Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft To Sell Its Own Windows RT Tablet
Glasswire writes "ComputerWorld reports that Microsoft will announce a Microsoft-branded tablet on Monday running the Win RT (ARM-based) subset version of Win 8. MSFT choose not to offer a x86 Win 8 version, which could have given them a performance advantage over ARM-based Apple iPads. A PCMag opinion piece titled 'A Microsoft Tablet Would Be Dumb' says, 'The only real reason to introduce a Microsoft-branded tablet is because Microsoft couldn't get anyone else to make a Windows RT tablet.' No reaction yet from Microsoft's system OEM customers that it will now be competing with."
You have to make up your mind. Either MS could not find anybody to make an RT tablet, or they will have competitors in the RT tab;let market. It cannot be both.
I am no fan of Microsoft, but I tend to like them better when they are the underdog. It seems it brings the better out of them.
As a network administrator/system operator/analyst/jack of all, I want an x86 tablet please. Why? Because I need a windows tablet in the enterprise that I can manage like a computer.
RT is nice...for the consumer space...I guess. But I really want a windows tablet for the enterprise space please.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
As the GP pointed out, if Google can buy Motorola and own the Xoom and the RAZR, what's wrong w/ Microsoft having its own tablet or phone? In fact, given that most OEMs sub-contract that work out to the likes of Foxconn, LiteOn and other actual manufacturers in China and Taiwan, does Microsoft have anything to lose by doing exactly that, getting someone to make a tablet specifically for them, and then putting their logo on it? They're not even making it, so the end product will be no better nor worse than other vendors. Only difference will be Windows RT vs Android vs iOS, but that's a real Microsoft vs Google vs Apple differentiator.
Particularly given that since they want to price it higher than either Apple or Google/Mot, chances are that no vendor would want to bat for them w/ such a market disadvantage. So Microsoft is probably pitching this themselves, hoping that their brand name will help sell it.
Only odd decision of theirs, though - they'd have done better to have gone w/ either Medfield or Fusion, rather than ARM.
Their current-gen console has sold 67 million units, despite reliability problems. Microsoft must be doing something right.
From the post: "...running the Win RT (ARM-based ) subset version of Win 8."
Clearly implies Win RT is based on Win 8, but a subset, since you cannot run legacy Win apps and is missing many other full Win 8 features.
Full Win8 is only available in x86 version.
Look, we can all see this will flop, but when it does, can this time the shareholders dump Ballmer?
He makes terrible choices, and that impacts their products. They have talent in Microsoft, they have money, they have a market to leverage, yet time and time again he fails to marshal them.
So at some point the shareholders have to say enough and dump him.
Oh and BTW, the Acer A700 tablet has sold out on pre-order. That's the *Android* Quad Core Tegra 3, with bigger than HD screen (1920x1200), so Windows RT will face incredibly tough competition out there.
or did they do this, decide to mfg their own tablet, because at those prices nobody wanted to make a WinRT based tablet and end up like Nokia? Yes I know some had announced they were planning a Windows tablet but we've also seen Microsoft on stage with vendors(HP) showing product before which didn't see daylight.
So why a Microsoft built tablet? Has Ballmer really gone chair throwing ape over Apples success? His attack on the iPod didn't go so well( hello Zune ). Nor did Windows Mobile 6.5 or their latest 2 year attempt with Windows Phone 7. So now a port of Windows 7 to ARM, a rejiggering of the Windows Phone UI framework for tablets along with no backwards compatibility and they're going after Apple? Steve B is looking at strike three it would seem. Maybe he thinks there is a huge pent up demand to do word processing on tablets and since they can't rely on the x86 Windows economy and compatibility they'll leverage their next best monopoly and that is in the business office suits. ie, Microsoft Office. Yup, that is my guess at the moment. It'll be all about running MS Office on a tablet and nobody wanted to touch that with a 10' pole so it had to be done by Microsoft themselves. And they probably 'leveraged' their XBox manufacturing partners to make it. Leveraged in quotes because they probably threatened to move the XBox production elsewhere if these were not sold to Microsoft at cost.
But as is usually the case with MS, the real details will remain a mystery until some court documents expose what really went on behind the scenes. It's almost always completely different from what they say in public. We're looking forward to Monday for a good laugh.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
My understanding if Google charged for Android and if Google didn't allow OEMs to modify Android then there would be more outcry. Android isn't quite free as Google gets their money from advertising and services and Google is starting to put in more requirements for Android. The main worry here is that OEMs have to pay for Win RT. MS will pay nothing and will be at an advantage in terms of cost. The latest rumor is $80 per tablet. For a $500 tablet, that is a significant amount of money. Second is that MS can relax requirements for themselves for Win RT which OEMs cannot do.
Besides screwing over OEMs, what else does MS can do? Many OEMs are still a little miffed about Zune where they supported PlaysForSure for years trying to battle Apple only to have MS abandon them with Zune only DRM that locked them out of the market. While music is no longer DRM laden, video and books still have DRM attached.
The last thing is MS has not been very successful at hardware. Sure mice and keyboards are okay. But Zune was a flop. Kin was a flop. Xbox is finally in the black of almost 9 years of being supported by Windows and Office revenue. If Xbox was a separate company they would have had to declare bankruptcy or leave the business like NEC and Sega.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Google pulled something off? They have a near monopoly with their search engine. Let's see.. what else... oh.. a few people use gmail... and... ????
Stuff that has failed:
Google+
Google X (google rebranded with an OSX theme.. it lasted a day)
Google catalog
web accelerator
Google Video (this was going to whip YouTube... planb was apparently to just buy youtube)
google answers - pay us $10 to answer a question for you researched using google
google wave
wiki search
google audio ads
google dodgeball (like foursquare)
jaiku (like twitter)
google notebook
google pagecreator
google buzz
froogle
google coupons
voice search
google viewer (instead of search results page... display them like a slideshow)
google checkout
print ads
realtime search
google labs
google lively
orkut
friend connect
google latitude
knol
google health
igoogle
google click-to-call
google sidewiki
goog-411
google tv
google radio ads
google shared stuff (bookmarking site)
searchmash
google search timeline
google bookmark lists
google desktop
fast flip
google pack
google web security
image labeler
subscribed links
app inventor
City Tours
Google Breadcrumb
Google News Timeline
Google Sets
Google Squared
Google Talk Guru
Image Swirl
Places Directory
Realtime Mytracks
Script Converter
Sputnik.
OK.. that's enough for now. There's more... that's just what I could remember + what i could find in 5 mintues.
Why would anyone count on google to pull off *ANY* project over Microsoft. At least Microsoft has more than 1 profitable project.
Why is it that Microsoft can't seem to do anything until some one else does it and it's usually Apple?
Corporate culture. Microsoft is famously a competitive environment, but from what I've read it's not companies like Apple that's the enemy, it's other projects at Microsoft that might siphon resources from yours. When an outside vendor introduces a successful product, nobody can say, "it'll never sell." When the product is *wildly* successful, like the iPad, it can even overcome "we tried that before and it doesn't work."
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I know this seems like reverse logic, but Microsoft having its own branded tablet then licensing it to OEMs is a good idea. First, there's a reference model, and someone BIG to compete with on price, added features, etc. It's a bit of a market creation tool to give Microsoft more reach with RT.
This begs the question: do I think it will work? No. Added Office or no, Microsoft is a battleship that made money by following and is now a battleship so jinormous that it takes three years to turn so it can fire its admittedly huge guns. It will, however, push Apple and Google forward towards adding value because they know just how large the shells that Microsoft fires can be. Everybody wins. Lots of powder burns.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.