reboots a computer? It's used for several tasks these days, like.. oh, i don't know.. LOGGING IN?

    "What’s with having a mechanical button to activate a virtual onscreen keyboard?"

    Maybe because onscreen buttons may be obscured by apps running?

    "but an unmodified version of Windows 7 on a small touch screen translates into icons roughly the size of theoretical particles"

    Obviously he's never used Windows 7 on a multi-touch screen. You can use multi-touch to pinch-zoom the icons to whatever size you want.

    That's what causes a "trainwreck in the making?" Stuff that he simply doesn't understand.

  24. Re:This says a lot to me actually by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I mean, if they were concerned about getting a serious toehold in that market they'd release something solid when its ready, not when its sales might artificially peak due to Christmas shoppers right?

    MS has done this for years with consumer gadgets. For example, the Xbox and the Zune were pushed into the Christmas shopping seasons. Both allowed MS to claim that they moved millions of each when in reality, they simply pushed the quantities on retailers who would spend several months selling down their inventories. In the case of Zune, sometimes at bargain basement prices.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  25. Re:Looking forward to it. by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But my hope was that it ran a modified version of OSX.

    There was a survey that came out a week or so prior to the official announcement of the iPad - I heard about it on the now-defunct podcast "Network World's Twisted Pair". The survey-takers asked people whether they would prefer (on the iPad) a more-or-less standard OS X interface, or an iPhone-style (what Apple now calls iOS) interface. Something like 70% of the people stated they'd prefer the iOS style.

    I'm not saying this in an attempt to invalidate your opinion; I'm just pointing out that, among the wider population, the majority of people don't seem to want a computer-like interface to their tablets. We probably could have deduced that even without that survey, though, given the tepid sales previous Windows tablets have seen.

    I'd guess the take-away Mr. Ballmer needs to grasp is that the majority of people don't want a "Start" button on their slate...

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  26. Re:I'd settle for by mark72005 · · Score: 3, Funny

    These devices look sooooo sweet, I am going to get one on lunch day.

  27. Re:Once again.... by mark72005 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What people failed to see was that a tablet should not be a old tech feature like a laptop with a rotating screen. A tablet is an entirely different device, a totally new market. Not a bolt-on feature set for an OS.

  28. Re:Doing it just to do it by Culture20 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Why include a "CTRL-ALT-DEL" button on the device's chassis unless you expect the software to crash on a regular basis? What's with having a mechanical button to activate a virtual onscreen keyboard?

    I hate coming to the defense of Microsoft, but "CTRL-ALT-DEL" hasn't been a hard-reboot sequence since WinME. It's been used in WinNT/2K/XP/V/7 as a way to access the login prompt because IIRC it's a special sequence that only the kernel is allowed to listen for, so you can ostensibly be assured that no program other than the login prompt is accepting your username/password. A soft-keyboard version of "CTRL-ALT-DEL" would defeat that "security" purpose.

  29. Re:Once again.... by Da_Biz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Foreseeing something and actually doing it are two very different things.

    Apple released the first version of the Newton almost two decades ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MessagePad

    Microsoft's PC operating systems divisions, with its internecine management wars, has managed to produce uninspired designs, solutions that have more security holes than a sieve, and has generally stagnated in the arena of innovation.

    Microsoft doesn't have a technology problem: they've got a cultural problem. Like Xerox PARC of the days of yore, Microsoft's Research division cranks out all manner of bankable ideas--yet their corporate patrons fail to see the need to actually implement these things to any serious degree.

  30. Re:Looking forward to it. by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not saying this in an attempt to invalidate your opinion; I'm just pointing out that, among the wider population, the majority of people don't seem to want a computer-like interface to their tablets. We probably could have deduced that even without that survey, though, given the tepid sales previous Windows tablets have seen.

    Exactly, the appeal of the iPad (or any tablet) is a smaller, simplified interface that is well suited to the form factor, with a user interface that is suited to the device.

    All of the complaining that people won't be able to use it as a "real" computer is tech geeks thinking the rest of the world wants the same kind of machine they do.

    Taking a desktop OS and putting it on a tablet and not actually changing much isn't really much in the way of progress -- it's repackaging 20 year old tech in a new box and not really taking advantage of it. If Microsoft just wraps up their existing OS, then it doesn't stand a chance of competing with the iPad.

    As has been pointed out, Microsoft has been on tablets for a long time, and haven't really captivated people with it.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  31. Re:Once again.... by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Informative

    Repackaging WinMo or Win7 into an iPad like form factor will not result in success

    This is a very good point. I've actually used Windows 7 on a tablet PC, yes, complete with touch screen. It's horrible!

    Imagine having to do window management on a device like that, stuff you don't even have to bother about on iOS or Android OS. Imagine an OS where lots of apps aren't designed for e.g. changed dpi settings (to at least be able to put your thumb on a maximize widget and not hit the restore widget!) and have their UI's crap out completely at that. Imagine how no text box in the OS will automatically pop up a virtual keyboard, and that the built-in Windows 7 virtual keyboard that's there consumes a third of the entire display on a 1024x600 touch screen. It's like how polished Windows XP 64-bit is for 64-bit apps. That's where Windows 7 is today, at best. They haven't even thought about how you're supposed to *use* Windows 7 as a touch OS yet, it's just a cobbled together mess of mouse interfaces, touch-oriented keyboards, small widgets, and API's for multi-touch features, for the 0.32% that use such devices on Windows 7. And they're already talking of a HP Slate this christmas. This will risk ending up a huge disappointment for HP.

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  32. Re:Once again.... by gtall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Clearly Apple won but it's not as if one direction is obviously superior to the other from an objective viewpoint."

    I'm not sure about that. I would think a small screen is simply not going to lend itself to head-shrunken Windows. The size changes the paradigm, that's what Apple got but they didn't get it in a flash. It came because the way music is bought for iPods. Music, to Apple, is mere software. People seem to like a lot of choices as long as they are well organized. That's the problem with the Windows world, it isn't well organized. It's a polyglot that makes most owners scared to death they might have to upgrade their OS. Apple figured out it was the closed garden that makes owners feel safe from the horrors only an OS screwup can inflict.

    That said, Apple's machines are not for geeks who revel in a freewheeling environment because they know how to navigate it. Instead of a horror they see an interesting challenge. MS has corrupted that experience, Linux is attempting to give it back. But then Linux runs up against the mass market which doesn't care about computer challenges. So the trick for the Android devices will be to neuter the free-wheeling environment that scared the hell out of most people yet still allow for a geek-appeal to get under hood. The later will help encourage apps to be produced for it...as long as those apps don't reopen the box of horrors users do not want.

  33. Re:Once again.... by aristotle-dude · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well, to be fair... Microsoft demo'd a lot of features in Longhorn back in 2002 that apple copied and was able to get to market with faster (due to Micorosoft's major screwups in developing Longhorn). Microsoft showed stuff like 3D Window managers with wobbly windows, instant search, etc.. long before they were in other products like Compiz/XGL or OSX.

    I think you have your history a little screwed up. Apple released hardware accelerated version of their compositing rendering engine Quartz back in August 23, 2002 (10.2 Jaguar). Previous to that, they had software based Quartz in 10.0 and 10.1 and Quartz evolved out of Display Postscript on NextStep. Apple and Next had been working on search for a long time before that as well.

    The taskbar in Windows 95 and quick launch was stolen from the NextStep dock.

    --
    Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  34. Re:Once again.... by Altus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I disagree.

    First off, calling iOS a "phone os" when its core is the same as that of Mac OS is showing that your not really thinking about the difference. The difference between the approaches has nothing to do with the core of the OS and everything to do with the displace and interface levels of the OS. That is where the difference is between iOS and Mac OS X and, in so much as OS X and Windows are similar, it is also the difference between iOS and Windows.

    So given that the basic difference is in the UI layer I think its pretty obvious why iOS is better suited to tablets than windows. Windows was designed for mouse interaction and iOS was designed ground up for touch interaction. From a design standpoint, there really is no doubt which tactic is better for designing an OS for a touch based device.

    Now that said, design isnt everything. Microsoft wanted full windows on their tablet so that they could leverage a large library of applications for the platform, even though those apps would not be easy to use with a touch interface. Apple managed to get the best of both worlds by releasing the iPhone first (the first phone that provided an easy way for people to build and, more importantly, market phone applications) and then was able to leverage those applications on the launch of the iPad. I suspect if the iPad had come first Apple would have faced an up hill battle trying to get developers and users on board at the same time.

    --

    "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

  35. Re:I'd settle for by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The problem is that they're getting to the point where software lock-in, strong-arming OEMs, making vague unspecific threats about patents and generally acting like a street thug isn't going to work.

    If everyone is using an iPhone or an Android device, what's Microsoft going to do, hire people to break their phones? Wait, they might just...

    They've been coasting on Windows and Office for 20 years, but that ride is almost done. They'll have to compete for real now, and it will be pretty amusing to watch, since they have clearly forgotten how to do it.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.