Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft's Surface Caught Windows OEMs By Surprise

MojoKid writes "Microsoft's Surface isn't just an attempt to take on the iPad or an articulation of MS's independent design philosophy — it's a fundamental threat against the OEMs who've spent decades as Microsoft's partners and collectively destroyed the industry's perception of the PC as a high-value product. The adversarial roots run deep. Microsoft didn't tell its partners about Surface until three days before the event and gave only the most minimal details on the product. Only the largest vendors even got a phone call; Asus and Acer, the 4th and 5th largest PC manufacturers worldwide, have stated that they had no idea anything was coming. For OEMs who have spent decades working in lock-step with Redmond, that's deeply unsettling."

565 comments

  1. *** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    *** Announcement project***
    ***to be distributed to all OEM guys.***

    Hey guys, we're going to try ruin you again in 3
    ( ) years
    ( ) months
    () days
    ***
    Please select the right choice, boss.
    Marketing Slime Department

    1. Re:*** Announcement project*** by tripleevenfall · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Sources close to Microsoft have told us that the software giant built Surface because it was unhappy with the way its traditional partners [such as HP and Dell] weren't innovating around its next-generation operating system."

      I wonder why manufacturers might not be "innovating around" windows mobile, or whatever they call it these days. Because there isn't any demand...? Because MS is 5 years too late to the party...?

    2. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because these companies were never innovators to begin with. They were box builders with economies of scale.

    3. Re:*** Announcement project*** by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Sources close to Microsoft have told us that the software giant built Surface because it was unhappy with the way its traditional partners [such as HP and Dell] weren't innovating around its next-generation operating system."

      I wonder why manufacturers might not be "innovating around" windows mobile, or whatever they call it these days. Because there isn't any demand...? Because MS is 5 years too late to the party...?

      cough PCs are commodity resources cough

      Seriously, this is like 1973, but with tablets and phones rather than cars - price of gas suddenly goes sky high (from 0.25$US/gallon to about 1.30$US/gallon, shortages abound) the GM, Ford, Chrysler and American Motoros only focused on big V8 engines (think 6L or more displacement) Meanwhile the automakers of the rest of the world, who made cars which could stretch a gallon to 25 or more miles ate their lunch. Took about 10 years for Detroit to sort their junk out.

      PCs have been more cores, more clock, more memory, but basically the same old sh*t operating system, just more confusing from release to release. Then the iPhone shows up and reveals not everyone is in love with being chained to a desktop or laptop (which can only choke out a few hours on battery.) Paradigm change.

      Early Win XP tablets are clunky and problematic, because the operating system isn't geared to the interface. Most tablets are useless without a keyboard. Then the iPad launches and people find they don't need no steenking keyboard (though still nice to have sometimes, it's not entirely necessary.)

      Now the war is in full swing between Google and Apple, which have trampled the laptop and desktop markets, largely because people want to be more portable and more mobile. And there are loads of apps which work great, Android promotes development more openly than Apple. And Microsoft has no answer but some abandoned Slate thingie.

      Lot of water under the bridge and now iOS and Android rule the roost, with large customer bases, app stores, consumer acceptance (even lust in some cases.) Microsoft thinks they're going to walk in with these things and get it right on the first try, because their OEM buds were dropping the ball? Not quite.

      Fewer people need Microsoft and many are happy to be free of that enigmatic and often incompetent company (Hey, what's a few security holes here and there? How about a few botched OS releases?) Honestly, adios MS.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    4. Re:*** Announcement project*** by UnknowingFool · · Score: 5, Informative

      Innovating? I think many of the partners are just now getting over the royal screwing they got with the Vista.

      Vista was late. MS changed things constantly and at the last minute. One change that hurt the OEMs was the whole Vista Compatible/Ready fiasco where MS included Intel graphics as Vista acceptable very late when they told OEMs that it would not be. HP was thoroughly pissed as they had planned their hardware around this. To put into context why this screwed over HP, let's delve into it. In planning for Vista which would not include Intel graphics at the time (915 chipset I think), HP would have to order the more expensive 945 from Intel or go with discrete. That would be more expensive but HP had planned for that maybe a year in advance. All the sudden, MS changes direction and allows it but only as "Vista Ready" meaning it couldn't run Aero. That meant all the low cost OEMs suddenly could put out "Vista" PCs at a lower cost even though they could only run the basic version. That didn't matter to these OEMs as long as they got sales.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    5. Re:*** Announcement project*** by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Microsoft was on of the first to the party. It is just that they sucked. I wish people would get a grip on this. Windows Phone 7 was not their first version of their phone OS! Microsoft was pushing Windows Mobile for many version before the rebranding and new UI! I am not even a hard core Microsoft hater. Windows 7 didn't suck, Microsoft Flight Simulator rocks, the XBox 360 is a great consol and has made them a pile of money. Windows Phone is a disaster.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    6. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Dan+East · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There wasn't anything innovative about the Windows CE / Pocket PC hardware even after generation after generation of devices. Devices would get a slightly faster CPU, or slightly better LCD panels, and that was it. It is my personal opinion that the capacitive method of touchscreen is what truly allowed the iPhone and following devices to succeed. The resistive touchscreen was a hardware limitation that could only support a single touch, did not register a touch when the screen was physically touched (and that makes all the difference in the world, see below), and suffered from accuracy / calibration issues. Microsoft could not create a UI that did not revolve around the stylus until those hardware limitations were overcome, and none of the OEMs had any motivation to invent new hardware that wouldn't even be utilized or accommodated by the OS.

      For example, let's say that Dell invented capacitive touch and wanted to put it in the Dell Axim line of Pocket PCs. So they contact Microsoft and told them of this amazing new touch capability. Do you think Microsoft would then completely throw out their stylus based GUI and embrace the new technology, leaving HP, Casio, Asus and other Pocket PC manufactures totally in the dark? Both Microsoft and the OEMs were crippled in their own ways by relying on the other to make advances. It becomes a "chicken or the egg" first kind of problem.

      Now about touch screens. The problem with using fingers on resistive touchscreens is that you can physically touch the screen, but not press hard enough for it to register. So there was no correlation between sensory reception and interacting with the device. With capacitive touch it can be tuned such that the moment you physically contact the screen (and thus "feel" you touched the screen) a touch will register. That subtlety makes all the difference in the world. Anyone who spent much time using resistive touch, and trying to use it without a stylus (playing games, using 3rd party "touch based" keyboards etc) knows what I'm talking about. My thumbs would be very sore after a gaming session from pushing the screen extra hard to make sure it registered my presses.

      --
      Better known as 318230.
    7. Re:*** Announcement project*** by asteriskshill · · Score: 0

      Just to clarify, Windows Mobile is their old mobile OS, that has been obsolete for about 2 years now, replaced by Windows Phone.
      However, that is not pertinent here, since the OS that runs on Surface is Windows 8.
      BTW, are we still calling it Surface, or is it $urface now?

      --
      Yes! Opinions are at least as important as facts!
    8. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Pope · · Score: 1

      The 302 and 350 cubic inch V8s (5 & 5.7 litres respectively) were far more common than the 400s or 427s. Your point still stands IMO. Though the double-whammy of fuel prices and increased safety standards didn't help Detroit out either.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    9. Re:*** Announcement project*** by symbolset · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They don't have the margins to make big bold bets.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    10. Re:*** Announcement project*** by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The 302 and 350 cubic inch V8s (5 & 5.7 litres respectively) were far more common than the 400s or 427s. Your point still stands IMO. Though the double-whammy of fuel prices and increased safety standards didn't help Detroit out either.

      True, 289, 327, 330, 351, etc. were common, but the flagships were driven by 454 (Chevy), 455 Olds, 430 (Buick), 400, 429 (Ford), 500.1 (Cadillac). Such focus on multi cores and large memory resources to hand the shear bloat of operating system and applications -- if it weren't for an operating system which tries so hard to be all and do all, the market would have been more focused upon lower current draw / tighter code / better peformance, but all Microsoft and their buddies were doing were selling us more demand upon resources. That's fine, if your work requires massive resources, but many people don't. With the web and a few apps some people get everything done without needing a big machine.

      It's entertaining, in some ways, but sad in others. I'm sure someone at IBM is looking at Microsoft, in light of how the PC eclipsed the mainframe, and thinking "Didn't see it coming, did you?"

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    11. Re:*** Announcement project*** by a90Tj2P7 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Now the war is in full swing between Google and Apple, which have trampled the laptop and desktop markets

      Portable devices have more or less supplemented laptops and desktops, they really haven't made any big dent towards replacing them, let alone "trample" them. They've taken more away from the mobile phone market than desktop computing.

    12. Re:*** Announcement project*** by jsepeta · · Score: 2

      windows phone 7 is ALSO being replaced by Windows Phone 8, without any upgrade patch.

      Microsoft has their heads squarely jammed up their ass so they couldn't see that they had already named a device the surface, now confusing the marketplace. it's about as dumb as apple naming their new Ipad the New Ipad. The marketing MBAs behind these terrible name choices should be drawn and quartered.

      --
      Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
    13. Re:*** Announcement project*** by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 5, Interesting

      > Microsoft was on of the first to the party. It is just that they sucked.

      Sort-of correct. Microsoft had a tablet ("WinPad" in 1996 and a "MS Tablet PC" in 2000 at Comdex ) and phone ("Pocket PC" in 2000) long before Apple (2010 iPad and 2007 iPhone, respectively; technically Apple had the Newton in 1987 so they were first but we all know how that turned out), yet sales of Apple's hardware blows Microsoft's out of the water? Why is that? (i.e. Why do non-geeks prefer a iPhone / iPad?. Where is the MS Zune now?)

      You mentioned "It is just that they sucked." In business it is ok "to suck", you just have to "suck less then the competition."

      Microsoft continues to fail for the most part (with notable exceptions such as the ones you mentioned) because Microsoft doesn't have a fucking clue about consistent & responsive Hardware+Software+User Experience. Apple mastered "good enough" ages ago. Microsoft's "good enough" means inconsistency. It's attention to the details.

      References:
      * http://www.pcworld.com/article/187062/microsofts_history_with_the_tablet_pc.html
      * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Tablet_PC
      * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Mobile
      * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablet_computer
      * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone
      * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zune

    14. Re:*** Announcement project*** by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

      "Sources close to Microsoft have told us that the software giant built Surface because it was unhappy with the way its traditional partners [such as HP and Dell] weren't innovating around its next-generation operating system."

      I wonder why manufacturers might not be "innovating around" windows mobile, or whatever they call it these days. Because there isn't any demand...? Because MS is 5 years too late to the party...?

      Having used a windows phone at the recent TechEd, I can't see the thing being terribly successful. There are a few nice features, but the tile interface is completely frustrating to manipulate. I thought "surface" was supposed to be something other than just a windows mobile tablet, no?

    15. Re:*** Announcement project*** by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

      Microsoft was on of the first to the party. It is just that they sucked. I wish people would get a grip on this. Windows Phone 7 was not their first version of their phone OS! Microsoft was pushing Windows Mobile for many version before the rebranding and new UI! I am not even a hard core Microsoft hater. Windows 7 didn't suck, Microsoft Flight Simulator rocks, the XBox 360 is a great consol and has made them a pile of money. Windows Phone is a disaster.

      Windows CE/PocketPC was pretty great to have around the turn of the century. Nobody was selling anything else close to it. Unfortunately, MS didn't do anything with it until they had already let competitors take the opportunity from them.
      Still, I enjoyed having a phone that would play mp3's and videos years before it was common.

    16. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Missing.Matter · · Score: 1

      they had already named a device the surface, now confusing the marketplace

      The original surface is known by about .00001% of the population, and has been rebranded. Anyone confused by this probably isn't too bright.

    17. Re:*** Announcement project*** by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      GM, Ford, Chrysler and American Motoros only focused on big V8 engines (think 6L or more displacement)

      Ahh...the good old days...when a manly car sounded and moved like a manly car.

      Reminds me...need to start scanning around for an older (70's) Trans Am....455 4-speed...I want to get one of those and fix it up. I've got a job..I can afford it for a daily driver.

      :)

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    18. Re:*** Announcement project*** by ebuck · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They don't have the margins to make big bold bets.

      True, but that is in part due to not having the obsene amounts of cash that rolls in when a big bold bet pays off.

      Apple has shown that there are so few people willing to make the bets, that they can safely win about 70% of the time. The payoff seems high enough to cover the few misses (AppleTV), which is why Apple is now has a market capitalization of twice Microsoft, fourteen times HP, and twentyeight times Dell.

      HP and Dell made the obscene amounts of cash on big bold bets, that's how they came to be. The friuts of their prior successes, like all fruits, don't keep forever.

      HP comes to market too slowly, and kills great products before the public can get excited about them. Dell has streamlined manufacturing and custom orderability enough that it is hard to imagine buying a computer without a Dell like experience.

      The real question is, what has HP and Dell done lately?

    19. Re:*** Announcement project*** by itsdapead · · Score: 1

      Windows CE/PocketPC was pretty great to have around the turn of the century. Nobody was selling anything else close to it.

      Symbian/EPOC? Palm OS? Sharp Zaurus (Linux/Qtopia)?

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    20. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Sir_Sri · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's pretty much it.

      Microsofts business model for years was to build software that could run on a wide variety of hardware. They'd do some mock up non commercial things to show off concepts, and then leave it up to all of the 3rd party teams to either develop their own ideas, or to pick up on microsofts ideas and role with it.

      And that's why we've all been using mTablets since 2000, because Bill Gates told us tablets were the future in 2000, with a half decent demo in 2002 of something that I think was even keyboardless (in the MS parlance that made it a slate).

      Now here's the strange part. I've had tablets (convertible tablets) since 2005. Toshiba, HP. The latter has working touch on it, but the virtual keyboard input was always shitty, given that it was connected to a keyboard already that's not a huge surprise. So microsoft and partners *could* have had the iPad equivalent as early as 2003. And didn't, unless they didn't get touch working nicely until 2008. But either way, the manufacturers didn't innovate.

      Surface is microsoft trying to either give their manufacturers a swift kick in the arse and shame them into doing something. Or its microsoft deciding that it can't rely on the manufacturers anymore, and it's going to do it itself (think xbox). A microsoft equivalent of the google nexus line of thinking is actually really compelling. Not so much because I'd want to buy one, but because it might make everyone else wake up and start making things worth buying.

    21. Re:*** Announcement project*** by jimmyfrank · · Score: 1

      Adios MS, yikes, I hope not, I make a living thanks to MS. The demand for .NET devs has increased over the last 6 months so that's good.

    22. Re:*** Announcement project*** by rgbatduke · · Score: 2

      Perhaps it is because the market has been resistant as all hell to moving past Windows XP because a) it worked; b) Vista didn't and cost MS all of its vendor street cred; c) Windows 7 wouldn't run on legacy hardware. At least not unlike a pig; d) legacy software wouldn't always run on Vista or 7 and not all vendors updated their software so that it would (or charged money for the update); the PC market grew suddenly enormously soggy as the desktop market evaporated, laptops became the new desktop (and got very, very cheap) and they had no damn MARGINS left to PAY for "innovation" -- and still pay for all of MS's "innovations" in the high cost of the OS; e) did I mention Android ate their lunch, Google surfaced as a thin appliance who-cares-what-your-OS is layer, and even linux started to come out of the closet?

      No?

      As I pointed out in the last post on this, this is all just Microsoft engaged in an elaborate form of Seppuku. They screwed Borland, Lotus, Corel, Netscape and got (mostly) away with it. They screwed IBM over OS/2 and got away with it. Now they are basically screwing all of the hardware manufacturers in the world, without a friend left in the software world either. Either they "become" Apple -- an odd goal given that Apple has remained competitive largely because of a handful of highly innovative hardware products of the sort one cannot guarantee finding every five years to keep your company afloat in the long run -- or they die.

      I'm betting that they die, slowly and painfully, the way one does in fact die with one's guts spilled out through a self-inflicted wound.

      On the good side of things, we have a very good chance of seeing OTC Linux and Android hardware from all of the big manufacturers, far better hardware support, and who knows -- maybe GAME manufacturers will read the handwriting on the wall. Will they still want to write for MS operating systems when MS sells both PC hardware and the Xbox and has a vested interest in eating their lunch? Will they still find a PC market when PC makers turn towards Linux and Android, respectively, to be able to compete with Apple and Microsoft? And actually win -- MS will have to PAY for its OS development on its own hardware platform, where linux development, highly distributed, is much, much cheaper.

      rgb

      --
      Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
    23. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 1

      Thats actually a very interesting point. I think you are right in that there are so few companies going for the big idea, that if you dare to go for the big idea at the right time, you're almost guaranteed total market share dominance.

    24. Re:*** Announcement project*** by steelfood · · Score: 2

      Seriously, this is like 1973, but with tablets and phones rather than cars - price of gas suddenly goes sky high (from 0.25$US/gallon to about 1.30$US/gallon, shortages abound) the GM, Ford, Chrysler and American Motoros only focused on big V8 engines (think 6L or more displacement) Meanwhile the automakers of the rest of the world, who made cars which could stretch a gallon to 25 or more miles ate their lunch. Took about 10 years for Detroit to sort their junk out.

      OT, but Detroit didn't learn anything from that. 20 years later (the 90's), they were back to making gas guzzlers again. Fast forward to the late 2000's, and yet again they get their lunch eaten for the same reason no less. Hell, they almost starved to death this time until the government gave them a welfare check.

      The worst part is that you absolutely know that when gas is cheap again (in say, 20 years), they'll be making the same mistakes yet again.

      But yeah, Microsoft's Windows 8 strategy means Linux on the desktop FTW. Only, I suspect the personal, home, casual computing paradigm is moving away from desktop and into mobile (though exactly what shape this will take is beyond me). Not that I particularly like Unity, but it's good to have a project out there to address this up and coming market segment. Only, they should've made it an optional interface instead of the default.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    25. Re:*** Announcement project*** by jimmyfrank · · Score: 1

      There will be an upgrade to 7.8 but not to 8 so if that's what you meant.

    26. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is this modded insightful? Microsoft is upset with their hardware partners not doing anything to appropriately sell WinRT, or Windows 8 Pro for that matter on a tablet.

      This has nothing to do with Windows Phone, and the fact that the poster called it Windows Mobile should have shown him off as the troll that he is.

    27. Re:*** Announcement project*** by coyote_oww · · Score: 1

      Reminds me less of cars, more of 1995, when everyone was bagging on Microsoft for being behind the curve on browsers. The world was going to be Netscape soon!

      MS has a pretty good track record of catching up to markets that didn't see coming. They have a backbone of other products and services, so it's not Home Run or Die! for them. Based on their track record, they get something second-tier out, then steadily adapt features and functions from their competitors over the next 5-10 years. Meanwhile, Linux geeks will foam at the mouth and celebrate the imminent death of MS.

      MS could go broke on this, but I really doubt it. I like the idea of MS, Amazon, Apple, and a dozen others competing for tablet dollars. Hopefully they all decide to sell at a loss trying ineffectively to capture the market, till something completely new and better arrives or MS turns it into a commoditiy market. I can live with unhappy Linux geeks - they don't live in _my_ basement.

    28. Re:*** Announcement project*** by steelfood · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They acknowledged their mistake there. I believe they caved to Intel's request here, which in the post mortem, they said they shouldn't have. It not only made them unpopular with a lot of the higher-end OEMs, but it also was partially reponsible for the botched Vista release.

      This is a different move. I think the only ones really unhappy and complaining loudly are the cheap, low-cost OEMs. HP and Dell are probably secretly glad, because the higher-end stuff also come with higher margins (remember the race to the bottom that was netbooks?). Of course, they're probably a little bit upset that they now have a fairly high standard that they have to meet. But that's their own fault for thinking they can keep releasing crap into the market and the consumers will lap it up because there's no alternative out there.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    29. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      As apple's history shows, getting the big idea wrong results in bankruptcy.

    30. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      The tough thing about electric cars, is that if they are successful, then gas prices will drop substantially.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    31. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. It's since touchsnart that I'm waiting for something actually portable and the first thing worth their money is the damned ipad which for all the hardware it gets doesn't have anything not toyshing.

      I coordinate teams all over italy and work mostly with office and enterprise architect with the occasional source checkout: it is so hard to make a pc to caters needs of professionals on the go?

      To have something with performance and half decent battery I had to go with a macbook with virtualbox and windows xp. Wtf?

      Thy killed netbook stillborn forbidding decent screens and dual atoms, then the ultrabook joke with shitty ulv cpus making up for five hours of battery by having no cpu power.

    32. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HP and Dell made the obscene amounts of cash on big bold bets, that's how they came to be. The friuts of their prior successes, like all fruits, don't keep forever.

      Compaq (now HP) came around and undercut IBM prices by 25%. Then Dell came around and undercut Compaq by 25%. Certainly both companies have done interesting things, but don't kid yourself, their main "innovation" was cutting their own margins to 0 while trying to subsidize PC sales with other profitable businesses like printers, servers & "services".

      This makes their consumer offerings rather dismal as there's no other revenue channel propping up the crap. Consumer sales are *very* "touchy-feely" with laptops and tablets and don't fit the low-cost mailorder model.

      Microsoft had to choose to retreat to the enterprise along with these guys or go it alone.

    33. Re:*** Announcement project*** by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      Uh...better hurry. Those older cars have been fetching six figures in some cases.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    34. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Sigma+7 · · Score: 1

      Windows 7 wouldn't run on legacy hardware. At least not unlike a pig;

      Devil's advocate: No modern software runs on legacy hardware.

      Within the past month, I have seen both Firefox and Chrome take 1GB+ of ram, and the web browsers didn't have enough windows open to justify that amount. (In case of Firefox, it was holding onto a lot of memory via Javascript in windows that were closed for quite some time. No idea why Chrome took that much memory.) That's more memory than what's found on a 512MB system.

    35. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, Android phones are already selling at a faster rate than PC's right now, and that will be true of iPhone next year and iPad the year after (if current trends continue). If you look at the sales curves, the PC curves are almost flat, and the mobile curves are almost vertical. Very soon, most of the devices that people use for computing will not be laptops or desktops.

    36. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iPad, dude. iPad.

    37. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not inconsistency. It's consistently trying to force the same interface (Windows) no matter the device.

    38. Re:*** Announcement project*** by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Samsung seems to be doing well.

      The problem is that if all those companies start going the Apple way, none of them (including Apple) will get any usefull return on their risks. There can be one Apple, there may be space for two, or three, but you can't go much further than that.

      Also, those are industrial companies, as the GP said, they do scale, not innovation. That's what they did their entire life, and that's what they'll die doing.

    39. Re:*** Announcement project*** by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Take a look at Microsoft, they are the specialist here. Getting the big idea wrong may not result in banckrupcy if you hedge your bets.

    40. Re:*** Announcement project*** by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      Uh...better hurry. Those older cars have been fetching six figures in some cases.

      Not quite.

      Some special cars do, but there are a lot of the old Corvette-wannabe cars turning into beaters. Those can still be picked up for under 10K, often under 1K, but Sun States tend to have cars with interiors in need of total replacement.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    41. Re:*** Announcement project*** by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      >>>Reminds me less of cars, more of 1995, when everyone was bagging on Microsoft for being behind the curve on browsers. The world was going to be Netscape soon! MS has a pretty good track record of catching up to markets that didn't see coming.
      >>>
      Well yeah it's easy when you (1) Buy someone else's ready-made browser called Mosaic, make a few changes, and rename it Explorer. (2) Have the dominant OS. Just include the new program with your $200 OS, and no way can Netscape compete because they can't afford to give it away for free.

      But Microsoft doesn't have #2 this time around. In the mobile world it is Apple & Google that hold that dominant OS.

      BTW I've stayed loyal to Netscape/Mozilla all these years. No way am I going to support Microsoft if I can avoid it. I use the OS because I need to run the same software as work (like Visio), but use free alternatives otherwise.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    42. Re:*** Announcement project*** by KlomDark · · Score: 0

      I think we're going to call it M$carface or just $carface...

    43. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. Not to mention they substituted their premium manufacturers of components for garbage from the bargain bins to cut costs. Dell has about as much brand strength as a quality product as an e-machine now.

    44. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Synn · · Score: 2

      This is true and the wins can be big. Zune, yeah a flop. But who would've thought in the 90's that MS would come out with a console to rival Playstation?

    45. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They acknowledged their mistake there. I believe they caved to Intel's request here, which in the post mortem, they said they shouldn't have. It not only made them unpopular with a lot of the higher-end OEMs, but it also was partially reponsible for the botched Vista release.

      This is a different move. I think the only ones really unhappy and complaining loudly are the cheap, low-cost OEMs. HP and Dell are probably secretly glad, because the higher-end stuff also come with higher margins (remember the race to the bottom that was netbooks?). Of course, they're probably a little bit upset that they now have a fairly high standard that they have to meet. But that's their own fault for thinking they can keep releasing crap into the market and the consumers will lap it up because there's no alternative out there.

      I think you are spot on. Just wanted to say that :) regards, Anon.

    46. Re:*** Announcement project*** by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      >>>I have seen both Firefox and Chrome take 1GB+ of ram,

      That's been my observation as well, and I actually HAVE a 512 MB system. I have to close-and-reopen chrome about once an hour to free-up the RAM. And with Firefox I just continue using Firefox 4, since it's well behaved with small memory amounts. (I'm afraid what the latest version would be like... probably a hog like chrome)

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    47. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      it's about as dumb as apple naming their new Ipad the New Ipad.

      First, if you go to Apple's web site you'll see that it isn't called the "New iPad", it's just the new iPad, lower case "n"; they've simply dropped the generation suffix, which makes sense since it was never printed on the device anyway. Second, Apple has sold many models of iMac since 1998 without creating confusion, and they don't seem to be generating any problems with the different models of iPads, MacBooks, Pros or Minis either if their profit statements are any indication. I guess some people can cope with the concept of printing the device family on the front and the exact model number on the back better than others; perhaps it comes from decades of experience with car makers using a similar scheme (ie the Camaro. Oh, sorry, that's the "New Camaro").

      That said, reusing the name Surface doesn't seem wise, since (a) they're completely different device families (not that they're difficult for anyone who isn't completely blind or stupid to tell apart), and (b) anyone who knew about the original Surface, AKA "Big Ass Table" will be sour on the name, while to everyone else there's no recognition value in it at all, so overall they're starting with a slight negative bias. Marginally better than calling it Kin or Zune, though.

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    48. Re:*** Announcement project*** by petsounds · · Score: 1

      The iPad's success wasn't any one thing, but surely the App Store (and the ease of creating multi-touch apps with their SDK) was as significant to the equation as the hardware. Apple recognized that a different hardware paradigm dictated different kinds of software. Different ways of interacting with them. And they knew they needed to make this software effortlessly within reach of your average consumer.

      Microsoft never considered this aspect, because Bill Gates (the tablet was his pet project) was never really a software visionary. He never thought about re-architecting an OS specifically for tablets from the ground up.

    49. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      If you want a long life, try not to cut your own throat.

      If you care about the screen, then two years old laptops are better than the current models, which can't be very good for sales.

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    50. Re:*** Announcement project*** by MHolmesIV · · Score: 1

      Aha, so this is why they sold more PCs last year than apple has sold IOS devices in it's entire lifetime?

    51. Re:*** Announcement project*** by GodInHell · · Score: 1

      A microsoft equivalent of the google nexus line of thinking is actually really compelling.

      Google actually protects its vendors by having them produce the nexus phones for it, rather than making their own "offical" android device. At least they have so far. Motoogle cometh.

    52. Re:*** Announcement project*** by GodInHell · · Score: 1

      Mr. Bill?

    53. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 1

      Which Apple project are you talking about? Are you talking about before Jobs return? Apple has pretty much gambled with itunes, ipod, iphone, ipad... and those are KEY devices/services that have changed everything.

    54. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      Windows CE/PocketPC was pretty great to have around the turn of the century

      Unless you actually valued your data, or wanted bug fixes.

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    55. Re:*** Announcement project*** by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

      I don't believe any of those were cell phones back then were they? AFAIK they were just pda's. The Windows CE phones were phones that also did other stuff. I suppose I did not specifically mention "phone" in my original post - sorry.

    56. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But who would've thought in the late 80's/early 90's that Sony would come out with a console to rival Nintendo and Sega?

      Actually, on that note:

      But who would've thought in the late 70's/early 80's that Nintendo and Sega would come out with consoles to rival Atari?

      Things change... people change... hairstyles change...

    57. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      Time when microsoft had to bail apple out of bankruptcy with a multi-billion USD injection into the company in exchange for stock for reasons of not getting raped by anti-trust enforcement if apple was to die. Time when apple got several of its bets wrong or simply not right enough.

    58. Re:*** Announcement project*** by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      Microsoft thinks they're going to walk in with these things and get it right on the first try, because their OEM buds were dropping the ball? Not quite

      hey, at least they are giving it a shot. i'd think lesser of the company if they just gave up.

      a well put together windows 8 tablet could be quite compelling. i think it could even be a bit larger / have a bit less battery life than your average iPad / Android tablet, and still be a success. if it runs exchange / office there's a huge built-in user base for the things.

    59. Re:*** Announcement project*** by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      Portable devices have more or less supplemented laptops and desktops, they really haven't made any big dent towards replacing them

      yes, but people aren't buying new laptops every year or two, they are sticking with the 5-10 year old clunkers that are good enough. the technology in the tablet / phone space is changing fast enough that consumers can warrant purchasing new devices at a much faster rate.

    60. Re:*** Announcement project*** by jd2112 · · Score: 2

      I don't know about Dell, but HP has turned boardroom politics into a soap opera.

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    61. Re:*** Announcement project*** by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      I was not referring across devices.

      Two example to prove my point:
      How consistent was the control panel from Win 3.1, Win95, Win NT, Win 2K, WinXP, Vista, and Win 7 ?
      Microsoft does not understand how having a consistent UI across its versions of Windows is a good thing.

      How consistent was the home directory across Win95, Win NT, Win2K, WinXP, and Vista ? Get it right the *first* time instead of constantly fucking it up almost every version of windows.

    62. Re:*** Announcement project*** by del_diablo · · Score: 1

      Which is a rather ungradiented view of reality. There exists crap implentations of resistive touch, and the same applies to capacitive one. Lets for instance take Apple: You don't actually need to touch the screen, but with other manifacturers you often need to physically touch it. The same is true for resistive touch, for instance Nintendo does a great job at it, but a lot of manifacturers don't, either to save cost or because they don't care.
      Secondly: You can have multitouch resistive display, nothing is actually stopping it. Its just that nobody implents it, because they ARE dickbags.

    63. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      windows phone 7 is ALSO being replaced by Windows Phone 8, without any upgrade patch.

      There is an upgrade patch. It is called WP 7.8 and unlike WP 8, it will actually be designed to run on WP 7 hardware.

    64. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Surface is microsoft trying to either give their manufacturers a swift kick in the arse

      What was going to give the OEMs a 'swift kick in the arse' was the fact they would charge $85 for Windows RT and full OEM price (less usual discounts) for Windows 8 and Office on tablets. This meant that the OEMs could only build ARM tablets that were more expensive to build than an iPad sold for, and would still have to send off the MS tax to Redmond. With x86 they would be even more expensive.

      Several OEMs had been working on ARM tablets with Android (or WebOS) and they could make a profit on those, given time. Like Netbooks MS wanted to kill off Linux/Android/etc in the OEMs so WOA/Windows RT could do that by threatened loss of discounts over _all_ products if they made non-Windows ARM machines. It has already worked with HP's WebOS and Dell's alleged Android tablet.

      OEMs won't make Windows RT, or probably any ARM now, because they would make a loss or be more expensive than iPad3. Windows 8 slates/surface would be even more expensive and will be just a niche market because they will cost as much as an Ultrabook.

      However, OEMs may get pissed off with being kicked up the arse yet again, and tell MS to get stuffed and build Ubuntu machines.

    65. Re:*** Announcement project*** by fredgiblet · · Score: 1

      That upgrade is pretty much purely cosmetic.

    66. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Sir_Sri · · Score: 1

      Sure, but none of the manufacturers even tried to pick up on the tablet form factor.

      And quite honestly, the app store does more harm than good to software. We have an app for that, it's called the web. Now I'll grant you that users may want stupefied walled gardens rather than the more chaotic open download from anywhere windows world. But that was never MS's business and they are only slowing coming around to that idea, and reluctantly at that, and rightfully so.

    67. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Sir_Sri · · Score: 1

      And I'm sure microsoft is actually contracting some hardware maker to build their demo units for them, dell and HP don't really add a lot to the process if you can go direct to the manufacturer.

      As I say, I'm not even sure microsoft is seriously trying to sell surface on its own in any quantity. The nexus line is actually expected to sell, but microsoft wants just enough to force the PC vendors to not produce crap, not to be its own OEM.

    68. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Sir_Sri · · Score: 1

      OEMs won't make Windows RT, or probably any ARM now

      Good. It's a stupid idea anyway. Consumers will just be confused by it. It's a business product for business users to lock them out of downloading whatever random shit could infect their tablets, other than that it's a bad idea in general.

      But yes, you're right the downstream OEM providers may switch to linux if they get mad enough with MS. That is the great risk MS is taking, but then no one has any loyalty to Dell or HP or toshiba or the like. They know how to use windows, they want windows games and programs to work, the name on the box doesn't matter, so if that means all of the downstream guys fade from the commercial business it won't change much, and it won't help linux marketshare any.

    69. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Windows+Breaker+G4 · · Score: 1

      For dell that might be true but traditionally that's far from the truth for HP. HP has made tons of advancement in printing for example. HP employes (or employed) tons of R&D people. Sadly I fear meg whitman is running them into the ground.

      --
      brickspeed.net for your old Volvo performance addiction
    70. Re:*** Announcement project*** by justforgetme · · Score: 1

      Who would have thought in 1980 that people would actually pay money for computer software?
      "Computer software is what you do with your computer, not a commodity!" -- DRI exec 1979
      Microsoft, actually, was lucky.

      --
      -- no sig today
    71. Re:*** Announcement project*** by jbolden · · Score: 1

      I.E. 2 (the version before they started working hard on their browser) was just a default throw away product. Netscape had about 70% of the market with Microsoft having about 5% of web traffic, even with it being the default browser. #2 was likely AOL's in house browser, the one they bought Netscape to write a replacement for.

    72. Re:*** Announcement project*** by symbolset · · Score: 1

      As Microsoft said in the surface announcement, the opportunity to design both the hardware and the software together so that they work together the most completely is the ultimate ideal. The silicon can be improved to work around hardware difficulties, and vice versa. HP and Dell can't do that. Apple and Android manufacturers can.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    73. Re:*** Announcement project*** by petsounds · · Score: 1

      You kind of circled around my central point though. Sure, Microsoft could have used HTML/JS, just as Palm did. My point is, the operating system itself had to be different. OS support for multi-touch gestures like page flicking, system-level UI interfaces that make sense in a tablet where you don't have a mouse available, developer APIs for things like viewing media fullscreen. But what Microsoft did was tweak Windows XP to give it pen input support as an alternate form of text entry. Basically, it was Windows XP.

      So how were manufacturers supposed to innovate with that? Microsoft didn't spend the research dollars on building a new OS to fit the tablet. They just tried to jam XP into a portable format. I think manufacturers saw this was a half-assed offering, and weren't going to invest heavily when MS certainly didn't. Now, fast-forward to today, you can certainly see MS being justified in criticizing its vendors for not innovating with Windows 8 on tablets. But back then? It was a mess. And I'm sure Bill Gates was pissed when he saw the iPad, but he was so entrenched in a corporate culture that put innovation in UI and user experience pretty low on the list that he didn't have much of a chance.

    74. Re:*** Announcement project*** by jbolden · · Score: 1

      Browsers because they run large interpreted programs that are graphics heavy are demanding applications, well above average. That's worse then a hosted operating system within the main operating system since generally the hosted system would be running compiled code. We just think of them as being light because the individual applications are low functionality.

    75. Re:*** Announcement project*** by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      actually they weren't making bets then. They were standing pat on the earlier successes. It wasn't until Job's return that they began to make moves. The last big bet they lost was the Newton. The Apple TV really wasn't a disaster it just wasn't a big win.

    76. Re:*** Announcement project*** by atlasdropperofworlds · · Score: 1

      Apple is a key innovator for sure, but they never seem to make it "all the way there". People like the iPad, for example, and for some it's all they need. For the rest of us, it falls way short. What the iPad in a redirection of the path portable computers are going to take: We want things that are portable like iPads, but powerful like desktops. The value is not in the iPad itself, it's in the fact that people like it.

      Besides, the iPad was really made in response to a project within microsoft - SJ thought MS was going it wrong, and set out to do it right.

    77. Re:*** Announcement project*** by symbolset · · Score: 1

      The trick is fooling other people into making the big bold bets, thinking you will backstop them when you won't. If you can pull that off over and over for 20 years and more, you're Microsoft.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    78. Re:*** Announcement project*** by guruevi · · Score: 2

      The problem with the convertible tablets was (and still is) always the same:
      - Ran an OS not suited for that type of input (Win2k-Win7 and still no decent touch?) even tablet versions of Windows didn't work well
      - Ran an underpowered battery hungry x86 with no innovative battery (even though it was available at the time)
      - Ran desktop programs which required fine mouse inputs
      - Ran an OS where you couldn't just substitute a library to convert the look and feel of the OS because everyone had to implement their own look and feel because the standard API was poor and documented even worse.
      - Was too heavy to be carried around
      - Was marketed as both a laptop and a tablet but did neither very well
      - Was sold at the price point of a high-end laptop but the only difference with a low-end laptop was the flip-screen gimmick
      - The gimmick was gimmicky and broke very often and fast

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    79. Re:*** Announcement project*** by symbolset · · Score: 1

      Microsoft carefully managed and encouraged the hardware provider race to the bottom by managing the cost of the software for certain partners. They needed their hardware partners to be weak, subsisting on slim margins less than their software cost.

      Now they reap what they sow. It was a good plan up until we found an escape from it.

      A better plan would have included the idea that people crave progress as a postulate, and worked from there. Preventing progress can only get you so far and no more.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    80. Re:*** Announcement project*** by symbolset · · Score: 1

      Apple aspires to sell the highest margin third and no more. It makes them a premium brand with premium margins. They have no aspiration to control the market and don't care what the other two-thirds do with their share. This is a grand successful strategy for Apple and I cannot disparage it. They get almost all the profit money and they're fine with that. I don't care for their gear, their philosophy, nor their 'ware - but they've got this money thing figured out.

      With iPad they overshot by a good deal and they'll be grinding out product as fast as they can to meet that third for the forseeable future. They're building factories the size of cities, investing tens of billions of dollars in inventory and parts to secure a major fraction of the world's production capacity. But they didn't ever and won't ever aspire to be the cheap gear the least two thirds of people buy, nor will they aspire to be the provider of gear we turn to our own odd purposes. That's not them.

      I don't even care for their products, nor their Cathedral. I'm more of an Android Bazzar kind of guy. I like to own my gear and control it utterly. But even I can see this strategy is working for Apple. They're kicking ass and taking names.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    81. Re:*** Announcement project*** by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      ASUS announced multiple new tablets running Windows8 just a week or two ago, and now Microsoft pops up with a device that puts those to shame. You really think ASUS is thrilled with its Win8 investment now? Might as well ditch and go back to making Android tablets.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    82. Re:*** Announcement project*** by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      No offense but The 360 hasn't made MS a pile of money. Look up their books -- the gaming division has nearly sunk them many times over. Its their office suite that keeps them afloat at all.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    83. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who misses the resistive touch screens there truly is a tradeoff. A small amount of water / moisture makes the capacitive screen useless. The precision of using fingers / thumbs is non-existent so the screen space has to be wasted and you have to navigate through a bunch of screens and menus to get to what you want. Multi-touch is a gimmick. I would rather have buttons than have to plan finger yoga.

      There are good and bad resistive touchscreens. I wish there was still the option; capacitive is not the clear winner.

    84. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hilarious they should also add:

      "HP to Cut 30,000 Jobs"
      "HP recommends Windows 7"

      OEM's deserved it for being a bunch of lemming slave robots to Microsoft and refusing to evolve into the whole Open Source Linux thing that Google has so expertly taken advantage of with Android. Facebook will soon release it's own phone guess what based on Linux. If these companies had thriving R&D divisions and were pumping out Linux based tablets, laptops and desktops of all imaginable futuristic configurations and innovating at light speed, Microsoft would be reduced to selling Linux software or out of business and Apple would be terrified.

      I hate all of them and don't mind if they go out of business so that other newer companies like Canonical, Red Hat, Novell, Oracle and System76 that actually want to evolve and innovate into future can have chance to finally finish the Microsoft monopoly off.

      Then they can put:
      "[Smart successful company] recommends Linux"
      "[Failed slave robots] recommend Windows 7/8"

      Hope Microsoft makes Windows 9 and 10 an exclusive Apple style OS that can only be run on Microsoft branded tablets, laptops and desktops manufactured and sold directly by Microsoft. That would be sweet justice. No Windows 9, 10, 11, 12 for you OEM slave idiots!

    85. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How long before they start running ads about how bad the surface is....

    86. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's simple, they are going to copy the Apple business model entirely but Apple is not the hunting target here. Microsoft can make up for the lost profits that Apple and Googles companies have been sloshing in the mobile and tablet area if it cannibalizes the Microsoft OEM partners and eats their lunch. The whole strategy is to avoid competing with Apple and Google directly because the failure of Windows Phone has proven that they cannot accomplish this realistically.

      Microsoft has tied it's OEM partners down with long term exclusive Windows 7 contracts that prevents them from selling Ubuntu or Red Hat based Linux laptops, desktops and tablets to the public or in the mid-range professional area, the majority of systems you see on OEM website catalogs. Any company that posts "We recommend Windows 7" tags is in this sort of contract. These companies are in the midst of releasing ultrabooks and tablets to compete against Apple. Microsoft seeks to scoop up the entire market that would have gone to the OEM's in the ultrabook and tablet area because Microsoft Surface was promoted at their keynote as an ultrabook replacement.

      Shooting fish in a barrel really...to fully integrate hardware and software, be like Apple and pummel the OEM's while they're tied down...

    87. Re:*** Announcement project*** by hairyfish · · Score: 1

      Because MS is 5 years too late to the party...?

      What party are you talking about? Are you expecting the smartphone/tablet/IT market about to dry up this year? Will consumers all of a suddenly stop choosing new products and stick with whatever device they have in 2012 and keep that for the rest of their lives? The mobile/tablet market is still in its infancy like the PC circa 1991. MS was late then too and we all know what happened that time around. I've had the Ericsson, the Nokia, the BB, the iPhone and now on Android. If MS get WP8 right I'd be willing to give it a go, and I'll bet real money they take a fairly reasonable chunk of the mobile market in the next couple of years. Don't believe this post PC era rubbish. MS own the corporate space so have an awful lot of leverage to get a lot of their mobile integrated devices into that space. Gartner are predicting MS to take #2 spot off Apple by 2015, and only a fool would believe they couldn't do it.

    88. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IBM dauphin and Toshiba Libretto, Apple Newton were all homing in, but a couple hundred MHz and NiCad batteries - only so much you can do. And the one inch HDD HP produced at the time. The stunning thing, is that SONY sat there and did nothing . MS will need luck, as they were the ones that let WIN CE rot on the vine. Imagine having to re-install windows 8 on an Ipad. This is why others will ignore a me-too pad, set against power sipping all in one chipsets, running lean, not bloated software.

    89. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      music distribution, an mp3 player and a phone isn't gambling.

    90. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if apple had made a phone back in 2000 or a tablet in 1996 it would of been just as bad as microsoft. They were doing it 10 years in advanced its a little cruel comparing it to something using much more advanced hardware with no legacy to support. Smaller hard drives with more density, faster chips, capacitive touch, apple hasn't invented any of that; sure they put it together in a nice package software included, but when you start from scratch that's bound to happen. However i can see what happened to Microsoft when the iphone and android came about happening to apple; the software on the iphone is designed for a simpler phone which starts to look dated with the advanced technology now available.

    91. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The phrase is "all of a sudden".

    92. Re:*** Announcement project*** by macs4all · · Score: 1

      As apple's history shows, getting the big idea wrong results in bankruptcy.

      Did I miss something?

      When did Apple declare bankruptcy? Ever?

    93. Re:*** Announcement project*** by macs4all · · Score: 1

      As Microsoft said in the surface announcement, the opportunity to design both the hardware and the software together so that they work together the most completely is the ultimate ideal. The silicon can be improved to work around hardware difficulties, and vice versa. HP and Dell can't do that. Apple and Android manufacturers can.

      Except Microsoft neatly demonstrated that they can't do it either, when the theoretically nearly-done Surface couldn't even respond to a simple swipe gesture.

      And Android MANUFACTURERS don't (at least not usually), since the OS, at least in the case of Android Phones, is bastardized beyond recognition by nearly ALL phone carriers.

      So that leaves... Apple.

    94. Re:*** Announcement project*** by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Sure, but none of the manufacturers even tried to pick up on the tablet form factor.

      And quite honestly, the app store does more harm than good to software. We have an app for that, it's called the web. Now I'll grant you that users may want stupefied walled gardens rather than the more chaotic open download from anywhere windows world. But that was never MS's business and they are only slowing coming around to that idea, and reluctantly at that, and rightfully so.

      People (not slashdot readers) generally have better things to do than to scour the web for software. This why aggregator sites, such as C-Net, VersionTracker and MacUpdate became popular. So, Apple just took that to the next level, and built their own aggregator site.

      In the case of iOS, however, they went a step further, and said "We are creating a site where you can rest assured that the software is safe as we can tell; and, since we don't want to get a reputation as a malware-infested platform (cough..Android..cough), for iOS devices, we are going to restrict your software choices to those on the App Store."

      Overwhelmingly, PEOPLE (not slashdotters) said "That sounds like a GREAT idea! I HATE running all over the web looking for software, and THEN worrying that I am actually downloading something that will take over my machine, steal my data, etc."

      Is it a perfect compromise? No. But I think that the amount of malware on Android vs. iOS clearly shows that it is the BEST compromise for PEOPLE (but not some slashdotters).

      As a slashdotizen, you always have to keep in mind that we represent a vanishingly small (and getting smaller) group of people that still want to work ON their computing devices, instead of working WITH them.

    95. Re:*** Announcement project*** by macs4all · · Score: 1

      For dell that might be true but traditionally that's far from the truth for HP. HP has made tons of advancement in printing for example. HP employes (or employed) tons of R&D people. Sadly I fear meg whitman is running them into the ground.

      Yeah. Pretty sad for a company who's catchphrase is a simple directive: "Invent."

      Also very sad for a company founded in 1939, and whose name used to be synonymous with high-level electronic test gear and other very innovative products.

    96. Re:*** Announcement project*** by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Aha, so this is why they sold more PCs last year than apple has sold IOS devices in it's entire lifetime?

      Who's the "They"? Certainly not Microsoft. They don't even make a Personal Computer.

    97. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Sir_Sri · · Score: 1

      Ya absolutely. Apple is successful because everyone needs access to the web and the vast majority of people have no fucking clue what their computer does or how to find software for it. Even the concept of a web page is beyond a lot of people.

    98. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Sir_Sri · · Score: 1

      Touch works fine on my 5 year old HP tablet. In Vista no less. Actually, it works basically the same as an iPad. Also, it has pen input if you want it.

      Not sure what you're getting at with your 2nd line. Hardware is hardware. If you want x86 hardware you buy x86 hardware. It gets the job done fine.

      Never had any problem with inputs using touch or the pen, but sure, they weren't designed to be fully touch slates. that's sort of a stupid observation, they weren't designed to be slates so they didn't behave like slates.

      Again not sure what you're getting at with being able to substitute a library to change the look and feel. that's a stupid idea for consumers.

      Sure, again, manufacturers made laptops not slates. Although my HP can easily be carried around, insofar as any laptop can be.

      It was (is actually) a fully functional notebook and I can write on it. It is obviously not a slate however. But I can do a lot of stuff with it I can't do with an ipad.

      It was sold at the same price as comparably specced notebooks so... not intended to be a factual statement?

      Sure, the convertible screen could break. Again, manufacturers didn't step up to the plate, although I don't know anyone personally who ever broke one I can see how it would fail easily enough.

    99. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      Microsofts business model for years was to build software that could run on a wide variety of hardware. They'd do some mock up non commercial things to show off concepts, and then leave it up to all of the 3rd party teams to either develop their own ideas, or to pick up on microsofts ideas and role with it.

      Surface is microsoft trying to either give their manufacturers a swift kick in the arse and shame them into doing something. Or its microsoft deciding that it can't rely on the manufacturers anymore, and it's going to do it itself (think xbox). A microsoft equivalent of the google nexus line of thinking is actually really compelling. Not so much because I'd want to buy one, but because it might make everyone else wake up and start making things worth buying.

      The iPad's success wasn't any one thing, but surely the App Store (and the ease of creating multi-touch apps with their SDK) was as significant to the equation as the hardware. Apple recognized that a different hardware paradigm dictated different kinds of software. Different ways of interacting with them. And they knew they needed to make this software effortlessly within reach of your average consumer.

      Microsoft never considered this aspect, because Bill Gates (the tablet was his pet project) was never really a software visionary. He never thought about re-architecting an OS specifically for tablets from the ground up.

      Apple's revenue is at this time more than many nations, and they have no "partners", hackentoshes norwithstanding. MS has a great idea, and seeing the Apple model, decides to go it alone. Why not? Their partners are not interested in innovating, but in making money, and have shareholders to answer to.

      I own tablets, and 2 desktops and 2 laptops, and a netbook, because I believe in using the right tool to fit the job. I have many tablets, and all sorts of vatrieties. Kindles ( 3 different varieties, including a hacked Fire) Android (an Asus Transformer and 4 generic Chinese that I single purpose, think internet radio, because they were much cheaper than alternatives) and was thinking about a new iPad. I'll wait to see what shakes down in Surface, because I like the concept, and seems a lot cheaper than an Apple alternative. Hell, comes with a kickstand, case, keyboard, etc., all at extra cost on an iPad.

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    100. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Microsoft was on of the first to the party. It is just that they sucked.

      Sort-of correct. Microsoft had a tablet ("WinPad" in 1996 and a "MS Tablet PC" in 2000 at Comdex ) and phone ("Pocket PC" in 2000) long before Apple (2010 iPad and 2007 iPhone, respectively; technically Apple had the Newton in 1987 so they were first but we all know how that turned out), yet sales of Apple's hardware blows Microsoft's out of the water? Why is that? (i.e. Why do non-geeks prefer a iPhone / iPad?. Where is the MS Zune now?)

      You mentioned "It is just that they sucked." In business it is ok "to suck", you just have to "suck less then the competition."

      Microsoft continues to fail for the most part (with notable exceptions such as the ones you mentioned) because Microsoft doesn't have a fucking clue about consistent & responsive Hardware+Software+User Experience. Apple mastered "good enough" ages ago. Microsoft's "good enough" means inconsistency. It's attention to the details.

      References:
      * http://www.pcworld.com/article/187062/microsofts_history_with_the_tablet_pc.html
      * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Tablet_PC
      * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Mobile
      * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablet_computer
      * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone
      * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zune

      "Attention to the details" should also include "Command-X" for cut and and paste in Finder.... 27 years and still waiting on that one...

      Apple chooses AMD.... Apple choose nVidia... Apple gets pissed at nVidia, chooses AMD and then talks about maybe going low-ball with INTEL...

      Apple touts 500MHz PPC machines for over a year... Meanwhile, INTEL just keeps selling more and more while Motorola can't get new toilet paper for their bathrooms... IBM... who dat?

      AMD has consistently shown how multi-threading outlasts multi-core in both manufacturing and development phases.... 64-bit apps perform more consistently with more threads... Apple goes multi-core.... ATTENTION TO THE DETAILS

      Why bother having AMD make your ARM processors and develop a technology powerhouse for your next OS phase... INTEL still wants to fiddle around with embedded 32-bit cpu designs for.... Grandma Barkers Rum Emporium....ATTENTION TO THE DETAILS...

      Know someone who plunked down $4000+ on a 17" G4 Powerbook, only to have the mainboard die after the warranty expired... $900 = ATTENTION TO THE DETAILS

      Ever have the power connector on your Apple laptop just kind break because it's a $5 part on a $2000 machine... ATD! Get that replacement for $29.99 at iFixit.com because THEY pay attention to the details...

    101. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see what your saying, they are to busy trying to do what Apple did, monopolize the industry. MS can make any crap claim they want, and they usually make nothing but BS statements. I read the comments that make good points over the move and those that seem to be diehard fans of this company. But they have been arrogant... They built and monopolized OS's sat back sippin' cocktails and thought life would stay that way forever!!! Now there scrambling to keep those drinks flowing..

    102. Re:*** Announcement project*** by themusicgod1 · · Score: 1

      Did it do multiple input sensing?

      Even the recent touchscreens seemed unable to do that. Were the MS tablets of 2002-2005 capable of multitouch??

      --
      GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    103. Re:*** Announcement project*** by GodInHell · · Score: 1

      The nexus line isn't marketed at the average user though -- its a developer phone to show off the tricks and tips that Google thinks developers should start adding to future phones. But the party I want to emphasize here is that there is no such think as the "Nexus" phone, it's the "HTC Nexus One" the "Samsung Galaxy Nexus" and the phones keep the manufacturer's look and feel (i.e. trademarkable branding elements) along with the official Google "nexus" blessing. They're good phones, but they haven't been the best of their generation yet -- they tend to push the technology in interesting directions, rather than tailoring the phone to sell well.

    104. Re:*** Announcement project*** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because these companies were never innovators to begin with. They were box builders with economies of scale.

      amen.

    105. Re:*** Announcement project*** by guruevi · · Score: 1

      No, they were barely able to do normal touch (with a stylus, not with a finger)

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    106. Re:*** Announcement project*** by themusicgod1 · · Score: 1

      That's the windows tablet memory I remember.

      --
      GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
  2. Surprise, surprise! by OldGunner · · Score: 1

    This was a real Gomer Pyle moment the bottom feeders.

    --
    Vietnam Veteran / Former Postal Worker -- Use Caution When Taunting!
  3. Don't Need the Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    HP and Dell are doing just fine killing themselves on their own, don't need Microsoft's help

    1. Re:Don't Need the Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How wrong is it compared to Google buying out one of the largest Android manufacturer Motorola Mobility?

      Why was that wrong?

    2. Re:Don't Need the Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Anybody with more than 2 brain cells to bang together knows that Google bought Moto for the patents. And Google's upcoming devices are going to be from multiple manufacturers or have you not heard the news that the new Nexus tablet coming out next month will be from Asus. Lol. What a moron.

    3. Re:Don't Need the Help by msauve · · Score: 3, Insightful

      When Microsoft makes the Surface OS open source, you'll have a comparison to make.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    4. Re:Don't Need the Help by gmuslera · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nokia was going with their corporate suicide schedule pretty well, but Microsoft gave them an extra push anyway. Maybe is doing the same with those 2 too.

    5. Re:Don't Need the Help by Rich0 · · Score: 2

      And if Google announced that they planned to only allow Android to be sold by a few vendors, and only under their licensing, then I'd be quite critical of them.

      I have no issues with MS making a branded computer. My concern is when OS vendors want to control the hardware experience to a point where the computer aisle in any store has 5 models to choose between.

    6. Re:Don't Need the Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When Microsoft makes the Surface OS open source, they'll lose money.

    7. Re:Don't Need the Help by ozmanjusri · · Score: 5, Informative

      http://source.android.com/

      Welcome to Android

      Here you can find the information and source code you need to build an Android-compatible device.

      Android is an open-source software stack for mobile devices, and a corresponding open-source project led by Google. We created Android in response to our own experiences launching mobile apps. We wanted to make sure that there was no central point of failure, so that no industry player can restrict or control the innovations of any other. That's why we created Android, and made its source code open.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    8. Re:Don't Need the Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its a darn good thing there aren't any OS manufacturers who do this...........right? ;)

    9. Re:Don't Need the Help by MightyYar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That is not true at all. Many devices ship with non-Google-approved hacked-up versions of Android - and they didn't pay Google a dime. The Kindle Fire is an enormously successful example.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    10. Re:Don't Need the Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like Apple. As long as MS continues to sell the OS for a "reasonable" price, I'm fine with them making their own hardware.

    11. Re:Don't Need the Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Google is deathly afraid of the Kindle Fire. They were counting on the fact that people using Android wanted to be able to use the trademarked Android name and include the proprietary Google apps, which they charge money for. Anyone can release a hacked-up device without those, and while some people did, only Amazon has done so successfully. So successfully, in fact, that it's the best selling Android-based tablet and they can't even call it Android.

      Look for Google to counter with a first or second party tablet in the near future. Expect them to push heavily on the proprietary Google services that you don't get on the Kindle Fire.

    12. Re:Don't Need the Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why, because then we can compare Win 8 to iOS? Because, heck, we call all dig right into the innards of iOS, right?

    13. Re:Don't Need the Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aside from the fact that Google DOES strictly control the use of Android(tm) under licensing, Microsoft is not restricting anyone from making a Win8 tablet. All those OEMs are still free to do so, they just have to compete against the first party offering. If they want to sell any, though, they're going to have to offer a better product or a better price, and that scares them.

    14. Re:Don't Need the Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean Windows? You want Windows to be OSS...

    15. Re:Don't Need the Help by ebuck · · Score: 1

      Google is deathly afraid of the Kindle Fire. They were counting on the fact that people using Android wanted to be able to use the trademarked Android name and include the proprietary Google apps, which they charge money for. Anyone can release a hacked-up device without those, and while some people did, only Amazon has done so successfully. So successfully, in fact, that it's the best selling Android-based tablet and they can't even call it Android.

      Look for Google to counter with a first or second party tablet in the near future. Expect them to push heavily on the proprietary Google services that you don't get on the Kindle Fire.

      If they are afraid, that's great. We have had too many players enter the market place well, and then rest on their laurels. I like Google, but even if it is a favorite horse in the race, it still has to run.

    16. Re:Don't Need the Help by symbolset · · Score: 1

      Lose more money. Their mobile efforts are already bleeding out like an ebola victim.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    17. Re:Don't Need the Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't understand. I own an Android tablet and I didn't pay Google a single penny for any of the numerous Google so called proprietary applications that are installed on it.

      I thought it's common knowledge Google is going to come up with a nexus tablet like how they have been releasing nexus phones. I don't think it has anything to do with kindle fire.

    18. Re:Don't Need the Help by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      HP seems to be getting their shit together. Meg Whitman seems to be making the tough decisions. He might get HP back in shape. I mean she!...she!...I keep doing that.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    19. Re:Don't Need the Help by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      This will be hilarious if HP or Dell or Toshiba loses Microsoft OEM support, has to pay $100 instead of $20 per license, and thus can't compete as well anymore. "Oh, you think so? Ubuntu's looking good these days..." Too bad they'd feed us that Unity crap instead of Gnome-Shell though.

    20. Re:Don't Need the Help by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I'm not so sure since what they keep cutting, like Services, are what make them the most profit. IBM is heading down the same path. It's much harder to manage services, but also the most profit. HP want's everything fixed cost, easily managed, and most importantly no headcount doing any work outside of management.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    21. Re:Don't Need the Help by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      >>> Kindle Fire is the best selling Android-based tablet and they can't even call it Android.

      Why not? Surely Amazon can advertise it as "andoid kindle" if they wish. (Do the older black-and-white kindles have android software?)

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    22. Re:Don't Need the Help by ZFox · · Score: 1

      Why not? Surely Amazon can advertise it as "andoid kindle" if they wish.

      Am I missing something? Trademark infringement seems like it would stop them.

      (Do the older black-and-white kindles have android software?)

      Linux kernel, but no Android.

    23. Re:Don't Need the Help by jbburks · · Score: 1

      So you're very concerned about Apple, and prefer the Microsoft ecosystem?

    24. Re:Don't Need the Help by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Google does not control the use of Android. They do control the use of their Logo, access to unreleased versions of Android, and non-Android applications like the Market. Keep in mind that Android itself lacks many key features that people associate with Android.

    25. Re:Don't Need the Help by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      I am very concerned about Apple, and I'm very concerned about the direction that MS is going.

      You don't have to be a fanboy to recognize anti-consumer behavior.

    26. Re:Don't Need the Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Without those things, Google is hoping that your device is useless. If you want to call it the trademarked name "Android", have the Android logo and the Android marketplace, and the proprietary Google apps, you must pay licensing and obey strict rules about how you use it.

      Amazon used the Android source to make the Kindle Fire, but you'll notice that nowhere do they claim it is an Android device. Google hates that Amazon has been successful in this (doubly because they've been MORE successful than the Android licensees have been).

    27. Re:Don't Need the Help by Kergan · · Score: 1

      That's not comparable. Also, MS would by no means be guaranteed to succeed at monetizing it. Recall that Google makes less on Android than on iOS:

      http://gizmodo.com/5897457/google-makes-four-times-more-money-from-ios-than-android

    28. Re:Don't Need the Help by Kergan · · Score: 1

      Look for Google to counter with a first or second party tablet in the near future. Expect them to push heavily and fail miserably on the proprietary Google services that you don't get on the Kindle Fire.

      There. Fixed that for you.

    29. Re:Don't Need the Help by steveha · · Score: 1

      Google is deathly afraid of the Kindle Fire.

      I think that overstates the case. "Deathly afraid"?

      I do think that Google is concerned about the Fire; a Fire customer is likely a customer lost to the actual Android ecosystem. Google would rather have actual Android devices hold the largest share of the market.

      The new Google/Asus tablet will hit the same price point as the Kindle Fire, but will have real Android (4.x, Ice Cream Sandwich) and better hardware. That will pull some of the customers potentially lost to Amazon back to Android.

      It's good for us when companies compete for our affections like this. I'm looking forward to getting a tablet with good hardware, a good price, and a clean Android environment (not some vendor-hacked version like what I have on my phone).

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    30. Re:Don't Need the Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Certainly not. Google requires you to pay for a license and adhere to strict rules regarding usage if you want to use the trademarked name.

    31. Re:Don't Need the Help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure you did. You didn't pay money directly to Google, but the company that manufactured your tablet paid Google for the privilege of including the Google apps. You paid for the tablet, so you indirectly paid for those apps.

  4. Microsoft don't have partners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    They have counterparties.
     

  5. Not their first attempt at this by kelarius · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Remember what happened the last time Microsoft tried to compete with Apple hardware by themselves. I predict this hitting the market with the giant *THUD* usually associated with MS products.

    --
    Personally I'd rather have my idiots at home glued to the TV than out doing idiotic things
    1. Re:Not their first attempt at this by drinkypoo · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Remember what happened the last time Microsoft tried to compete with Apple hardware by themselves. I predict this hitting the market with the giant *THUD* usually associated with MS products.

      Oh come on, don't be so negative! I'm sure that their latest effort will have all the quality and attention to detail of the Xbox 360.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that a Zune reference or a Windows Phone reference?

    3. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that a Zune reference or a Windows Phone reference?

      Okay, Zune I've heard of but what is this "Windows Phone"? With their experience in the desktop market and their wide range of software support I bet a product like that would be a hit!

    4. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You mean the second-best selling console of ths generation that was making profit on hardware sales long before Sony did with the PS3? Oh and let's not the billion+ revenue that Xbox Live brings in a year. Yeah, what a failure the 360 has been for Microsoft.

    5. Re:Not their first attempt at this by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Remember what happened the last time Microsoft tried to compete with Apple hardware by themselves. I predict this hitting the market with the giant *THUD* usually associated with MS products.

      Like Xbox360?

    6. Re:Not their first attempt at this by P-niiice · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That may change, but it's not looking that way right now. This is Apple creating a great product but not listening to potential customers and taking it to the next level. This thing is going to fly off shelves if they can keep the buzz going (and that's a big IF).

    7. Re:Not their first attempt at this by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2

      I'm sure that their latest effort will have all the quality and attention to detail of the Xbox 360.

      At $599 for the WiFi only version, they'll have plenty of time to handbuild them...

      http://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-surface-will-be-wifi-only-and-start-at-599-report-2012-6

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    8. Re:Not their first attempt at this by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      What Apple product is the xbox360 meant to compete against?

      On the other hand, it is meant to compete against a technically far inferior Nintendo product. Nintendo wiped the floor with Microsoft in that regard.

      Microsoft has trouble competing with a company and a product that the tech press love to hate. How are they going to manage against a media darling?

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    9. Re:Not their first attempt at this by kelarius · · Score: 1

      Remember what happened the last time Microsoft tried to compete with Apple hardware by themselves.

      Like Xbox360?

      It's amazing to me how many people don't read the post they're commenting on. Considering I specifically mentioned Apple, which to my knowledge hasn't produced a gaming console in the last decade, I don't think Xbox 360 applies.

      But hey, if you want to go there, how many first gen xbox 360s do you think are still out there? I suppose that making people buy 2-3 replacements for the same hardware is a good way to drive sales.

      --
      Personally I'd rather have my idiots at home glued to the TV than out doing idiotic things
    10. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Remember what happened the last time Microsoft tried to compete with Apple hardware by themselves. I predict this hitting the market with the giant *THUD* usually associated with MS products.

      Like Xbox360?

      What Apple product does the XBox 360 compete with?

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    11. Re:Not their first attempt at this by ljw1004 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think xbox360 is the top-selling console both in the US and worldwide:
      http://techcrunch.com/2012/06/04/microsoft-xbox-now-top-selling-console-worldwide/

    12. Re:Not their first attempt at this by geoskd · · Score: 0

      That may change, but it's not looking that way right now. This is Apple creating a great product but not listening to potential customers and taking it to the next level. This thing is going to fly off shelves if they can keep the buzz going (and that's a big IF).

      What Buzz?

      The only reference I have heard to anything about it has been here on Slashdot. If it hadn't been for that, I never would have known about it. The latest iDoohickey (tm) however somehow manages to find its way into conversation where I work (Lets just say that my company is in an industry that the computer revolution almost missed).

      -=Geoskd

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    13. Re:Not their first attempt at this by cp.tar · · Score: 5, Funny

      What Apple product is the xbox360 meant to compete against?

      Apple Pippin, of course.

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    14. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, the one with RROD and busted discs if moved. Notice you replied to a post mentioning "all the quality and attention to detail", rather than the commercial success.

      And to the OEMs... Heh are you kidding me? You let yourself get held by the balls for decades and now you're all suprised when they get squeezed? Give me a break.
      Wake up and collectively come up with a backlash. ASUS already showed it was possible to turn the tables around with the original 7" EEE PC.

    15. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      So you're comparing the 2nd best selling console with the 3rd? No less one that was designed more to "win" the BD vs HDDVD battle than anything else, since they were still riding high on the PS2's success and banking on that continuing? The PS3 should only be mentioned in statements of how to fail, or "at least we're better than a PS3", although that's like saying it's better to be behind a hippo than an elephant - neither is pleasant.

      I haven't kept up with the profit numbers, but revenue is largely irrelevant. Last I recall, XBox etc was losing money, due to things like the red ring of death and other problems that caused a high turn over of hardware under warranty. Perhaps that's finally turned around.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    16. Re:Not their first attempt at this by ozmanjusri · · Score: 3, Funny

      What Apple product is the xbox360 meant to compete against?

      Pippin.

      Nobody said they were agile...

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    17. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's probably referring to the multiple design revisions it had to go through before it ended up being anything that could be mistaken as a quality hardware product. Also, possibly the multi-billion dollar sinkhole MS is still in that will take many years of Xbox LIve profitability before MS can dig out and actually call the thing profitable. Take the blinders off "nutcase".

    18. Re:Not their first attempt at this by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How many consoles have been returned for service? And how financially successful has Xbox 360 been? Objectively, 33+% return rate is a hardware fiasco. Objectively, not breaking even after 9 years is a financial failure. It's only now starting to be in the black quarterly. If Xbox was a separate company, it would have had to declare bankruptcy. Other companies like NEC and Sega gave up console divisions because it wasn't financially successful.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    19. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They had to replace their RRoD consoles after all....

    20. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Wait; a guy from Microsoft, at a Microsoft media event, announces, without sales data, that the XBOX 360 is the best selling console worldwide?

      This information seems very reliable and extremely trustworthy.

    21. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Bam_Thwok · · Score: 1

      AppleTV.

    22. Re:Not their first attempt at this by the_B0fh · · Score: 1

      Are they actually net positive now, years after all the investment they poured into the xbox division?

      If at first you don't succeed, keep pouring money in, and one day you'd make profits...

    23. Re:Not their first attempt at this by the_B0fh · · Score: 2

      (Lets just say that my company is in an industry that the computer revolution almost missed).

      -=Geoskd

      You're a lumberjack (and you're OK!)

    24. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Details are starting to come out, and it looks like MS can cock this one up fine, all by itself: http://www.cmswire.com/cms/mobile/microsofts-surface-tablet-battery-price-and-connectivity-details-emerge-016215.php

    25. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the only reason it wasn't successful for SEGA was more because they botched the rollout of the Dreamcast. It was the most capable console of it's gen. Microsoft only got this far because it was willing to burn more money than either of those two companies while trying to get a solid toehold in the console market.

    26. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Swampash · · Score: 2

      Are they actually net positive now, years after all the investment they poured into the xbox division?

      Hell no. They haven't even made a dent in the BILLION-DOLLAR writedown that they had to eat thanks to the RROD fiasco.

      The Xbox is arguably the greatest turkey in the history of the technology industry. I can't think of another product that's failed to such an extent.

    27. Re:Not their first attempt at this by phantomfive · · Score: 0

      This thing is going to fly off shelves if they can keep the buzz going

      * And if it isn't priced too expensive for what you get.
      * And if it isn't delayed so much that when released it is inferior to every other product out there.
      * And if when people buy it, they realize they can't do much with it because there are no apps (note part of the reason Apple maintains 'buzz' is because people actually use their product).
      * And if the UI isn't painful to use.
      * And if people don't get turned off by the ugly color schemes.

      Let's face it, Microsoft has a lot of potential reasons to not buy their tablet , and not very many reasons to buy one.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    28. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Glarimore · · Score: 1

      It's top selling because most users are on their second or third replacement console.

    29. Re:Not their first attempt at this by P-niiice · · Score: 1

      I work at a software company. Everyone here is getting one, and they all pretty much want the Pro model. They already own Ipads, but wanted something similar but with a full OS and the ability to run real applications, not just apps.

    30. Re:Not their first attempt at this by obarthelemy · · Score: 1

      I'm sure MS would be delighted to be second best in phones and tablets.

      --
      The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
    31. Re:Not their first attempt at this by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 2

      > Yeah, what a failure the 360 has been for Microsoft.

      You seem to conveniently forget ... :-)

      1) the 2 billion investment MS has made into the XBox platform
      http://www.unet.univie.ac.at/~a0025537/php/ABWLs/FK-Marketing/store1/Case_XBOXlive.pdf

      2) and the $1 billion expense from the RROD
      http://venturebeat.com/2012/05/13/1-billion-dollar-pain/

      I am neither a XBox nor PS3 fanboy (I have both consoles), just pointing out some basic facts you left out.

    32. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      According to MS's SEC filings the Xbox 360 has a net loss of ~$1 billion, including Live subscriptions. The lifetime net loss for the franchise is $5 billion.

      http://www.microsoft.com/investor/SEC/default.aspx

    33. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Xbox: $4 billion in losses
      Xbox 360: $1 billlion in losses
      The Xbox 360 was in the black for two years following $1 billion and $2 billion losing years prior but it is now back in the red.

    34. Re:Not their first attempt at this by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

      I work at a software company. Everyone here is getting one, and they all pretty much want the Pro model. They already own Ipads, but wanted something similar but with a full OS and the ability to run real applications, not just apps.

      You do know apps is just a shorted from applications for marketing bling.

    35. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The net loss for the entire Xbox franchise is $5 billion.

      http://www.microsoft.com/investor/SEC/default.aspx

    36. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Missing.Matter · · Score: 1

      That's the same price as the comparable iPad.

    37. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't that because everyone has to by two or three due to them breaking all the time? Just saying I haven't known a person to have their first Xbox still running.

    38. Re:Not their first attempt at this by P-niiice · · Score: 1

      You are 100% correct, but I'm pretty sure you know what I mean so let's not take the conversation in that direction.

    39. Re:Not their first attempt at this by dualboot · · Score: 1

      Pretty true since there are many 360's and AppleTV's that might as well have Netflix written on them instead of their respective first party logos.

    40. Re:Not their first attempt at this by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      And the only reason it wasn't successful for SEGA was more because

      It was because Sony knowingly published fradulent specs for the PS2. HTH, HAND.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    41. Re:Not their first attempt at this by bmcage · · Score: 1
      Ok, but then you mean you want to buy a new laptop, and this form factor is just how laptops will look like in the future. All hardware companies have prototypes of laptops that become tablets for win 8.

      This take of MS on this form factor might win and looks nice ... as a win laptop, but it will only beat tablets if it is not a laptop. At least for a few more years, the juice in a tablet is not there yet to be able to replace a laptop for real for most people, and certainly not for programmers.

    42. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny yea.. but come on, everyone knows it's the best selling. Everyone has one.

    43. Re:Not their first attempt at this by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      >>>You mean the second-best selling console

      Xbox 360 is the 2nd best. Which means it lost. And not just a minor loss, but only 1/2 as many sales as Nintendo. That's like an Olympic marathon where the 2nd place guy shows-up an hour after the gold medalist. Granted it's better than last time when Xbox was outsold 130 million to 30 million by PS2, but still nothing to brag about.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    44. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      A $99 network TV product vs a $300 game machine with (HD) DVD player capabilities?

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    45. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Xbox 360 is the 2nd best. Which means it lost.

      You heard the man! The 360 lost, so I guess we should all stop having fun playing our games on it.

       

      That's like an Olympic marathon where the 2nd place guy shows-up an hour after the gold medalist.

      Well good thing this isn't a marathon then, and coming in "second" doesn't actually mean losing. News flash, this isn't an athletic competition. Whoever is 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc strongest in a given market doesn't mean they've "lost" that market. It's when they exit the market that they've lost (or alternatively, once it becomes apparent that they are going to exit the market, either by choice or simply by going bankrupt).

    46. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Bigbutt · · Score: 1

      Mine is still running. Of course I got my first Xbox this past Christmas when I couldn't wait until whenever to get Rocksmith on the PC.

      [John]

      --
      Shit better not happen!
    47. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> that was making profit on hardware sales long before Sony did with the PS3?

      Not quite so staggeringly long when you take into account that the XBox360 was released a whole year earlier. So, don't compare the exact dates without adjusting by a year. Then, take into account that the 360 wasn't having to compete with the PS3 or any other real next gen graphics for the first year of its life whereas the PS3 has been competing with the 360 for sales ever since it came out..

    48. Re:Not their first attempt at this by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Whoever is 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc strongest in a given market doesn't mean they've "lost" that market. It's when they exit the market that they've lost

      I'd say it's when they've failed to make money in a given market that they're losing, and so far, Microsoft has yet to make any money on the Xbox 360. They've literally sunk billions into it so far, and have only recently begun to operate in the black... just in time for another console generation. Meanwhile Nintendo has been making money on the Wii since the start, and selling more, which is called winning.

      Microsoft is not out of the game, because they can continue to pour money on the fire more or less indefinitely if they can maintain their effective monopoly position. I use my Xbox 360 (bought used, optical drive replaced) pretty regularly. But you really can't argue that Microsoft is actually doing well in the games market, because Microsoft is a public corporation whose purpose is to make a profit. They've managed to get their foot up into it, but they haven't made great strides toward success since.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    49. Re:Not their first attempt at this by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Isn't that because everyone has to by two or three due to them breaking all the time? Just saying I haven't known a person to have their first Xbox still running.

      I'm still on my first Xbox 360, and I bought it used. I do have about three Xboxes because it was cheaper to get a new (used) one than to replace the optical drive, though. However, the optical drive for my 360 was only a little over twenty bucks, and the soldering job to swap the PCB so you don't have to do any stupid key extraction tricks was trivial. Five bucks or so for a 360 opener kit with a hex key or whatever it is, and an opening tool. I'm operating on the premise that some of them are good and some of them are shit and buying a used one that still works is a good way to find one that is not shit. Having to replace the optical drive is only expected — nobody but Nintendo seems to be able to source an optical mechanism that lasts.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    50. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh I'm not arguing whether or not they are doing well. I'd agree that it could be said that they are losing, but lost has a certain finality to it that I don't really feel applies. As long as they are able to continue pissing money away, and choose to do so, saying they've "lost" just sounds wrong (though if you wanted to say it like "they've lost their direction"..).

    51. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Kergan · · Score: 1

      And if the battery life and price are right. And if it ever delivers. (Remember the Courier?)

    52. Re:Not their first attempt at this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is a sucker's bet AGAINST.... WHY?

      Ballmer may have the CEO moniker, and the MICROSOFT logo may be on the buildings, but everything else about Windows 8 and hardware development is a whole new ballgame...

      FLASHBACK: INDOORS (2002...)

      {BALLMER}
      What specs are we looking at for VISTA down the line?

      {VP DRONE GUY #1}
      1~2GB RAM, 4GHz CPU to start. We can have INTEL throw in their 950GS garbage pail and no one will ever know what they're missing. As an incentive to all the business license holders, we'll add a WordPerfect import filter for WordPad, free. Talk about TCO!

      {BALLMER}
      And what about the heat issue? Do you have the cross-licensing set up with the Red Cross yet?

      {VP DRONE GUY #2}
      That, and the guys came up a new feature incentive for people who do get burned using these PCs... it's called... get this... a "patch". We can even charge people for it in the workplace and call it TCORFOD... Total Cost of Ownership for Office Drones!

      BTW, I cut my teeth on MS-DOS 3.3 and all those Windows books devoted to becoming a certified Windows Nut... MSCE + $$$ = INSANITY

  6. Welcome to reality by yacc143 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Okay, so you've been partnering with the evil Overlord for decades, and you thought yourself immune?

    I don't think that there are many former MS partners alive, and of those, all are alive not because MS, no they are alive despite MS.

    1. Re:Welcome to reality by gutnor · · Score: 1

      Meh, what do you think running a business is really ? Do you really think that Google did consult all its mobile phone manufacturer partner to ask their opinion about buying Motorola ? No they didn't because that is still a free market and partnerships are only temporary truce not legal commitment to preserve your partner business model and profit margin.

      If MS is not nice enough with its partners and they take offense they will retaliate by being less nice in turn. That's what it means to be partner - that is a 2 way relationship.

    2. Re:Welcome to reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Android is open source, Google can't fuck their partners nearly as hard as Microsoft can.

    3. Re:Welcome to reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If MS is not nice enough with its partners and they take offense they will retaliate by being less nice in turn. That's what it means to be partner - that is a 2 way relationship.

      MS doesn't have partners, they automatically hold all the aces because they directly control Windows and everyone needs Windows or they'll die. It's a "lick my boots or I'll have you shot" relationship.

      Meh, what do you think running a business is really ? Do you really think that Google did consult all its mobile phone manufacturer partner to ask their opinion about buying Motorola ?

      Non-sequitur. Google was a new entrant into an existing market without established [dependency] relations with the existing players. Microsoft created the Packaged Commodity OS market which the OEM market is dependent upon and MS is the sole entity within it (Apple doesn't sell commodity OS, they only use their own hardware. Only Linux/BSD compete with MS directly and they don't count).

      What MS is doing is Vertical Integration and the OEMs are right to be worried about it. It may even qualify as anti-trust since MS is clearly going to be able leverage their Windows monopoly to cut-off the OEM air supply if they dare to compete with MS in the hardware segment.

    4. Re:Welcome to reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honestly, some of those partners are *more* evil imho.

    5. Re:Welcome to reality by IwantToKeepAnon · · Score: 1

      Okay, so you've been partnering with the evil Overlord for decades, and you thought yourself immune?

      There is only one Lord of the Ring, only one who can bend it to his will. And he does not share power.

      --
      "Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." -- Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy
    6. Re:Welcome to reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Android is open source, Google can't fuck their partners nearly as hard as Microsoft can.

      Right. Because anyone can grab Android's source code as it's being developed, and phone manufacturers can't get charged arbitrary fees to see the preview version in advance... Oh wait!

  7. Apple by Nerdfest · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apple has taught them well. First locking down the software supply chain (Metro marketplace), now secrecy for new products.

    1. Re:Apple by Nerdfest · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I would also guess that they're jealous of the ability of Apple to lock people into their products without attracting much anti-trust attention. From where I sit, the future for consumers and software does not look bright, but the majority of them haven't realized it yet.

    2. Re:Apple by SuricouRaven · · Score: 5, Informative

      Apple is antitrust-proof because they don't control upwards of ninety percent of a market like MS do with desktop OSs. The biggest concern of antitrust is using market dominance in one area to forcibly dominate in another - the textbook (literally, used in textbooks) example being Microsoft using their dominance of desktop OSs to promote their web browser so effectively they they all but destroyed any competition. The iPhone may be the single most popular smartphone, but it still makes up less than half of smartphones in use - and if they don't have a dominant position, they can't be accused of abusing it.

    3. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The majority of them will NEVER realize it. As long as they can get to Facebook and Youtube, it's all good.

    4. Re:Apple by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      MS have much fatter profit margins then Apple... The vast majority of their products have negligible unit costs, and development costs which were recovered long ago.
      Apple still has to buy the raw materials and assemble them, a significant cost for every product sold... Comparably specced tablets/phones/laptops from competing manufacturers aren't massively cheaper than Apple.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    5. Re:Apple by Old97 · · Score: 1

      M$ profit margin is, I believe, higher than Apple's. M$ charges $400 for a copy of Office - digital download. What's the margin on that do you think? M$ has successfully pushed the low margin part of the business to the OEMs while retaining the most profitable part. Unfortunately for them those low margins leads to crappy unimaginative hardware products so now the must either share more of the pie or get into that business as well which is what they seem to be doing. Apple spent years perfecting their supply chain management and they've done the engineering but stayed out of manufacturing itself which explains a lot of their profit margin. Can M$ get that smart that quickly? They will have to partner with manufacturers and obtain high quality parts at low prices. I see trouble ahead for M$ if they go this route. Perhaps their very profitable enterprise business will bankroll this experiment for some years, but success is far from certain. They're not even as big as Apple anymore.

      --
      Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
    6. Re:Apple by Rich0 · · Score: 2

      Yup. If Apple retains their tablet advantage for a few years I'd expect them to start getting looked at from an anti-trust standpoint. Right now things are too up in the air - they have huge marketshare, but the market is young enough that nobody can say for sure it will stay that way. Once upon a time anybody with a DVR owned a Tivo...

    7. Re:Apple by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Apple is antitrust-proof because they don't control upwards of ninety percent of a market like MS do with desktop OSs.

      Apple and Microsoft are both anti-trust proof because they both pay the dane-geld.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    8. Re:Apple by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Informative

      Apple does get anti-trust attention. Remember the publisher suit? Why Apple doesn't get any anti-trust attention in the iPad area is that having the lock-in does not mean it is worthy of anti-trust scrutiny. There are certain criteria that have to be looked at. One of them is that no suitable alternatives exist. If you want a non-Apple tablet, all you have to do is go down to Best Buy and give them money. Motorola, Samsung, Asus, RIM, HP, etc. have all sold tablets. The fact that they don't sell well is only anti-trust if Apple does things to leverage their monopoly. If Apple went to Best Buy and threatened them not to selling competing tablets, that would be anti-trust. As it stands, few people want other alternatives but they exist.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    9. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the old software/hardware sales paradigm is dying fast. Microsoft's business model was to sell expensive software than ran on cheap hardware. Now the model is moderately priced mobile hardware and dirt-cheap-or-free software.

      In the Apple WWDC keynote last week, Tim Cook announced that there were 650,000 iOS Apps in Apple's App Store. 30 billion have been downloaded with tens of millions of downloads per day. The average selling price of those apps? Less than $4.99. The developers get 70% and Apple has written checks for ~$5 billion, which means that Apple has only made ~$2 billion on all of those apps - - not a big revenue stream. Microsoft would suffocate on only $2 billion/year in software sales, but Apple thrives because apps drive hardware sales where Apple cleans house. High-volume sales of cheap software driving moderately-priced hardware sales creates a symbiosis that benefits both Apple and developers. But in a world where $4.99 apps are just the fuel that drive hardware sales, Microsoft dies unless it can make money on hardware. Hence, Surface.

      Under the new mobile computing paradigm, OEMs are now a direct threat to Microsoft's bottom line.

    10. Re:Apple by Pope · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And yet Microsoft still hasn't learned the important lessons: 1) when you announce your breakthrough product(s), it's available TODAY (or next week), and here's the PRICE. 2) You can go outside and play with it for 10 or 20 minutes right after this announcement.

      What did we get from MS? "Here are two things we made, they won't be able to run the same programs, we're not going to really demo any of it, we won't tell you the price, we won't tell you when it's shipping, and none of you here get to play with it." It was a fucking amateur production from start to finish.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    11. Re:Apple by toriver · · Score: 2

      It's no more "anti-trust" for Apple to control the environment around their device than it is for Sony (PS3), Microsoft (XBox 360), Nintendo (Wii), camera manufacturers (think that Canon lens is going to be usable by a Nikon camera or that Nikon lens on a Canon body?), ... Which other companies do you feel Apple are "in trust" with? Microsoft ran into trouble because of their exclusivity deals with other companies.

    12. Re:Apple by toriver · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I am sure Microsoft did not have any expenses during the development of Office that the $400 price is supposed to cover.

    13. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple is antitrust-proof because they don't control upwards of ninety percent of a market like MS do with desktop OSs. The biggest concern of antitrust is using market dominance in one area to forcibly dominate in another - the textbook (literally, used in textbooks) example being Microsoft using their dominance of desktop OSs to promote their web browser so effectively they they all but destroyed any competition. The iPhone may be the single most popular smartphone, but it still makes up less than half of smartphones in use - and if they don't have a dominant position, they can't be accused of abusing it.

      That all sounds nice. But, it isn't accurate. They can be accused of abusing it. For example, if they put a clause in their agreement that said if you had an Android version of an app that you sold for the iphone, you had to charge no less than you did on the iphone, then they could still face legal action even without having a majority of the smartphone market. The fact is they do have a dominant position because they make such agreements with book/magazine publishers. Essentially, they are inflating the price by 30% and using their market dominance to set the price for all e-books on any platform. This is definitely an abuse of their market dominance.
         

    14. Re:Apple by Cl1mh4224rd · · Score: 1

      Apple is antitrust-proof because they don't control upwards of ninety percent of a market like MS do with desktop OSs.

      I'm not sure that's the reason. Google owns roughly the same share of the search market as Apple owns of the tablet market, yet Google is currently under antitrust investigation by, I believe, more than one government.

      --
      People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
    15. Re:Apple by Old97 · · Score: 1

      How many billions does it take to update a product that's over 20 years old? Apple sells nothing at a loss and they have a comparable suite of word processing, spreadsheet and presentation that sells for less than $60 for your entire family. Somehow they make a small profit on it. Open Office/Libre Office is a free download. They're not getting billions in donations for that.

      --
      Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
    16. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your points are right. However, you should consider they point of view. Maybe they went hastily out with the announcement because a rival company (Apple, Samsung, etc) is closer to real delivery of a similar product... a tablet with a keyboard cover (the only hardware novelty that Surface has).

    17. Re:Apple by n7ytd · · Score: 1

      Apple has taught them well. First locking down the software supply chain (Metro marketplace), now secrecy for new products.

      Exactly. Microsoft finally manages to have a launch event without leaks, but it took some extreme steps: they didn't even announce the venue until what, 5 hours before the event? If they wanted to keep a tight lid on the announcement, why would they go blabbing all the details to non-involved partners?

    18. Re:Apple by n7ytd · · Score: 2

      And yet Microsoft still hasn't learned the important lessons: 1) when you announce your breakthrough product(s), it's available TODAY (or next week), and here's the PRICE. 2) You can go outside and play with it for 10 or 20 minutes right after this announcement.

      What did we get from MS? "Here are two things we made, they won't be able to run the same programs, we're not going to really demo any of it, we won't tell you the price, we won't tell you when it's shipping, and none of you here get to play with it." It was a fucking amateur production from start to finish.

      Which begs the question: is this really a product or a trial balloon? I worked in R&D long enough to recognize a dog and pony show. Cobbling something together that looks like a product to show potential customers is standard practice before investing the resources needed to actually design a product that can be built and sold.

    19. Re:Apple by NightLamp · · Score: 2

      The value proposition with ARM WinRT is new, you get a copy of Office (desktop version) with every license. This hasn't been done before, at the price that an ARM WinRT license goes for ($85-$90) you get the OS and Office, thus sharing a slice of the massive revenue Office brings.

      I don't think MS is worried about OEM's taking the opportunity seriously, I think they genuinely want to push the envelope on design and quality, it's like saying "if you can't beat this (Surface), then you are going to lose.", that is a legitimate business strategy.

    20. Re:Apple by SethJohnson · · Score: 1

      "Here are two things we made, they won't be able to run the same programs, we're not going to really demo any of it, we won't tell you the price, we won't tell you when it's shipping, and none of you here get to play with it."

      And let me add:

      "And we've got each of these devices tethered to power supplies because we've barely gotten the OS optimized for this hardware and we can't depend on battery life lasting through the entire presentation. YMMV when it's released, hopefully."

    21. Re:Apple by Picass0 · · Score: 1

      >> "What did we get from MS? "Here are two things we made, they won't be able to run the same programs, we're not going to really demo any of it, we won't tell you the price, we won't tell you when it's shipping, and none of you here get to play with it." It was a fucking amateur production from start to finish."

      It's a nice way to pump your stock price - lots of press coverage but none of the burden of a shipping product.

    22. Re:Apple by Solandri · · Score: 2

      If Apple retains their tablet advantage for a few years I'd expect them to start getting looked at from an anti-trust standpoint.

      Apple has continuously been losing tablet market share, it's just that the enamored press isn't reporting it. When the iPad first came out, its tablet market share was over 90%. Since then, most references I'd seen put it at 75%. The latest figures (once you dig through the "I love Apple; Apple is lord" spin) puts it at just 63%. The numbers are all there, but the press is so busy fawning over Apple that you have to do your own market analysis to see what's going on. Ignore the editorializing and just look at the raw numbers.

    23. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like the iPhone 1 or iPad 1?

    24. Re:Apple by vakuona · · Score: 1

      If I were the Dells and the HPs of this word, I would quit making desktop computers. If Microsoft will so brazenly compete with its partners, then maybe let them go the whole hog on the desktop front, which is far from a money spinner these days.

    25. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Collusion could also land Apple in trouble. You don't have to have a majority market.

      Price Fixing, Bid Rigging, and Market Allocation Schemes: What They Are and What to Look For
      http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/guidelines/211578.htm

    26. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And zero products sold since nobody can buy it.

      And less products sold later when you actually ship it, because by that time many people are already past the hype, have forgotten, don't care, etc. Or it's been eclipsed by the next big thing being hyped by some other company (probably Apple, who do this stuff right), etc.

    27. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What did we get from MS? [...] It was a fucking amateur production from start to finish.

      Ha, totally. I especially like their "so hip" dubstep commercial that can only show the tablet actually running in the last second or so and only from far away. And yet it still looks like a kids cereal box or something. The badass vibe they sold to idiots is completely phony.

      MS is always fumbling something. The only thing they know how to do well, better than anyone else I know, is screwing people over.

    28. Re:Apple by jthill · · Score: 1

      There are certain criteria that have to be looked at. One of them is that no suitable alternatives exist.

      There's nothing wrong with legitimately-achieved and maintained market dominance. With the kind of dominance Apple has even minor overreaches can crush upstarts, so they get looked at very hard. "Monopolization" means trying to hurt or smother competitors by gaming the system rather than competing on fashion or value.

      --
      As always, all IMO. Insert "I think" everywhere grammatically possible.
    29. Re:Apple by jbolden · · Score: 1

      It depends if you count the Kindle Fire. Apple is happy seeing the Amazon/B&N subsidized tablets doing well because it removes a price point for Android (or not Microsoft).

      Amazon/B&N on at the $80-220
      Apple at $400-800
      Microsoft (classic windows) $1000+

      is a fine positioning for Apple.

      So far to move a lot of tables you have to sell your tablet at or below hardware cost either on purpose (Amazon) or accidentally (RIM).

  8. Just a reminder of who they are. by oconnorcjo · · Score: 3

    This is MS's way of reminding other companies that a partnership with Microsoft is merily a list of companies that MS can label as suckers.

    --
    I miss the Karma Whores.
    1. Re:Just a reminder of who they are. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Has Microsoft ever alienated so many partners at once, though? And aren't these the sorts of partners that Microsoft still relies on substantially in other ways? Still seems like an Iffy proposition.

    2. Re:Just a reminder of who they are. by Bert64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They rely on microsoft more than the other way round, therefore microsoft can treat them however they like with impunity.
      It just goes to show that you shouldn't build your business in such a way that its dependent on a single supplier.
      Notice how about the most successful computer manufacturer these days is the only one who doesn't rely on ms and is able to differentiate themselves?

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    3. Re:Just a reminder of who they are. by symbolset · · Score: 1

      There are limits. I'm sensing that if they're not over the limit yet they are dangerously close.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
  9. Should have seen it coming. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey OEMs. Thanks for doing all that R&D, testing, market development, etc. Too bad your win8 tabs don't have this nice, awesome surface software that we've been teasing this past couple of years. You know, the one that wins acclaim and awards whenever we show it off.

    Welcome to Zune 2.0. Next we'll hear that it will have an exclusive "Surface" store that only works on surface tabs.

  10. Scorpion and the Frog by maroberts · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Once upon a time a scorpion needed to cross the river and asked a frog to carry him across.
    "No, you'll sting me", said the frog.
    "I promise I won't", responded the scorpion.
    Somewhat dubiously the frog agreed and they started to cross the river, the scorpion riding on the frogs back. However, halfway across the river,t he frog felt a siny sting and noticed the sting of the scorpions tail sticking into him.

    "Why have you done that?", The frog asked as he died agonisingly.
    "Because it's in my nature", returned the scorpion as the waters swallowed them both.

    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

    1. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The way the story is normally told the scorpion specifically points out that the frog can trust it because stinging the frog would kill them both. The way you tell it, having the frog seemingly rely on the scorpion's promise instead of the scorpion's self interest, makes the frog seem dumb at the beginning.

    2. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      The way the story is normally told the scorpion specifically points out that the frog can trust it because stinging the frog would kill them both. The way you tell it, having the frog seemingly rely on the scorpion's promise instead of the scorpion's self interest, makes the frog seem dumb at the beginning.

      But then it would be a poor analogy for the situation with MS and their partners, because MS is doing what's probably in its own self-interest here.

    3. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by MozeeToby · · Score: 1

      I've always wondered, what stops the scorpion killing the frog before or after they start to cross? Most businesses won't destroy a deal that is mutually beneficial, but the minute they think they can get an advantage you'll be stung. The parable would be more applicable to modern businesses if the scorpion stung the frog as they neared the far bank, when he thought he could probably make the rest of the distance on his own; only to have the frog grab him and pull him down into the depths.

    4. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by FreedomOfThought · · Score: 1

      Which rightly represents a good portion of Windows Partners/Users. Microsoft rarely (if ever?) presents logic to their false-promises, because they know that people are prone to blindly nod and continue. Its unfortunate that I have to admit that I do like using Microsoft's products, even if I do have a problem with some of the ways their company operates.

    5. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by ZOS0 · · Score: 1

      My gift to you, oh Slashdot where I have learned much and contributed little, is a once in a lifetime opportunity to witness that elusive combination of a 5 digit UID first post and a Robot Chicken fable in which Microsoft is a frog, or something like that. (mildly NSFW, language)

      Robot Chicken


      And because I feel like it's only proper: First!

    6. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it though? It certainly smacks of short term thinking, winning the battle and in doing so losing the war.

      But even that's not accurate. Microsoft are taking a risk with their whole market dominance, built up using commodity hardware and ever diminishing margins for their OEM partners, and they are taking this risk not to dominate a new market, but just to become a player in that market. For this risk to make any sense MS must believe that the traditional desktop's time is coming to an end, that they are getting ahead of the curve by jumping fully into a tablet/touched based future, and they seem willing to risk their total dominance of the traditional desktop in order to do it.

    7. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by ErroneousBee · · Score: 1

      I doubt it is in Mocrosoft's interest to kill the ecosystem. It will leave every MS dependant hardware or software vendor looking for a transition strategy to Apple/Linux/Nintendo/Sony/Android. I guess many will already have woken up and decided "No more purposefully buggy DSDT tables, no more half-hearted Linux support", though I guess Asus and Adobe will snooze a while longer.

      --
      **TODO** Steal someone elses sig.
    8. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by recoiledsnake · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know the prevailing Slashdot wisdom about Microsoft partners and prevalent urban legends and fairy tales, but does someone have any hard numbers on how much revenues and profit the OEMs have made with Windows PC over the past 3 decades? A hundred billion? How about they invest some of those profits to try to one up Apple, Microsoft' Surface and Amazon. How is it Microsoft's fault that OEMs are failing to match Apple?

      Lets take Compaq:

      In November 1982 Compaq announced their first product, the Compaq Portable, a portable IBM PC compatible personal computer. It was released in March 1983 at $2995, considerably more affordable than the Canadian Hyperion. The Compaq Portable was one of the progenitors of today's laptop; some called it a "suitcase computer" for its size and the look of its case. It was the second IBM PC compatible, being capable of running all software that would run on an IBM PC. It was a commercial success, selling 53,000 units in its first year and generating $111 million in sales revenue. The Compaq Portable was the first in the range of the Compaq Portable series. Compaq was able to market a legal IBM clone because IBM mostly used "off the shelf" parts for their PC. Furthermore, Microsoft had kept the right to license the operating system to other computer manufacturers. The only part which had to be duplicated was the BIOS, which Compaq did legally by using clean room reverse engineering at a cost of $1 million.[12][13][14] Phoenix Technologies would shortly follow their lead, but soon "clone BIOSes" were available from many other companies who reverse engineered IBM's design, then sold their version to the PC clone manufacturers

      So without Microsoft, Compaq and IBM clones wouldn't exist. What about Dell?

      Dell traces its origins to 1984, when Michael Dell created PCs Limited while a student at the University of Texas at Austin. The dorm-room headquartered company sold IBM PC-compatible computers built from stock components.[7] Dell dropped out of school in order to focus full-time on his fledgling business, after getting about $300,000 in expansion-capital from his family.

      In 1985, the company produced the first computer of its own design, the "Turbo PC", which sold for US$795.[8] PCs Limited advertised its systems in national computer magazines for sale directly to consumers and custom assembled each ordered unit according to a selection of options. The company grossed more than $73 million in its first year of operation.

      The company changed its name to "Dell Computer Corporation" in 1988 and began expanding globally. In June 1988, Dell's market capitalization grew by $30 million to $80 million from its June 22 initial public offering of 3.5 million shares at $8.50 a share.[9] In 1992, Fortune magazine included Dell Computer Corporation in its list of the world's 500 largest companies, making Michael Dell the youngest CEO of a Fortune 500 company ever.[10]

      To get back to your analogy, the frog became a Fortune 500 company thanks to the scorpion. Cry me a fucking river.

      What about HTC, the big maker of Android phones? Another poor frog, right?

      HTC was founded in 1997 by Cher Wang, HT Cho, and Peter Chou.[6] Initially a manufacturer of notebook computers, HTC began designing some of the world's first touch and wireless hand-held devices in 1998.[7] The company has a rich heritage of many "firsts", including creating the first Microsoft-powered smartphone (2002) and the first Microsoft 3G phone (2005).[6] Their first major product was made in 2000 and was one of the world's first touch screen smartphones.

      Not to mention the fact that all this lead to prices going from about $5000 each to a very decent machine for $500 and made them affordable to the masses including the 3rd world leading to the PC and internet revolutions which everyone is reaping the benefits of(Including Apple which switched to x86 to drive down costs). If you think Apple hardware is exp

      --
      This space for rent.
    9. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing, which is the whole point of the story. The scorpion is so self-destructive, that its too stupid to kill the frog before the crossing and its too impatient that it can't wait to get across the river to kill the frog.

      In this case, the story is simply used in an incorrect manner designed to make Microsoft look stupid for no reason.

    10. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by DarthBling · · Score: 1

      Robot Chicken had a pretty funny parody of this old fable: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LScK7ifz_PA

    11. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by shadowrat · · Score: 1

      i see your pedantry and raise you one. Any frog large enough to carry a scorpion across a body of water would eat the scorpion.

    12. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Answer: Nokia is the frog but the OEMs weren't notified until 3 days ago that a scorpion can swim, too.

    13. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 5, Funny

      The way the story is normally told the scorpion specifically points out that the frog can trust it because stinging the frog would kill them both.

      Actually, the way I remember it is that the scorpion refreshes the tree of liberty while the river gradually warms up until the frog boils, but before that the frog uses 4 boxes for defense after it votes with two foxes about dinner, then the scorpion trades one thing for another, so it deserves neither, all of which is like if Ford sold cars with the hoods welded shut... or something like that.

    14. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by cduffy · · Score: 1

      "No more purposefully buggy DSDT tables, no more half-hearted Linux support"

      Is it purposeful on the OEM's part? I mean, if they're using Microsoft's AML compiler rather than Intel's, that pretty much gets them there regardless.

    15. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by ewieling · · Score: 1

      Microsoft is more like a wife who has been cheating on you for years. Each time you catch her, she says she will never do it again. Eventually you stop believing her -- even if she stops cheating.

      --
      I really shouldn't have used someone else's email address for this account.
    16. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought there was a bit where AIG insured the frog against the scorpion's sting, bundled it into CDOs (along with insurance sold to the sheep against being eaten by the foxes) and got the whole lot rated AAA. The fox and the scorpion traded their credit default swaps to the previous owners of Instagram for Facebook shares, and waited to be bailed out by the IMO when Greece collapsed because the frog was clearly too important to fail.

    17. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by idontgno · · Score: 1

      all of which is like if Ford sold cars with the hoods welded shut...

      Thank you. You're the only one who's gotten any of this right.

      If it's not a car analogy, it's CRAP!"

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    18. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by itsdapead · · Score: 1

      You forgot the bit where the over-confident scorpion takes a nap allowing the frog to overtake it but the frog has promised the devil the soul of the first living thing to cross, so he tells the devil that his brother is much fatter and juicier than him except he first has to get 1/2 the way then 1/4 the way then 1/8 the way so he never actually gets there which doesn't matter because the frog actually liked it in the briar patch and just dropped stones into the water until he could reach it.

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    19. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A girl in a forest sees a snake, and is fearful. The snake asked only to be hugged once before it dies, the girl says, "No, you're a snake who will bite me and I'll die!" The snake says, "Look, I am old, I have no teeth. Please, everyone has always been afraid of me when they see me. Just once I wish to be hugged." The girl takes pity, picks up the snake and hugs him close. The snake whips out a set of fangs and bites her. As she lays dying she says, "But you said you wouldn't bite me!" As it's slithering off, the snake turns back to the dying girl and hisses, "I have no pity for you. You knew what I was when you picked me up!"

    20. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by geeper · · Score: 1

      But frogs are dumb, even at the end.

      --
      Error reading device 'Signature'. (A)bort, (R)etry, (F)ail?
    21. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by symbolset · · Score: 1

      But what have you done for me lately?

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    22. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      I like your modified version. I'd like to add the following lines:

      The frog, being a frog, had no problem swimming under the water and soon swam back to the side of the river to claim his next passenger.
      Why did the scorpion die agonisingly?
      Because he had the misfortune to catch a ride on the back of a blue poison dart frog....

    23. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I've always wondered, what stops the scorpion killing the frog before or after they start to cross

      It doesn't sting before because it tries to hold itself in check. It doesn't wait until after because it didn't managed to hold itself in check for long enough.

    24. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So without Microsoft, Compaq and IBM clones wouldn't exist.

      So Compaq needed Microsoft to clone the BIOS? Or Compaq could not have used another OS? Your statement seems to indicate that Microsoft needed the cloners to keep it (Microsoft) from being in IBM's pocket.

    25. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by the_B0fh · · Score: 1

      Why? Is Asus going to stop making and selling x86 desktops, motherboards and laptops?

      No.

      So why would Microsoft worry about anything?

    26. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1

      Mod parent +1: Ugandan

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    27. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Teal deer

    28. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's always so much funnier when one comes up with the amazingly original idea of jumping on the coattails of another who came up with it first (and probably better as well).

    29. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by sjames · · Score: 1

      I still say Han shot first!

    30. Re:Scorpion and the Frog by sjames · · Score: 1

      So without Microsoft, Compaq and IBM clones wouldn't exist. What about Dell?

      Without Microsoft, the PC and it's clones would have run CP/M. IBM was certainly much more important to this.

      To get back to your analogy, the frog became a Fortune 500 company thanks to the scorpion. Cry me a fucking river.

      What did the scorpion have to do with this? This pre-dated the era when MS started slipping money under the table to cement their dominance.

  11. Doesn't matter... by unixisc · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...one way or the other. People who want the sleekest looking tablet or phone will go for the iPhone or iPad, and people who want the average market 'just gets the job done' will get Androids. MS is trying to position itself in Apple's space, and in this battle, will lose badly, since it's beauty that's going to win in the end.

    The only thing MS could have done to differentiate itself would have been to make Fusion or Medfield based tablets or phones that could have run some, if not most Windows apps. But by going w/ ARM, which is alien space for them, they've chosen to play on away turf, rather than on home grounds. Why would anyone prefer Windows RT or Windows Phone 8 to either Android or iOS, which has a long head-start over Windows here? This will be a repeat of NT on MIPS and PPC.

    1. Re:Doesn't matter... by oakgrove · · Score: 1

      I agree that the WinRT tablet doesn't hold a candle to the iPad aesthetically or functionally after all, you can easily pick from dozens of iPad keyboard cases if that's your bag. But a lot of people keep saying that the inclusion of Office is going to be a compelling differentiator. Personally I disagree with that as first of all, there are many applications on iOS and Android that will read and write Office formats and secondly, as far as getting "real work" done, there is a lot more real work done on computers that doesn't happen in Office. So it is a convenient addition for the people that really care but I don't think it's going to sell a significant number of devices next to the iPad.

      As far as the x86 version of the Surface, sure it will sell...if the price is right. The thing is this is basically an ultrabook with a touchscreen. Unfortunately for MS, people will see it as a tablet and the root price for a tablet is set by the iPad. And that price is $499. Much more than that and forget it as far as mass market acceptance goes. Just my opinion. YMMV.

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
    2. Re:Doesn't matter... by zaxbowow · · Score: 1

      ARM is alien space for MS? Someone should have told the CE division about this long ago.

    3. Re:Doesn't matter... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You forget about the old days of the original Xbox. Never underestimate what persistence and an endless pocket of money to throw at the issue can solve. They may misstep but they are stubborn enough they may push through till they get it to stick or at least carve out a niche like they did with the Xbox and Xbox360.

      Yes I see their first attempt as failing miserably but I also see them throwing money at it till it starts sticking and making money back,

    4. Re:Doesn't matter... by codespace · · Score: 2

      Most people don't buy tablets for either of those reasons. They buy iPads because everyone else has an iPad, and they don't want to get left behind. The few who buy Android often want them specifically for their lower cost, so they don't have to hand their iPads to the kids on long car trips. I sold laptops and tablets for a year and some change, and the tech community's perception of consumer values vs the reality is pretty skewed.

    5. Re:Doesn't matter... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Somehow I doubt that division gets much respect within Microsoft. The XBox may be a success, but less so Zune, and Windows mobile. Be it smartphone or tablet, Microsoft barely exists in that field.

    6. Re:Doesn't matter... by mcmonkey · · Score: 2

      I agree that the WinRT tablet doesn't hold a candle to the iPad aesthetically or functionally after all, you can easily pick from dozens of iPad keyboard cases if that's your bag.

      I was wondering what I was missing in this story. I read and hear this talk about an MS competitor for the iPad, but every picture I see shows something with a keyboard, similar to an iPad with a keyboard case. In that respect, this "tablet" seems guaranteed to fail.

      Going by the completely unscientific method of iPad owners I know, less than 50% own an external keyboard for it, and usage time with that keyboard runs about 10% of total time using the tablet.

      If MS is marketing this thing with a keyboard (every picture I've seen has had a keyboard in the picture) then they're not really going after the iPad market. In that case, this is another small notebook/netbook.

      It's kinda like if MS came out with a smart phone with a 6" screen. It's not a competitor with the iPhone because people want a phone they can put in their pocket, but it's not really enough to seriously dent the iPad market.

      The MS Surface won't compete with the iPad and won't have a major impact on the netbook market.

    7. Re:Doesn't matter... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but they just shot their cash cow. Who knows how much longer it can linger before it falls over and dies? They may no longer have the luxury of blowing big wads of monopoly income in order to enter a new market.

      What money are they going to throw at it if their OEMs "return the love"?

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    8. Re:Doesn't matter... by geoskd · · Score: 1

      ARM is alien space for MS? Someone should have told the CE division about this long ago.

      Having used windows CE, I have to say that ARM remains foreign turf for MS. Every winCE device I have ever used has been a flaky POS, and these are supposed to be industrial equipment. It's like being back in the bad old days of win9x and the blue screen of death.

      -=Geoskd

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    9. Re:Doesn't matter... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...one way or the other. People who want the sleekest looking tablet or phone will go for the iPhone or iPad, and people who want the average market 'just gets the job done' will get Androids. MS is trying to position itself in Apple's space, and in this battle, will lose badly, since it's beauty that's going to win in the end.
       

      Microsoft is looking squarely at the corporate world, which they still dominate completely to sell they tablet in large quantities at a premium. Show me an Ipad version of Excel or Word and then the playing field might be level. But the fact is Redmond is doing an end run around apple and they have essentially given up on the non business user and the entertainment pc in general, except for their XBOX line. Just watch the next iteration of the XBOX will have internet capabilities that will put so called Smart TVs and things like the PS3 and Apple TV to shame. I predict there will be a new super social networking capable release of the XBOX in time for Christmas 2012.

      All this style before function crap can be put to rest if you just look at why Thinkpads/Lenovo/IBM sell in business and Mac Books are mostly used by trendy sales people!

    10. Re:Doesn't matter... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Funny

      You must admit they did get the naming correct.

      WINCE.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    11. Re:Doesn't matter... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, while I don't necessarily disagree with you on any point, this is not necessarily a zero-sum game. Since less than 50% of total people own an iPad/AndroidTablet, MS doesn't necessarily have to be competing. There is always the possibility that there are many people out there who don't own any kind of tablet because it doesn't have a keyboard. Therefore, MS could capture a potentially sizable market that is independent from the market that would purchase an iPad whose keyboard they rarely use.

    12. Re:Doesn't matter... by kqs · · Score: 0, Troll

      They buy iPads because everyone else has an iPad, and they don't want to get left behind.

      Protip: Whenever you think that you are smart and everyone else is a sheep, the way to spot the idiot is to look in a mirror.

    13. Re:Doesn't matter... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Office on the RT Surface won't be full Office but a "lite" version. If this will be any more useful than those third-party office apps is doubtful.

      And the Surface Pro is just again the old Tablet PC MS failed with long ago. It will fail again for the very same reasons. Well, at least it will fail in the mass market and failing here is an epic fail for MS.

    14. Re:Doesn't matter... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PCs aren't going away any time soon, and you're crazy if you think that Windows RT was ever going to be a huge source of income when trying to compete against well-entrenched free alternatives. Instead, they are pushing for integration across the gamut of devices, from phone to PC. A strong point of Apple's strategy has always been the nearly seamless interoperability between its mobile devices and desktop offerings, which appears to be driving an increase in desktop sales.

      In addition, if Microsoft can control/influence the supply chain well enough, they stand to make more/have more margin selling a tablet running Windows RT than they would make trying to sell licensing for it in a segment flush with free alternatives.

    15. Re:Doesn't matter... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are also releasing the Windows 8 Pro Surface which ships with full x86 architecture and support for full windows desktop apps.

    16. Re:Doesn't matter... by l3v1 · · Score: 1

      "Protip: Whenever you think that you are smart and everyone else is a sheep, the way to spot the idiot is to look in a mirror."

      So, the crowd is always smarter? Where's your miror?

      --
      I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
    17. Re:Doesn't matter... by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Isn't MS bringing Office for iPad out this Novembre?

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    18. Re:Doesn't matter... by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Exactly! No one buys a tablet for use; just too look cool as they ride along on their penny farthing bicycles, twirling their handlebar mustaches with glee as they think how much cooler they are then the poor techs who can't afford crApple crApp.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    19. Re:Doesn't matter... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Quit drinking the kool-aid. Apple has ceased to be a computer company. This is how they are "beating" Microsoft. They gave up and are now competing in what is essentially a different market where consumers aren't fixated on Windows and DOS comparisons.

      It's kind of like Linux really. They have found success elsewhere.

      Microsoft and a whole host of other people are drawing bogus conclusions from the situation.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    20. Re:Doesn't matter... by symbolset · · Score: 1

      When they were marched out toward the end of the last decade, they didn't leave forwarding addresses. So failure to notify them is excusable.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    21. Re:Doesn't matter... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      And X-Box is a PPC box (the first was a Pentium Coppermine)

    22. Re:Doesn't matter... by the_B0fh · · Score: 1

      $399 for the iPad 2.

      Nothing in the press release indicates it's going to be better than the ipad2, other than the min 32GB ram.

    23. Re:Doesn't matter... by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      Office on the RT Surface won't be full Office but a "lite" version

      Which users will have to replace with LibreOffice if they actually want to do some work?

      Yes, next year really will be the year of the Linux desktop!

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    24. Re:Doesn't matter... by trdrstv · · Score: 1

      ...one way or the other. People who want the sleekest looking tablet or phone will go for the iPhone or iPad, and people who want the average market 'just gets the job done' will get Androids.

      If they want "Shinny" then yeah, they might get the iPhone, but as for "just get the job done" ... that is the very definition of iOS. It doesn't integrate well with anything but iTunes and I was shocked to see how far behind it was compared to Android (gingerbread) in terms of functionality and usability. I went from a droid to an iphone 4s back to a droid after almost 2 weeks of that shit. I was glad I wasn't stuck with it. Fortunately in iOS 6 apple announced some features that have been present in android for over a year "are coming" but they still are far behind the curve because they don't want to give up that control.

    25. Re:Doesn't matter... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Understood, but would you bother going from iOS to Windows RT or Windows Phone 8? The only space I see in this market is Android and iOS. Maybe, just maybe, WebOS.

  12. and MS didn't even want to admit it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember shortly after the demo when an MS spokesperson stated that MS had given its hardware partners prior notice? Calling only the top 3 just 3 days before and giving them only the vaguest clue what was coming, was certainly not the impression I had gotten from MS, and certainly not the impression they intended to give.

    1. Re:and MS didn't even want to admit it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Technically correct, and that's the best kind of correct.

    2. Re:and MS didn't even want to admit it by Leggman · · Score: 1

      A young trainee is flying a helicopter with an instructor in Seattle. Suddenly a thick fog blows in and the student begins to panic and they lose their bearings. The instructor takes control and flies around for a few minutes until they come to a hover outside a large office building. The instructor pulls out some paper and writes a sign which says 'where are we?' and shows it through the window to the workers in the building; the workers huddle up for a moment or two and write up a sign which says 'in a helicopter' and displays it to the pilot. The instructor immediately banks left and flies directly to the airport. The student is amazed and asks 'how did you know from that sign where we were?' The instructor replied 'that answer was technically correct but completely useless. I knew we must have been outside the Microsoft building.'

      --
      You don't eat crackers in the bed of your future or you get all...scratchy! - The Tick
  13. This should actually be a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Microsoft's lockstep with OEMs has been the most irritating part of their existence to me, from the Windows Tax to the horrendous upcoming UEFI SecureBoot debacle. Hopefully this will split the hardware manufacturers enough so that I can buy some decent parts that have been made with priorities other than 'get the windows sticker.'

  14. Please, guys... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Please stop the mockery for one minute and show a little respect... these companies are deeply unsettled!

  15. Survival by FearTheDonut · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For Microsoft, this isn't so much as a betrayal, as it is survival. Microsoft has spend decades relying upon third-parties innovating hardware in order to sell Windows Licenses. And, especially of late, those third-parties have failed. With the mobile market taking off and those third parties having mediocre mobile hardware AT BEST, Microsoft has no choice than to make a product. Maybe, it will diminish into a mere reference design, but only if those third parties actually get to serious work. This should be a wake up call for HP, Dell, Lenovo, etc., to "innovate or die." Of course, if Microsoft has signed agreements saying they'd never create a competing device, it IS downright betrayal.

    1. Re:Survival by ISoldat53 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The problem is that now they are responsible to the end user. Before they had the OEM to shield them from the end user both legally and operationally. MS could always point at the OEM and claim the problem is with the hardware. During the leagal actions agains MS, they claimed they weren't culpable because they didn't sell the product to the end user the OEM or reseller did. This removes that layer of protection and allows class action against MS directly.

    2. Re:Survival by geoffrobinson · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that in those new categories anything that does sell has Android on it (if it's not Apple). And why not? Why pay the Microsoft tax if you are the OEM?

      My guess is that this will make the OEMs turn to Android even more.

      --
      Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
    3. Re:Survival by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With the mobile market taking off

      This. Tablets are predicted to outsell general PCs by 2015. Combined with the explosion in popularity of smart phones, mobile will be the dominant computing form within a few years. Microsoft MUST find a way to change with the times, or it will die along with the beige-box PC.

      This is a hard thing to do: they have many headwinds. But if they don't make the attempt, they will become as irrelevant as Univac is today, so they must try however much risk there is for them in doing so.

      That Microsoft might be killed off by the market transition to mobile devices should make a lot of slashdotters happy.

    4. Re:Survival by cplusplus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Uh... already they do make hardware, and they've sold tens of millions of units to end users - the XBox. I'm pretty sure Microsoft can handle this. Microsoft is also no stranger to lawsuits :)

      --
      "False hope is why we'll never run out of natural resources!" - Lewis Black
    5. Re:Survival by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Didn't you hear? You can eula class action lawsuits away now.

    6. Re:Survival by Eirenarch · · Score: 1

      They have experience in supporting end users - Xbox. Also they do sell retail Windows.

    7. Re:Survival by JoeMerchant · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The open market's competition to Apple has been lame. I was given a $3500 gift certificate for a notebook PC (couldn't be a MacBook), and the best the market had to offer at the time was a Sony Vaio, I have been using it for 2 years, and a MacBook Air it is not. Even though the Sony wins in some specs, overall it feels cheap, it runs hotter than a MacBook Pro, and it was ungodly expensive. Most of the features it "wins" on paper (BluRay drive, killer speed & graphics) it loses in real life because they generate too much heat and noise to use comfortably. It's not just Sony that's been missing the mark.

      Surface is a very bold attempt to out Apple Apple, I can't say whether it will succeed or fail - I do look forward to the pricing announcements which will decide whether or not I get a Surface or dual booting Air when this Vaio finally bites the dust.

    8. Re:Survival by RoverDaddy · · Score: 1

      Oh don't worry, the EULA will stipulate that you forfeit your right to class action if you turn the thing on.

      --
      RETURN without GOSUB in line 1050
    9. Re:Survival by UnknowingFool · · Score: 2

      Making a console that hasn't really changed in 8 years and has had lots of hardware issues is a lot less difficult than making tablets where it needs to be updated every year at the least. Sourcing and supply chain logistics in themselves is hard much less manufacturing.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    10. Re:Survival by TheMiddleRoad · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, I saw the Surface with the keyboard and went, "Hmm?" Then I saw that it was ARM and went, "Harumph!" Then I saw that it would come with an i5 and I went, "Oh!" If it's fast and can do video out, there's a good chance I'll buy one.

    11. Re:Survival by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "lots of hardware issues"?

      Could you please name two such issues?

    12. Re:Survival by BlueStraggler · · Score: 2

      Making a console with a disastrously high return rate has trained Microsoft in how to manage hordes of angry hardware customers.

    13. Re:Survival by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Hello Red Ring of Death and scratched discs? There's a whole wikipedia page devoted to Xbox 360 hardware problems

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    14. Re:Survival by steelfood · · Score: 4, Insightful

      MS could always point at the OEM and claim the problem is with the hardware.

      Do you blame bad drivers for the BSOD? No, you blame Windows. Do you blame Dell or Gateway for a slow machine? No, you blame Windows.

      Microsoft already has the ire of the users. They have nothing to lose by setting a gold standard for others to follow. If the Asus Windows 8 tablet crashes periodically, they can point to their own and say, ours is fine. If the Dell Windows 8 tablet comes with 8 layers of crapware and runs like a 486, Microsoft can show people that's not Window 8's fault.

      There's two legal concerns here: Class action lawsuits and an anti-trust lawsuit. Microsoft isn't the dominant player in the tablet market, but they are in the laptop market, and this crossover device may appear to allow them to leverage their laptop dominance to enter the tablet market. But if they played their cards right internally, and they separated the OS and hardware development properly, then this isn't a concern.

      As for class action lawsuits, they've always been named in them, OEM or not. I don't think they're dumb enough to market this as a 4G tablet or put out units that are defective in some way that would draw such a lawsuit. And if they are, the product's failed already, because it would've not been able to deliver the same experience that Apple delivers with the iPad. So that probably isn't a concern for them.

      As for an operational standpoint, I think the other replies have addressed it sufficiently. They already have the infrastructure to handle customer requests directly. In fact, considering they discontinued the Zune, they probably have more capacity than they need. It's then a matter of training.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    15. Re:Survival by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're entitled to your opinion of the "open market," but I disagree with your characterization of it "being lame," both in general but also in your use of the Air as an example.

      To me, I've had the opposite experience as you with Apple products. I look at an Air, or other product, and see it as overhyped and overpriced. I've purchased notebooks recently, and they seem more sturdy, with more features, for cheaper, and not much different in size overall. Your choice of Sony as a comparison sort of strikes me as a strawman in some ways--I wouldn't buy the Vaio either. The idea that you couldn't buy something better for $3500 is your mistake or a limitation of where you were forced to buy it, rather than anything else.

      iPad? Let's look at it another way: it has no keyboard (this is the Surface's selling feature, after all), and is completely locked down. If I want to control my hardware, it's not happening easily. If I want to put software not approved by Apple (or use *a fricking language to develop in not approved by Apple*), forget it. Other tablets offer all sorts of output, input, and storage options not available on the iPad. Its interfaces use non-standard hardware, relying on Apple once again. I'd rather have a Samsung tablet (or notebook by Dell) than Apple anyday--they're more failure-proof and give me more options to interact with it.

      The one thing I see Apple excelling in is aesthetics, which has always been their strong suit: their products just look better. In that regard, what I see Apple doing is building a brand that has become a status symbol--not because of technical advancements or innovation, but because it makes users *feel* technically advanced or innovative.

      Apple bundles the best and worst of modern design: aesthetically beautiful products with the appearance of minimalistic cleverness that are practically inferior.

      People buy Apple as a status symbol, not because of technical superiority.

      Sure, there are a ton of people who just want something to work, and don't care about redundancy, customizability, etc. but they're not buying products because the hardware is great either.

      Will I be buying a Surface? I can't say. Probably not, but it depends. What I will say, however, is that if Microsoft abandons the open-hardware model that made its success in the 80s and 90s, I will leave it. I won't put up with annoyances from those I work with either if they insist on Microsoft or Apple either (I admit I have this luxury in a way some might not). The last thing I need right now is another Apple.

      There is absolutely no reason that computing--mobile, desktop, notebook, phone, tablet, whatever--can't offer more choices rather than fewer. I think Apple and Microsoft both make great products in their own ways, but I'm sick of both of them manipulating network effects and human frailty to shove their products down our throats. I wouldn't care what my coworker wants to use, except that once one person uses their products, everyone is forced to weigh their choices in deciding mine. It's already at the point where messenger bags, folios, and other things are sized specifically for Apple products. What's next? I have to buy an Apple product because storage cabinets are sized to them?

      This argument that software and hardware should be tied together is bullshit, and leads to overpriced nonsense.

      Welcome to 1984. For those of you who don't remember it, enjoy learning why we left it before.

    16. Re:Survival by gtall · · Score: 1

      I think that is MS wishful thinking, i.e., it is all the OEMs' fault. By all accounts, the Galaxy thingy from Samsung counts as a decent tab. It just isn't running MS-Ware. I think the problem is that MS doesn't have it in their genes to ask "what am I doing wrong". They also do not have it in their genes to take large chances believing that everything must revolve around Winders. That is the only strategy they know and it is the only strategy they are capable of knowing.

    17. Re:Survival by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My exact thoughts as well. :)

    18. Re:Survival by n7ytd · · Score: 1

      Well, I saw the Surface with the keyboard and went, "Hmm?" Then I saw that it was ARM and went, "Harumph!" Then I saw that it would come with an i5 and I went, "Oh!" If it's fast and can do video out, there's a good chance I'll buy one.

      Just curious; why is video out important to you on a tablet? For home theater use or something else? Where this product would shine for me is if it finally is a "real" computer that happens to be useful as a tablet. Being able to put it in a dock next to a full-size screen and keyboard would be the win for me.

    19. Re:Survival by Tom · · Score: 1

      Surface is a very bold attempt to out Apple Apple, I can't say whether it will succeed or fail

      You have your answer right there. Beating the market leader at his own game has always been a stupid move and surfire recipe for desaster. You beat a strong competitor by going for the holes in his business concept, by coming up with something new. Most people won't buy something that does the same thing just a bit better. It needs to be either dramatically better, or do something that the old gizmo doesn't.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    20. Re:Survival by TheMiddleRoad · · Score: 1

      I have a PC at work, a PC in the home office, and a notebook in the bathroom. :) I want one PC that's ridiculously easy to carry like a tablet, but that's fast enough to do all three jobs. Two of my three setups have multiple monitors. USB 3.0 would be great. Thunderbolt would be fantastic. If it comes with Thunderbolt, I'll buy it in a second. I'd also be thrilled to buy an i3+ speed computer I can fit in my pocket with no screen and keyboard. Then I'd dock it at all these locations.

    21. Re:Survival by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think this is probably a better move for them than to partner up with one hardware vendor on the design and give one of them an advantage over the other.

      I always thought that if MS is going to pull something like this, they would partner up with Toshiba and bring out the "killer" tablet. Their history with MS and tablet/pad type device goes all the way back to the T100-X Dynapad (1992). That was the first device to utilize "Pen Services" on Windows 3.1 a full 10 years before the "Tablet PC."

    22. Re:Survival by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the Asus Windows 8 tablet crashes periodically, they can point to their own and say, ours is fine. If the Dell Windows 8 tablet comes with 8 layers of crapware and runs like a 486, Microsoft can show people that's not Window 8's fault.

      But what if it turns out to be Microsoft's fault? Has anyone ever run Linux on a typical Dell box and compared it to Microsoft Windows on the same box?

    23. Re:Survival by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I totally agree with all of this. MS has depended on it's partners to step up and produce hardware appealing enough for the masses to buy them that happens to be equipped with MS software. Then MS sees there is a huge gap in quality between it's partners and Apple who (for a lot of people) have stolen the spot light in every category.

      So it looks like they're trying to show it's partners and the market in general that Windows can be great if given the right design team with the right resources. MS's partners need a kick in the pants, this will be good for them. This will be great for every one.

      While MS doesn't have a huge list of hardware products, they do have the fantastically sold xbox (original and 360) and accessories, which tells me that if they want to get into the game (pun intended) and be successful they can.

    24. Re:Survival by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Karma's a beotch!

      MS has built themselves up around the view that hardware should be free and software should be paid for, and they end up with shitty software on cheap hardware that cuts every expense possible. Their model involves constantly reducing value.

      The number of people who care whether MS survives is diminishing. Half of those left are probably shareholders.

      Goodbye MS.

    25. Re:Survival by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft had the ire of users, but the one who had to pay for recall/replacement was the OEM

      The OEM had to deal with returns and lawsuits. MS got the profits (so inflated they had to invent a kickback scheme to appease their biggest partners)

  16. Suck it OEMs, you deserve it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There is a simple reason why MS is releasing their own tablet, the OEMs like Acer, Asus, etc.. keep producing shoddy pieces of crap. It is impossible for MS to compete in the tablet space with Apple when all the products are cheap, half baked, poorly designed products. In addition all these companies have been happy to jump on any and every bandwagon at the expense of MS.

    Yet they expect MS to keep supporting them while they continually stab MS in the back? fat chance.

    1. Re:Suck it OEMs, you deserve it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's wrong with Asus? I'd argue their tablets are towards the medium-high to high end of the line. Or is this just rampant fanboyism?

    2. Re:Suck it OEMs, you deserve it. by Zaphod+The+42nd · · Score: 2

      Selling a slightly inferior product is hardly stabbing someone in the back.

      Now, creating a competing product to one of your partners and not telling them until days before you go public with it... that's stabbing someone in the back. :P

      --
      GCS/MU/P d- s:- a-- C++++$ UL++ P+ L++ E+ W++ N o K- w--- O M+ V- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5- X R++ tv+ b++ DI++ D++ G+ e++ h-
    3. Re:Suck it OEMs, you deserve it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think the Asus Transformer (running Android) is really helping Microsoft right now.

    4. Re:Suck it OEMs, you deserve it. by Bert64 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They would be grossly negligent if they didn't try to jump on every non-ms bandwagon...

      MS has lots of OEMs...
      Each OEM only has one MS.

      You DON'T make a business around a single supplier...

      That supplier can seriously damage or even destroy your business at any time, wether through incompetence, malice or simple selfish profit motives and there's nothing you can do about it. Your only sensible course of action is ensure that you are never dependent on a single supplier.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    5. Re:Suck it OEMs, you deserve it. by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 1

      wha ??? uhh what did you smoke boy ? seriously ? Like MS never ever ever released crap before. Get a life. Your comments are getting stupid day by day. motherboard manufacturer and companies like Microsoft are supposed (even forced) to lock-step each other very close. When you think about it you'll know that his procedure is very logical...so please stop flaming..it's getting ridiculous

    6. Re:Suck it OEMs, you deserve it. by Lord_Jeremy · · Score: 1

      Funny you name Asus and Acer as the producers of shoddy pieces of crap. Personally I've always preferred their hardware over the other big names for quality reasons. The absolute worst in my experience has been Lenovo. I've had to support a number of Thinkpad t410s that are total trash when it comes to reliability.

    7. Re:Suck it OEMs, you deserve it. by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 1

      exactly, unfortunately the lenovo's we ordered were all faulty lol. ALL of them. We ordered 20 slim desktop m71e and for some reason when we added a simple rs232 port on the extention port in the back, they couldn't be detected. After some diagnostics, we found the culprit and it was the power supply. All power supplies were defect. I swear, all 20 power supplies were defective and they got replaced by the same one and once the new ones were replaced everything was working. This was complete failure on Lenovo's case. I still can't believe it.

    8. Re:Suck it OEMs, you deserve it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What OEMs do is bloat every windows consumer-level prebuilt with so much crapware the CPU usage will always clock to nearly 100% when the box is idle, and then people proclaim windows is slow :D

    9. Re:Suck it OEMs, you deserve it. by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1

      Cos the bloatware providers pay bribes.

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
  17. Bullshit by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 0

    I'm really not sure how this can be. I myself participated in a usability study 6 month ago with this thing, and these types of studies are hardly "secret". Yes, you sign a NDA, but seriously, if Redmond is bringing in dozzens of "little people" like me to roadtest the hardware/software, it not a "secret".

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you sign an NDA, presumably you are not allowed to talk about what you have seen. That is also called a "secret" in the English language. A secret may be known by many people, but if none of them will divulge it to others, it is still a secret.

    2. Re:Bullshit by chill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The secret wasn't that they were testing a tablet idea and interface, it was that they were going to build the thing themselves.

      The common assumption would be the MS was going to do things like they have for the last 3+ decades. That is, they'll make the software and the OEMs will make the hardware.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    3. Re:Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So who did you tell?

    4. Re:Bullshit by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      Everyone.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  18. Oh good by Moby+Cock · · Score: 1

    Good news...maybe this will herald in the age of cheap Chromium laptops and desktops.

  19. Too bad MS by bastafidli · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actually I believe this is too bad for MS, they chose wrong time. Now the OEMs actually have an options (Android, Ubuntu and co.) to deliver compeling use experience without MS. The one who can actually loose here is MS, since it can have hard time to compete with gazillions of generic lower priced offerings on the bottom end and iPad on the high end.

    1. Re:Too bad MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe yeah but they gotta try. Their bread and butter, the "IBM compatible PC" is dying, and they need to reinvent themselves or they will die too.

      And frankly, I won't mind seeing them die :D. After all the shit they've foisted on the industry, watching them twist in the wind as "oldschool" PCs fade in importance is ... pleasant.

    2. Re:Too bad MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes I agree. There is a couple of advantages to using Linux on being it's open source nature. If I owned HP today I would simply drop Windows. This sounds really harsh but think like this.

      1. Keep windows for the next 2 years.
      2. Invest heavily in Wine Development.
      3. Invest heavily in Marketing alternative products (OpenOffice, etc)
      4. Help Ubuntu develop a desktop that the users want.

      Just taking the license fees paid to M$ every year should be enough to change the whole IT echo system dramatically.

    3. Re:Too bad MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why Microsoft did it. OEMs are shipping google software left and right. This is payback. Google is the new Microsoft. Microsoft realized they can survive by doing what apple did. The real question is can there be two apple's?

    4. Re:Too bad MS by rwv · · Score: 1

      Now the OEMs actually have an options (Android, Ubuntu and co.) to deliver compeling use experience without MS.

      Full disclosure - I use Linux on desktops as much as possible. I've never owned an Apple product more sophisticated than an iPod (because of the cost). I don't particularly like Microsoft b/c of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. I own the non-MS video game consoles b/c of a lack of forced monthly fees for playing online - which I rarely do anyway. I use more Windows software than I'd like at my job, and I dislike it less than I did 8 years ago when I was starting my career.

      Android and Ubuntu can't compete with Windows in terms of "Productivity Software for Average People". OSX succeeds because it does. Meanwhile, iOS succeeds because it runs useful "Apps" where "useful" is a spectrum from "mindless entertainment" to "incredibly useful life tools".

      Touchscreen Tablets and Netbooks before them are an attempt to bridge the "Apps" to "Productivity" gap. The big bets that major companies are making is that people want portability with enough power to browse the web, play games, correspond via e-mail, and be productive. Just like mainframes became less necessary when PCs came out, so too will PCs be less necessary when the correct formula for a Tablets comes out. I guess Microsoft is hoping that Surface is that formula.

      People are lambasting the Surface keyboard... it goes without saying that keyboards that don't consume precious screen real estate are useful for productivity applications. Apple's iTools aren't focused on productivity. Microsoft's bread-and-butter is businesses (and schools) that need to at least pretend to be productive.

    5. Re:Too bad MS by bastafidli · · Score: 1

      Full disclose as well - Our family uses Linux on all our home computers for 5+ years for most things including productive office type work, school (both elementary and higher level education), multimedia and development. We have Windows for rare gaming. We use iPads for mobile/entertainment/gaming, etc. I use Linux and Windows at work. I have never consistently used OS X.

      While I do agree that the impression is that Linux "can't compete with Windows in terms of "Productivity Software for Average People"" the reality is that the gap is getting much smaller all the time. Just one random example of Corel purchasing releasing Bible Pro and releasing it as AfterShot Pro establishing legitimate competitor to Apperture and Lighroom" and Valve confirming Steam for Linux (still vaporware).

      In any case, my point was that if OEMs are squeezed by Microsoft from their established markets (Windows based PCs and HW) they may be pushed to position to make additional resources (money, marketing, support) available for non Microsoft solution. This may change the established impressions about such non MS systems. Using the "Live by the sword, die by the sword" analogy, the OEMs if pushed may become Microsoft undoing. Microsoft succeeded to avoid OEMs and challenge established vendors using their XBox and it assumes it can replicate the same success in tablet market.

    6. Re:Too bad MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft has a big advantage though that this other platforms do not... Decades worth of Windows x86 software which will be runnable (theoretically) on its x86 tablet.

    7. Re:Too bad MS by xtal · · Score: 1

      I submit those reasons are exactly why MS made this move, at this time.

      OEMs have alternatives now.. and customers don't care what OS their devices run. They just want them to work.

      Who's tagline was that again?

      --
      ..don't panic
    8. Re:Too bad MS by rwv · · Score: 1

      Part of the problem with OEMs is that they'll just throw their junkware onto Linux PCs. I own a Dell Netbook with Ubuntu. I still cannot for the life of me figure out why they replaced the Firefox logo with a Blue Orb. I was also dismayed that it included Dell Junk Software. I forget if it included other third-party Shovelware, but if Linux chances on for OEMs, the death of the OEM will be selling out to crap vendors who seek to profit from these sorts of nefarious schemes.

      Another post pointed out that Microsoft getting away from the Shovelware business would be a boon for Microsoft -- and that's something I agree with.

    9. Re:Too bad MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And most of them already tried that... Dell Streak? HP Touchpad? Lenovo A1? How many of those do you see in the wild? People want iPads. People do not want Android tablets or WebOS tablets.

  20. Surprised? by necro81 · · Score: 1

    OEMs have, with few exceptions, done a pretty dismal job of creating Windows-based mobile hardware, and utterly abysmal at producing competitors to the iPad. Is it any wonder MS said to itself "these guys can't deliver, let's do it ourselves"?

    1. Re:Surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right. As mobile starts to dominate over traditional PCs, anyone who isn't on-board will suffer just as (say) Nokia has suffered by failing to compete well in the smart phone space. Apple dominates the high end of the tablet market with the iPad, and Android dominates the middle of the market. Microsoft is nowhere to be found... and that will be their death knell if they can't fix it.

      So they HAVE to do everything possible to make sure they can get their OS working well on a compelling mobile platform. I'm not saying they will succeed at this - I think there is a good chance they fail. But they are not stupid - they can see as well as anyone where the market is headed, and if they don't find a way to succeed in that space, they're doomed, and they know it.

    2. Re:Surprised? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      And who's fault is that?

      In order to create a windows based tablet, OEMs had to use x86 compatible hardware... Even the lowest power x86 chips have been considerably more power hungry than the arm chips used in the ipad, therefore requiring a bigger battery or a serious battery life sacrifice.

      And then, the windows interface as well as that of most of its apps is simply not suited to use on a touchscreen device...

      The OEMs did what they could, within the limitations of the hardware and software available to them. If anything it's the fault of MS for tying their software to x86 and producing an interface unsuitable for touchscreens, and to a lesser extent intel/amd for not producing competitive low power x86 compatible processors.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    3. Re:Surprised? by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

      OEMs have, with few exceptions, done a pretty dismal job of creating Windows-based mobile hardware, and utterly abysmal at producing competitors to the iPad. Is it any wonder MS said to itself "these guys can't deliver, let's do it ourselves"?

      I think perhaps its the OEM's after years of producing tablets with an OS nobody wanted, restricted by the hardware the OS could offer that nobody wanted have given up. Personally I think its bad spin to claim your current hardware manufacturers cannot product quality hardware.

  21. So this will really be the Linux Desktop year? by timmy.cl · · Score: 5, Funny

    All the disappointed OEMs will be turning to Linux, making this year (yes, I promise this time is for real!) the Linux Desktop year.

    1. Re:So this will really be the Linux Desktop year? by interval1066 · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Linux has been my desktop for years (yeah, I know, I'm one out of the few), but seriously, even with all the complaints (valid or otherwise) I really think the big problem Linux has with the desktop is that its not windows. I'm hoping that will change real soon now.

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    2. Re:So this will really be the Linux Desktop year? by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      Linux is so GOD DAMN GOOD that it can actually transcend time and space: it has all along already been year of the Linux Desktop, we just don't know about it because Linux is already living in the future while we are in its past ;)

    3. Re:So this will really be the Linux Desktop year? by berashith · · Score: 2

      great, the year of the linux desktop is the same year that the desktop has become irrelevant.

    4. Re:So this will really be the Linux Desktop year? by Rogerborg · · Score: 2

      While we're playing Fantasy What If, the introduction of the steaming pile that is Metro might be just the impetus or excuse that they need.

      Heck, Unity is every bit as retarded as Metro. If you're going to switch away from a useful, familiar desktop to a retarded two-thumbs-and-Mr-pointy-finger idiom, you might as well drink Canonical's Kool-Aid.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    5. Re:So this will really be the Linux Desktop year? by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      As funny as this is, I think it could actually happen - though not on the desktop PC. MS has announced that they're cutting out the OEM vendors on tablets, not PCs. So, anybody making a PC will probably stay in bed with them. Anybody making tablets, however, can either decide not to make them, or put something other than Windows on them.

      So, 2013 is likely to be the year of the Android tablet, not the Linux Desktop.

    6. Re:So this will really be the Linux Desktop year? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unity is much more like a normal desktop. It was just released early and needs more iterations to make it production quality.

      I don't use it yet but I've tried 12.04's iteration and it's leaps and bounds above the original release.

      I bet the fall release will almost be usable. ;)

    7. Re:So this will really be the Linux Desktop year? by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

      All the disappointed OEMs will be turning to Linux, making this year (yes, I promise this time is for real!) the Linux Desktop year.

      Its been marked funny in retrospect its kind of sad. Linux has been locked out of gaining massive market share on the Desktop, by being locked out, by these very same manufactures that today got stuffed by Microsoft. In retrospect locking themselves into one supplier of OS for so long was a stupid idea, so stupid that Microsoft is trying to take this profitable new mobile market away from its partners. Who have been waiting for Microsoft to produce a compelling product.

      Its funny peculiar perhaps becuase this is about Mobile...and Linux has already won there, in a couple of years.

    8. Re:So this will really be the Linux Desktop year? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Maybe, if Linux can ever manage to handle stable APIs, and a desktop manager that follows the strategy of "small, constant improvement" instead of "revolutionary step backwards that confuses everyone"

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    9. Re:So this will really be the Linux Desktop year? by toriver · · Score: 1

      And it is SO FAST that as it zoomed past, the Year of the Linux Desktop only lasted for two seconds.

    10. Re:So this will really be the Linux Desktop year? by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 1

      This should be considered insightful lol. I mean, I think it's a geek's wet dream if this comes true. I really hope they give more "support" to the linux community...they need it...and deserve it really.

    11. Re:So this will really be the Linux Desktop year? by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

      Three apps that hold linux back
      Autocad
      Photoshop
      Office (OO is "OK" but it's missing some vital functions (like track changes and visual basic))

      Yes I know you can get them to work (I actually use Office 2007 on fedora), but until we can get a usable version of these apps linux will remain marginal and server side for J6P.

    12. Re:So this will really be the Linux Desktop year? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, because nobody runs KDE on Ubuntu 12.04. Hmm. . . What is that K surrounded by a gear doing on the lower left of my desktop?

    13. Re:So this will really be the Linux Desktop year? by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      Maybe, if Linux can ever manage to handle stable APIs, and a desktop manager that follows the strategy of "small, constant improvement" instead of "revolutionary step backwards that confuses everyone"

      But that is the True Linux Way(tm)!

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    14. Re:So this will really be the Linux Desktop year? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Which part? The Linux userland API has been constant for a long time. It's just other APIs that keep changing.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  22. Shark Bait by David_Hart · · Score: 2

    The poor reporting around the recent Microsoft announcements is like chum to the anti-Microsoft sharks here at Slashdot.

    Microsoft announces a piece of hardware that is better than any of their hardware partners have offered EVER. Any yet, Microsoft is the "Bad Guy"?

    How is it that the "hardware specialists", who have had over 3 years to come up with an iPad clone, just can't get it done? At this point, the hardware vendors deserve what they get. They've proven that they either cannot, will not, or just simply refuse to invest in competing on quality. Blaming Microsoft for being a "bad partner" stretches credibility to the breaking point.

    1. Re:Shark Bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Announcing is easy. Save the fwapping for the real, shipping product.

    2. Re:Shark Bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft announces a piece of hardware that you can't buy, can hardly even find a real picture of ...

      Reminds me of the vaporware announcements, 'cept now it's both hardware and software...

    3. Re:Shark Bait by Microlith · · Score: 2

      How is it that a bunch of vendors who are basically bound to a single, anti-competitive OS vendor who has shown a propensity for progressing only at a rate they approve of, and only so far as it keeps them on top, are supposed to create something incredibly "innovative?"

      At this point, the hardware vendors deserve what they get.

      Yeah, they went with Microsoft. Not that they really had any options.

      Blaming Microsoft for being a "bad partner" stretches credibility to the breaking point.

      Even when they've threatened vendors for daring to draw attention away from Windows? Microsoft has always been a bad partner, because the sole goal for any Microsoft partnership is to benefit Microsoft at any cost to the "partner."

    4. Re:Shark Bait by fast+turtle · · Score: 1

      Acer Iconia W5xx - Comparable specs to the iPad2, Runs Win7 Home Premium, includes a keyboard dock has a smaller battery (4hrs runtime) and been out for over a year.

      The question then is would I buy one? Why not, it at least runs windows - familiar OS and handles almost all of my existing software investment.

      --
      Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
    5. Re:Shark Bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft announces a piece of hardware that is better than any of their hardware partners have offered EVER.

      reference please or are you just pulling it out of your ass?

      Any yet, Microsoft is the "Bad Guy"?

      It is and it has always been. Did you have your long term memory removed?

    6. Re:Shark Bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      parent doesn't understand that people don't want hardware. they want a cool user interface which is something microsoft is not providing

    7. Re:Shark Bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The poor reporting around the recent Microsoft announcements is like chum to the anti-Microsoft sharks here at Slashdot.

      Microsoft announces a piece of hardware that is better than any of their hardware partners have offered EVER. Any yet, Microsoft is the "Bad Guy"?

      No rational person cares about the hardware in isolation. Computers/phones/tablets are tools to get a job done. Microsoft is the "Bad Guy" because every sort of user is less happy thanks to this decision:

      * People who care about hackability (the ones you see in slashdot comments) see this as a huge step backward from a PC or Android device. If there were OEMs, there would be some hope that some OEM would build a more hackable version (with a hardware switch or firmware setting).

      * People who care about cost want a bunch of OEMs competing to build the cheapest hardware possible. No OEMs makes them unhappy.

      * People who care about fit and finish see this as comically inferior to Apple's offerings. An OEM might have bundled it with software that made it usable.

    8. Re:Shark Bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Microsoft announces a piece of hardware that is better than any of their hardware partners have offered EVER"

      Really?

      http://www.manolith.com/2012/06/20/microsoft-surface-tablet-crashes-during-the-presentation-video/

    9. Re:Shark Bait by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      The question then is would I buy one? Why not, it at least runs windows - familiar OS and handles almost all of my existing software investment.

      The answer here is: Because you're running a desktop OS on a tablet device. I did that 14 years ago -- there were some nifty dual-screen Windows-based tablets back in 1998. The problem is that the OS lends itself to mouse and keyboard, not multiple fingers directly touching the screen, motion sensors, etc. The new MS interface kind of changes this, but current offerings don't.

      Whenever I see "comparable specs to ," I expect the next bit to be a defense of the product's lacklustre construction, user interface, battery life, or some other key feature -- because most competitors attempting to match/beat Apple on spec sheets just don't get overall design.

      I don't really care how fast the processor is in my tablet device, as long as it's fast enough to run the software installed, and doesn't burn through the battery too quickly, and is reasonably priced. If someone says "comparable features to " I tend to take notice, as someone's at least been thinking about the user experience instead of just the marketing material. Think of the Nintendo Gameboy/Gameboy Color/Advance -- the specs were sub-par by any stretch of the imagination -- but people BOUGHT them because the gameplay was better than the competition and they were CHEAP.

      Acer has just found itself competing against Microsoft, using the wrong OS for the job, supplied by its competitor.

    10. Re:Shark Bait by caution+live+frogs · · Score: 1

      Maybe that has something to do with the manufacturer's need to keep the hardware compatible with the software Microsoft had available. If some killer feature is a great idea but isn't supported by the operating system, what exactly is Dell or HP or Lenovo supposed to do? They built the devices the OS could handle, not the devices that would dethrone the iPad.

      If this discussion were about poor response to, say, Google creating a hot new built-in-house Android tablet, you'd have a point. But unlike an open-source OS like Andrid, OEMs have never had the ability to change Windows itself, just the option of adding in bundled drivers and software. And as mentioned upthread, there was no incentive for Microsoft to work with one specific OEM to produce a feature that other OEMs wouldn't have.

      If you want to blame the OEMs for anything, blame them for trying as hard as possible to make their devices look just like Apple's, while simultaneously (and largely unsuccessfully) trying to claim they were different and much better than Apple's devices. Almost every "ultrabook" mimics MacBook Air. There are lots of laptops that look like MacBooks. Nearly every slate/tablet (including Surface!) looks like an iPad clone, and many, many, many phones are as close to the iPhone design as they can get without getting sued. If they want a killer device they need it to look like it isn't copying Apple, because no one wants a knock-off.

    11. Re:Shark Bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Glad you have seen the great hardware.
      This thing will be a POS when released.

    12. Re:Shark Bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep in mind that the OEM's can't change the default UI for any Microsoft OS's that they distribute. This keeps them from being able to innovate at the OS level, hence the stagnation from the hardware vendors. Microsoft kept all control of the UI for the last two decades, and here is the results. So, yes, it is fair to hold Microsoft partially responsible, since they hamstrung the OEM's.

    13. Re:Shark Bait by recoiledsnake · · Score: 0

      >How is it that a bunch of vendors who are basically bound to a single, anti-competitive OS vendor who has shown a propensity for progressing only at a rate they approve of, and only so far as it keeps them on top, are supposed to create something incredibly "innovative?"

      Are you talking about Android?

      >because the sole goal for any Microsoft partnership is to benefit Microsoft at any cost to the "partner.

      Ahh, unlike Apple that overpays Foxconn and its workers. And I bet you'd go around giving extra money when you purchase things, just for the good of your partners. Do you? Why or why not?

      --
      This space for rent.
  23. So.... who *is* building it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obviously Microsoft didn't build their own factory from scratch (or did they?). If so, who is actually building this thing? For the original Zune it was Toshiba. I guess it isn't Asus or Acer :-)

    1. Re:So.... who *is* building it? by timmy.cl · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't be too surprised if it was Foxconn...

    2. Re:So.... who *is* building it? by magarity · · Score: 1

      Microsoft's shell company with some innocuous name based in the Caymans contracted a factory to have them made. Thus, even the OEM making it had no idea who it was really for.

    3. Re:So.... who *is* building it? by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

      Obviously Microsoft didn't build their own factory from scratch (or did they?). If so, who is actually building this thing? For the original Zune it was Toshiba. I guess it isn't Asus or Acer :-)

      If its not Nokia surely Elop will have to go. Seriously.

    4. Re:So.... who *is* building it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Foxconn?

  24. Only way to take on the IPad by kervin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The rest of the industry has had years to come back with an IPad competitor. Yet even with Apple sourcing all its hardware from the same parties, these OEMs haven't been unable to compete.

    Yes, they didn't have Win8 but they had Android and potentially WebOS.

    Right now MS realizes that the only way to take on Apple right now is to match ( or copy if you prefer ) their best moves.

    1. Re:Only way to take on the IPad by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The only problem with that is that Microsoft simply isn't capable. Matching "the best moves of Apple" is simply something they aren't capable of. It's something they've never done. They milk entrenchment. They drag their feet. They put the least amount of effort they can get away with. They play it safe like an accountant running a movie studio.

      They are out of their league if they want to go toe to toe with Apple based on purely technical merits.

      Apple may be annoying and evil but at least they have the engineering talent.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    2. Re:Only way to take on the IPad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right now MS realizes that the only way to take on Apple right now is to match ( or copy if you prefer ) their best moves.

      No, they think that. And the reason they think that is because despite all this stuff about OEMs not innovating, it's Microsoft that have no idea how to do that. So they're going to copy Apple, because that's all they can come up with. If Apple had focussed on matching (or copying if you prefer) Microsoft's "best moves" then Apple would not be where they are. Same goes for Microsoft. They need to come up with a new angle. Their own approach that, to at least some market segment, is better than Apple's. Aping Apple really isn't going to do it.

    3. Re:Only way to take on the IPad by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      The rest of the industry has had years to come back with an IPad competitor. Yet even with Apple sourcing all its hardware from the same parties, these OEMs haven't been unable to compete.

      Hilarious double-negative there - which makes your statement accurate! Yes, Android has proven competitive with tablets, too! About half the tables sold now are Android-based.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    4. Re:Only way to take on the IPad by jsepeta · · Score: 0

      Microsoft always steals from Apple. Nothing new here, move along.

      --
      Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
    5. Re:Only way to take on the IPad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you basing your comments on? Based on their work on their OS? Sure, they take things slow, drag their feet, etc...but honestly, it is the right thing to do when you have as much market share in the OS space and when hundreds of thousands of companies rely on your OS to get shit done. Sure, they could keep changing things around and make revolutionary changes to their OS, but they could easily risk alienating and pissing off a huge section of their user base. Just look at all the uproar over UI changes with the introduction of Office 2007. Windows will never be cutting edge as long as they still have the kind of market share they have. They just can't afford to fuck around with stuff while potentially pissing off their massive user base. You want cutting edge, go roll your own version of a linux distro (and I don't mean that with any malice).

      Now, if we move away from the OS space though, I don't think of MS as incapable of doing good work. I know a few folks who work at MS (on the R&D side) and they are really smart people and they work on some really neat shit. Just look at Kinect. Tell me that isn't innovative or awesome from a technology standpoint. The tablet space will allow MS to take more risks and be more creative simply because they don't have to worry about any existing user base. They can and need to take risks and think big with this effort, and I'm glad to see them introduce Surface, which, if nothing else, will light a fire under the butts of all their underwhelming OEM partners.

      As it stands, Android has failed quite miserably on the tablet side. I always thought it would catch up and surpass IOS on the tablet side as it has surpassed IOS (imho) on the phone side, but after holding out for so long, it doesn't look like that is really going to happen. IOS does a lot of things well on the media consumption device side of things, but there is still a big gap and need for many folks who want something like a laptop but in tablet form, but with an optional physical keyboard. Asus did well with the TF Prime on the hardware side, but ultimately, Android did handicap it on the OS side of things. MS has a great opportunity to introduce a new OS + hardware that fills this gap. Whether they will actually succeed is still up for debate, but I don't understand why folks are slating them for actually trying to develop something that is new, and different and will hopefully succeed. We can all agree that competition in this space will be very good for us consumers, and frankly, 2+ years of watching crappy Android tablets fail to compare against the iPad has left me very underwhelmed. Not being the biggest MS fan, I'm still rooting for them in this particular space.

    6. Re:Only way to take on the IPad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple annoying and evil ?
      are you kidding me? You must put your shoes on before your socks.

  25. Time to ship Android by martiniturbide · · Score: 1

    It is a good time for Desktop/Laptop makers start to ship Android??

  26. Cat, tiger and the barbecue. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1, Funny
    Looks like it is fableous friday today.

    Once upon a time there lived a tiger by the name SteveJ. It would keep everything thing uppity tight close to itself and dramatically show things things to the world. A cat by the name SteveB saw the show and wanted to be like the tiger. It thought "Tiger is successful because it has black stripes all over its body. I will also get black stripes on my body" and bought itself a barbecue, heated it well and jumped on the red hot grill. It did not realize only tigers who make both hard and soft part of the product can do that and cats who make soft part and not the hard part could not do that.

    (OK OK my modern fable sucks. But that fable was refined over a couple of millennia and I am winging it in 5 minutes. Pardon me.)

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Cat, tiger and the barbecue. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You owe me 43.5 seconds. I will collect.

    2. Re:Cat, tiger and the barbecue. by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 1

      But now SteveB has cool marks, too!

      --
      That is all.
  27. Lockstep, my ass by daemonenwind · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For years now, I've been building my own PCs. I expect most people on this board do the same.

    Why? So I don't have a crap power supply. So the motherboard has a few features beyond "power on". For decent air cooling. The hardware reasons go on and on. For years, anything that you couldn't easily put in a 20-word blurb about a PC has been shaved down and sacrificed beyond bone-deep cuts to create truly craptastic hardware setups.

    I'm rather confident this isn't the vision Microsoft had as it built its OS. At least, not for the *entire* non-boutique market.

    And then there's the software. My god, the crapware that gets shoveled onto computers. On the rare occasion I bow down to necessity and buy a laptop, the first thing I do is buy a new license to Windows, wipe the thing, and start fresh. It's damn near unusuable otherwise, thanks to the likes of McAfee, Norton, SomeDamnKidsGamesCompany, Yahoo, Earthlink, Google, AskJeeves, and every other piece of stupid bloaty crashy adware that I have to pull out root and branch.

    I'm rather confident this isn't the vision Microsoft had as it built its OS. At least, not for the *entire* non-boutique market.

    It will be a joy and a wonder to see someone not fuck over a Windows machine before it ever comes out of the box. Eyes will be opened, tears of joy will be shed, and people will think it's all because of Windows 8.

    And that's the true shame.

    Because it was always there to begin with.

    1. Re:Lockstep, my ass by hey_popey · · Score: 5, Informative

      On the rare occasion I bow down to necessity and buy a laptop, the first thing I do is buy a new license to Windows, wipe the thing, and start fresh.

      I am surprised by this part: last time I tried with a Win7 Pro laptop, I was able to use my own license number (the one on the sticker on the laptop case) with another Windows setup disc, without having to purchase a new license!

    2. Re:Lockstep, my ass by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

      My kingdom for a mod point... somebody bump this guy up a few...

      --
      C|N>K
    3. Re:Lockstep, my ass by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      As much as I resent not having control over my own device, I have to concede that you have a point.

      If my employer loses the ability to install non-MS-approved garbage on the devices they issue me I'll be a happy man. By the time Mc-Everything loads it is about time to go grab lunch...

    4. Re:Lockstep, my ass by Thud457 · · Score: 1

      And then there's the software. My god, the crapware that gets shoveled onto computers. On the rare occasion I bow down to necessity and buy a laptop, the first thing I do is buy a new license to Windows, wipe the thing, and start fresh. It's damn near unusuable otherwise, thanks to the likes of McAfee, Norton, SomeDamnKidsGamesCompany, Yahoo, Earthlink, Google, AskJeeves, and every other piece of stupid bloaty crashy adware that I have to pull out root and branch.

      So this is like Walt Disney being dismayed at the tacky squalor that sprung up around Disneyland and planning to have full control when he built Disneyworld. And then you had Epcot that fell so very far from his ambitious plans.

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    5. Re:Lockstep, my ass by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Where do you find your cases? I've been planning on building my next computer, but I've had trouble finding good cases.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    6. Re:Lockstep, my ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft has seen this shift over the years, and they've launched the "Signature" line of computers to combat the tide. More info here: http://signature.microsoft.com/

    7. Re:Lockstep, my ass by phayes · · Score: 2

      MS abandoned their insane restrictions of having different serial numbers for OEM & retail versions of Windows with Vista.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    8. Re:Lockstep, my ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For years now, I've been building my own PCs. I expect most people on this board do the same.

      Are you serious? People who spends their time on this stuff is very very rare, even on slashdot.

      I'm rather confident this isn't the vision Microsoft had as it built its OS.

      Wait, you are a windows user? I expect most people on this board only use Linux. See what I did there?

    9. Re:Lockstep, my ass by n7ytd · · Score: 2

      For years now, I've been building my own PCs. I expect most people on this board do the same.

      Why? So I don't have a crap power supply. So the motherboard has a few features beyond "power on". For decent air cooling. The hardware reasons go on and on. For years, anything that you couldn't easily put in a 20-word blurb about a PC has been shaved down and sacrificed beyond bone-deep cuts to create truly craptastic hardware setups.

      You know, I used to build my own computers, and built a couple of special-purpose boxes last year. But these days when anyone asks me the best way to go about getting the most bang for the buck on a new computer, I just tell them to take a trip to Best Buy, Staples, and Sam's Club, (because those are local here) then go to dell.com, and pick out a box from what's available. PCs have become such commodity hardware, it's not worth the effort to piece anything together.

      Last year I bought an HP box for household web, e-mail, etc. It's a crap box, but has a reasonably good Athlon processor, 640GB disk, 3 GB ram, DVD burner, and a Windows 7 license. I spent $350, which I decided was cheaper that I could buy the parts, plus it came with a warranty. Good enough for consumer needs.

      Dell's business lines are top notch, but all of the consumer stuff I've seen anywhere is utter crap. Cheap plastic, cheap keyboards, poor batteries.

      Then again, maybe I just grew tired of fielding support calls from people who tried to save $50 by bargain shopping and putting it together themselves. Much nicer to be able to point them to the store. :)

    10. Re:Lockstep, my ass by daemonenwind · · Score: 1

      newegg.com, mostly. I'm kind of an Antec fan as far as cases go.

      Cases are very much an "eye of the beholder" kind of thing. Big, small, aluminum, steel, showy, plain.....there's a lot of variety there. Anandtech.com has occasional case reviews up, give them a check.

    11. Re:Lockstep, my ass by daemonenwind · · Score: 1

      I usually only build for/with people I'd be supporting regardless of what they bought.

      Typically it's with a bit of skepticism in the beginning. But then once they get used to quick startups, things "just work"ing, and nothing dying after 3-4 years of use, they get pretty addicted.

      It's not always about cost savings at purchase - although that argument worked well before Moore's Law pushed hardware well past what most people need. it's about having nice things, and that the things you have actually can be nice.

    12. Re:Lockstep, my ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends whether it came with "Home" versus "Professional", or whatever crazy market segmentation they're trying these days.

      In any case, I'm with the prior poster: the amount of crapware that comes with a typical "out-of-the-box" laptop vendor these days is ridiculous and undermines the whole experience. On a new laptop, a friend of mine had 99 tasks running after boot to the Windows desktop. We were able to almost halve that by uninstalling various junky software tools that they were never going to use. It's insane. And some of it is infested in there pretty deeply and it took Autoruns to disable. Yes, Autoruns is a cool program, but it's symptomatic of how bad the problem is. Even when you want to get rid of some of the crapware they don't make it easy.

    13. Re:Lockstep, my ass by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      Same here, I have almost always been able to user the same license as the OEM one that came with the computer.

    14. Re:Lockstep, my ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Technically that's not legal unless you are an OEM. The serial number that are on those sticker are OEM only serial number. To install it, you must use the pre-packaged OEM installer disc.

    15. Re:Lockstep, my ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the rare occasion I bow down to necessity and buy a laptop, the first thing I do is buy a new license to Windows, wipe the thing, and start fresh. [...]

      I'm rather confident this isn't the vision Microsoft had as it built its OS.

      You bought two windows licenses. I'm sure MS isn't bothered that that doesn't live up to some noble vision.

    16. Re:Lockstep, my ass by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Cool thanks

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    17. Re:Lockstep, my ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It may not be Microsoft's vision but it is the future Microsoft has built.

      The PC market is not Microsoft child. It was built by Microsoft and Hardware and Software parters. Once upon a time all of those contributed to the platform innovation and success.

      However, Microsoft has spent years sucking this platform dry, marginalizing one partner after the other (where are the Corels, Lotus', StarDivisions, RealPlayers, Intuits, etc of today? all gone doing webapps and mobile where they don't have an ogre as parter. No VC will lend you money today to build a business on windows since they all know the profits, if any, will be preempted by Microsoft)

      There is no big PC desktop software player left except Microsoft (and Adobe, but Microsoft has been working on its case with initiatives like xps and by sidelining Flash)

      And Microsoft behaved no better with hardware partners. When intel starded writing multimedia software to accelerate multimedia adoption Microsoft killed the initiative. When the hardware vendors you blame today tried to release a new form factor in netbooks Microsoft strong-harmed them till netbooks where fat enough to run windows and had no price advantage left. The only big hardware advance desktop-side of the past decade is the 64 bit migration and it was born server-side by AMD where Microsoft doesn't have the weight to extinguish changes yet (thanks to linux). Any PC hardware change was doomed without Windows support and Microsoft only supported the changes it brought forward itself (yay for the innovation of windows keys on keyboards)

      So Microsoft had trained its partners for years to show no initiative (or else) and has appropriated to itself all the innovation and advances (the parts with the highest ROI, that earn enough money to finance new R&D). Even when Microsoft failed to push an initiative forward (like netbooks or olpcs) it was happy with only driving alternatives to the ground to protect its PC hegemony.

      Surface is only the logical conclusion of this process. Partners have been sucked dry and have no innovation left to contribute. Microsoft is alone with its platforms and can't count on anyone else to push them forward. It has to take a hand directly (when Elop has finished driving Nokia to the ground it will be the same mobile-side)

      Given how many of the past windows advances have been pioneered by others (with Microsoft misusing its weight as platform steward to appropriate the end result) I doubt they'll be any successful without changing in depth their corporate culture. Microsoft is ill-prepared for this kind of competition, where no one else brings it new ideas to steal (sorry implement better in windows, where the original inventor idea strangely fails to behave properly)

      And that's too bad for the hardware vendors that let Microsoft lobotomize them and continued to pass bad bargain after bad bargain with Microsoft for years rather than taking the risk to support alternatives. I doubt they have any money left to buy themselves a future. The whole process left them with razor-thin margins.

    18. Re:Lockstep, my ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then there's the software. My god, the crapware that gets shoveled onto computers. On the rare occasion I bow down to necessity and buy a laptop, the first thing I do is buy a new license to Windows, wipe the thing, and start fresh. It's damn near unusuable otherwise, thanks to the likes of McAfee, Norton, SomeDamnKidsGamesCompany, Yahoo, Earthlink, Google, AskJeeves, and every other piece of stupid bloaty crashy adware that I have to pull out root and branch.

      I'm rather confident this isn't the vision Microsoft had as it built its OS. At least, not for the *entire* non-boutique market.

      You do realise it was Microsoft that invented the registry for this very reason. Once upon a time there was this thing called TSR and programs were single executables and occupied a tiny footprint and had each byte code 100% utilised and so on and so forth.

      It will be a joy and a wonder to see someone not fuck over a Windows machine before it ever comes out of the box. Eyes will be opened, tears of joy will be shed, and people will think it's all because of Windows 8.

      Dude you are fucking deluded, the machine is fucked and it is being returned because of Microsoft.

      And that's the true shame.

      Because it was always there to begin with.

      And that is how Apple won by worming its way through Microsofts shittiness.

    19. Re:Lockstep, my ass by dvh.tosomja · · Score: 1

      > I am surprised by this part: last time I tried with a Win7 Pro laptop, I was able to use my own license number (the one on the sticker on the laptop case) with another Windows setup disc, without having to purchase a new license!

      Does typing in your licence number wipe out all the OEM crapware? I don't think so...

  28. Apple IS important here... by nweaver · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Apple has always gained value from controlling the software and the hardware. How many Windows headaches are directly attributable to the @#)(*#@) hardware various OEMs use?

    But the iOS success has really made it clear: Control the hardware supply chain and you can produce products (e.g. the iPad, the iPhone) that are actually cheaper than your competitor's products, as well as better.

    (For those who say the iPhone is not cheaper, its that the carriers subsidize it less because the phone itself is more valuable to customers. Compare the no-contract price of a shiny new Samsung Galaxy or Windows phone vs an iPhone 4s)

    --
    Test your net with Netalyzr
    1. Re:Apple IS important here... by yacc143 · · Score: 1

      Actually, here around iPhones are subsidized more than other more mainstream devices. It also makes sense, why should Apple give them away cheaper as long willing consumers queue overnight to get the newest and greatest?

      And comparing non-sub prices proves not much, because the non-sub prices are clearly not the prices the carriers are paying internally.
      (Non-sub prices at carrier outlets are blown up in a humoristic way, so the customer knows how much cheaper it is with a plan, and other retailers most vertainly have other incoming prices, ...)

    2. Re:Apple IS important here... by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 4, Informative

      > Apple has always gained value from controlling the software and the hardware.

      Yup, they learnt this lesson back in the late '70's with the Apple ][ floppy disc drive / controller. Summarizing the fascinating read:
        http://apple2history.org/history/ah05/

      IBM engineers had invented the 8-inch floppy disk in 1971, and over the next two years gradually increased its capacity from 80K to nearly 240K. Alan Shugart, an IBM manager, left that company and formed his own in 1973. ... The company went on to design and market the SA400 âoeminifloppyâ drive that same year, with a formatted capacity of 90K

      Steve Jobs had been visiting the Shugart offices regularly, insisting that he needed a cheap $100 disk drive. After Wozniak figured out the details of how to control a disk drive, Jobs came back and said that not only did he want a cheap disk drive, he wanted just the mechanism; no read/write electronics, no head load solenoid, no track zero sensor and no index hole sensor.

      Following the Consumer Electronics Show, Wozniak set out to complete the design of the Disk II. His original task on the disk controller was to reduce the chip count from the 40 chips used on the controllers for S-100 machines. ... Beyond that, he made additional design changes that reduced the total chip count to only nine. This eventually reduced further to eight, since two 555 timers were replaced by a single 556 timer.

      The Disk II was finally available in July 1978 with the first full version of DOS, 3.1. It had an introductory price of $495 (including the controller card) if you ordered them before Apple had them in stock; otherwise, the price would be $595. Even at that price, however, it was the least expensive floppy disk drive ever sold by a computer company. ... Because of the custom hardware and software Apple created to manage and access the disks, they had a formatted capacity of 113K, 23K more than the capacity offered by Shugart.

      The resulting product, the Disk II, was almost obscenely profitable: For about $140 in parts ($80 after the shift to Alps) [not counting labor costs], Apple could package a disk drive and a disk controller in a single box that sold at retail for upwards of $495.

    3. Re:Apple IS important here... by symbolset · · Score: 2

      The lesson here is that software and hardware designed together has benefits. Microsoft actually said that. PC OEMs can't design Windows to best fit their hardware. They would need open software or own software for that. So the worst possible Microsoft outcome would be for the hardware OEMs to agree with them on this obvious issue and act on that.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    4. Re:Apple IS important here... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      That is interesting reading. Franklin did come out with their version of the drive II. I'm sure the low part count made the task relatively simple.

      I remember people moving the speed control to the front panel of the drive II. They would adjust it to circumvent some copy protection schemes that looked for unformatted or bad sectors. Those were the days when you could actually work on your computer with a soldering gun. Like doubling the Atari ST RAM by piggy-backing the RAM chips and wire wrapping an additional address line.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    5. Re:Apple IS important here... by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      > Franklin did come out with their version of the drive II. I'm sure the low part count made the task relatively simple.
      Yup, I remember using a clone drive as well. I still got spare parts for them. ;-) The disk drives were half the size of Apple's. It wasn't Franklin though.

      > I remember people moving the speed control to the front panel of the drive II. . They would adjust it to circumvent some copy protection schemes that looked for unformatted or bad sectors.
      I never heard about that mod but it makes sense. Usually it was simpler to just trace the boot-code (since track 0 sector HAD to be readable by the CX00 PROM and the boot sector was ALWAYS placed at $0800 in memory) and then remove the offending copy protection checking code. Simple protections were a 1-byte "$60 RTS" patch. Later, hardware such as the Replay and Wildcard would just take a snapshot of memory and you could save that to disk. "Kracking games" was one of the reasons I became a programmer -- wanted to learn how the protection worked and how to defeat it, so I could study the game's algorithms. Fortunately (or unfortunately) I moved onto graphics & optimization programmer.

      The one mod I did hear about was the one where you could flip a switch to force "write-protection" on the disk and/or "force writeable" even though the write-protect notch was covered.

      > Like doubling the Atari ST RAM by piggy-backing the RAM chips and wire wrapping an additional address line.
      Ah neat. That's a cool hack. Over in Apple ][ //e //c land we were stuck with bank-switched RAM / ROM. Total PITA ;-(

    6. Re:Apple IS important here... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 0

      Very few. I go and put Linux on the misbehaving machine and it works. This went as far as OCZ Agility 3 SSD flat out not working, but you boot the Maintenance CD--a fucking Linux Live CD--and flash the firmware to fix it up ... a hardware issue, ok. But wait, the maintenance CD boots... oh, ont off the flash drive, that's different.

      I never booted the maintenance CD.

      I installed Ubuntu on the SSD. Booted it. Downloaded the maintenance tool, ran it from Ubuntu running on the SSD to update the firmware. Continued using Ubuntu, then cold booted later to re-initialize the drive's firmware.

      This is how life has always been for me. Hell once I had a BIOS that had invalid ACPI tables, so I fixed them (a Web site explained the bug, and showed which values to change, and had a dump of the table; I followed the instructions) and put a copy into a Linux driver (their instructions were to patch the latest BIOS image and reflash--fuck that). I had it do a check for the hardware, verify the table, and if it found the damaged table it would load the hard-coded correction. It worked! The HP laptop's brightness controls were suddenly functional, fuck yeah!

      My hardware was obscure, and the problem was obscure. Linux often has specific fixes for well-known corner cases in badly designed hardware; but more significantly, Linux has a lot of generalizations. A LOT. If a hard drive ceases to respond properly, Linux will send it a reset (shut the drive off, flush cache, bring it back up, re-issue read/write commands). Linux sanity checks some graphics hardware behavior. Linux sanity checks memory buffers. Linux recognizes a wide range of erroneous conditions and calmly takes the hardware into a known good state by some means (up to and including shutting it off and turning it back on), then proceeds as normal. Sure it's not Minix, but it doesn't panic() whenever the wind blows.

      Windows, upon encountering something unexpected, either bluescreens or ignores it and crashes trying to make use of very invalid data. Graphics card sent something funky? Telll it to play with framebuffer anyway. What do you mean it just randomly DMA'd a bunch of random areas of RAM and stomped all over them, then entered an internal error state and crashed?

    7. Re:Apple IS important here... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      Yep. I owned both systems. Small world! Getting the games to run on the Apple II was what inspired me to go into programming. The Apple II monitor was what sealed the deal for me. Those were the days when assembly/machine programming ruled...

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    8. Re:Apple IS important here... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      Yup, I remember using a clone drive as well. I still got spare parts for them. ;-) The disk drives were half the size of Apple's. It wasn't Franklin though.

      I meant to point out that you may had a drive manufactured by VTech. They made those shorter drives that matched the //c and their own Laser 128.

      I remember those during an Apple users group meeting..

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    9. Re:Apple IS important here... by knarf · · Score: 1

      For those who say the iPhone is not cheaper, its that the carriers subsidize it less because the phone itself is more valuable to customers. Compare the no-contract price of a shiny new Samsung Galaxy or Windows phone vs an iPhone 4s

      Europe here, where we do none of the silly carrier subsidizing thing - or at least we can choose to get a pay-as-you-go or contract without a phone. You want a phone, you buy a phone.

      I bought a phone about half a year ago. Spec-wise it is comparable to one of those fruit-phones - in some ways it packs a bit less, in other ways a bit more punch. Price-wise I would have needed to pay about three times as much for a comparable fruit phone. I'm talking normal retail prices here, taxes and all included.

      In other words... you are wrong about 'iProduct being cheaper', at least when it comes to phones. Personally I think you are wrong about them being better as well, but that is more of a subjective choice than an objective observation.

      --
      --frank[at]unternet.org
  29. They will thank MS in the end by elabs · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If Surface is a success it will jumpstart the entire Windows ecosystem and check the growth of the iPad. This will only help the OEMs in the end. If it's not a success then it's not a threat to OEMs.

    1. Re:They will thank MS in the end by geoskd · · Score: 1

      If Surface is a success it will jumpstart the entire Windows ecosystem and check the growth of the iPad. This will only help the OEMs in the end. If it's not a success then it's not a threat to OEMs.

      Yes it is. The windows tablet ecosystem on ARM will hasten the demise of the desktop ecosystem. The OEMs could find themselves Kodak'd with no access to either iOS or Surface, and being stuck with Android. If this sucker is successful, then Apple and MS will quickly wipe the Desktop relevance off the table, and leave the OEMs without a chair when the music stops. The OEMs now have a very strong incentive to hate MS, which is why MS kept it a secret from them as long as it could.

      -=Geoskd

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
  30. Bad for OEMs, good for end-users? by Gaygirlie · · Score: 5, Interesting

    While there are plenty of things I personally do not like about Windows 8 -- first and foremost Secure boot -- I still cannot help but feel that Microsoft's new direction will translate to various kinds of benefits for the general populace. Microsoft is now pushing for better integration of the hardware with the OS, for cleaner default installations and for innovation in the hardware, the only downside for the general populace being slightly higher prices on their new computers. One can hope that instead of rushing to the bottom the manufacturers will in the future try to focus on producing higher quality hardware and stop with their bloatware-installations and insanely crappy "feature software."(1) There are better ways of offering new software and getting people to buy stuff than just stuffing the computer full of pre-installed trialware, like e.g. why not ASK the user what kind of software they might need on their newly-installed device or what they plan on doing with it, and then OFFER to install trial-versions so they can try and see if the software does what they need?

    (1): a girlfriend just recently bought herself a new laptop from ASUS and I went there to help her set it up. Well, not surprisingly it was chock-full of all kinds of crapware, and ASUS's own software was actually the worst of all. One example of such software from ASUS is ASUS Update: it is nothing more than an application that checks ASUS's website for new driver releases for the laptop, but it is chock-full of spelling mistakes, it's dog-slow, it tries its god damn best to stick out of the desktop like a needle in the eye and so on. Heck, it was trying to install a 500 kilobyte update for 30 minutes before I got fed up with waiting, killed it and installed the update manually, which only took 3 seconds! Another thing I noticed was that the application kept one of the cores at 100% usage at all times, even when it was not doing anything, but when I minimized the application the CPU usage dropped to about 12%: looks like a rather clear case of the application just redrawing its own window all the time as fast as it can, with or without any reason whatsoever for that. It really baffles me how on Earth can ASUS think this is good for their image or for their customers.

    1. Re:Bad for OEMs, good for end-users? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A simple sleep(100) fixes those kinds of problems.

  31. so then tell MS to fuck off with secureboot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple gets marketshare by innovating and creating products people want, Microsoft gets marketshare by government contract and strong arm monopoly tactics.

    1. Re:so then tell MS to fuck off with secureboot by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

      Apple gets marketshare by innovating and creating products people want, Microsoft gets marketshare by government contract and strong arm monopoly tactics.

      Ignoring there recent monopolistic price fixing abuse by forming a Cartel with Book publishers. It seems to spend all its time across the world trying to stop the sales of competing innovative products. In fact it seems to abuse the legal systems in ways that I find uncomfortable. Their use of IP what is meant to be a sign of innovation has been insane, taking freely from others with a sue me I'll pay later attitude to a demanding a ban on anything that looks like an innovative product with weak minimalistic design patents.

    2. Re:so then tell MS to fuck off with secureboot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm, excuse me but when Apple uses someone's patents they pay without having to be sued (see one click in iTunes) meanwhile every crappy Asian knockoff brand is ripping off Apple left and right so their only option is to take them to court. Come up with your own inventions and you won't get sued.,

  32. OEMs are now free by minstrelmike · · Score: 2

    Now the PC manufacturers are free from Microsoft.
    They can build their own tablets using their hardware expertise and probably _buy_ a good software package easier than Microsoft can purchase hardware expertise.

  33. Keeping it up by StripedCow · · Score: 2

    IIUC, this surface thing is just a laptop, with a stand to hold up the monitor?

    --
    If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
    1. Re:Keeping it up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, it's a 90s style tablet PC, complete with stylus and everything.

  34. Surprised? by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 1

    I'm not. Historically speaking, any time you set out to do business with Microsoft you are going to get screwed. That's what Microsoft does. That's what they've always done. If you're surprised, you either haven't been around long, or your simply an idiot.

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
  35. Microsoft has altered the deal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pray they do not alter it further.

  36. Why did Microsoft rename their old "Surface"? by mark-t · · Score: 2

    Anybody know?

    Also... what term can we use now for gesture-based computing that isn't necessarily geared towards tablets? The term "surface computing" has been around for a while, but now I expect that term is going to just be too heavily associated with this particular mainstream product.. where at least with the old MS Surface, Microsoft could legitimately have made a claim to being the first one to commercialize a product that the term would get named for. Now calling something "surface computing" is just going to sound like people are trying to "microsoftize" an industry where there are already a number of other players.

    1. Re:Why did Microsoft rename their old "Surface"? by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      Anybody know?

      Also... what term can we use now for gesture-based computing that isn't necessarily geared towards tablets? The term "surface computing" has been around for a while, but now I expect that term is going to just be too heavily associated with this particular mainstream product.. where at least with the old MS Surface, Microsoft could legitimately have made a claim to being the first one to commercialize a product that the term would get named for. Now calling something "surface computing" is just going to sound like people are trying to "microsoftize" an industry where there are already a number of other players.

      Objection! Assuming facts not in evidence.

    2. Re:Why did Microsoft rename their old "Surface"? by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Objection! Quoting a dozen lines to only supply a single lIne of your own!

      Also... Failing to be specific in your objection lends suspect that your own objection is not rationally founded. Counsel is requested to clarify or else withdraw the objection.

    3. Re:Why did Microsoft rename their old "Surface"? by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      Objection! Quoting a dozen lines to only supply a single lIne of your own!

      Also... Failing to be specific in your objection lends suspect that your own objection is not rationally founded. Counsel is requested to clarify or else withdraw the objection.

      So using bold to indicate my objection wasn't enough for you? Well let me spell it out - Surface is NOT a mainstream product; it's not even a product yet - it's little more than vaporware.

    4. Re:Why did Microsoft rename their old "Surface"? by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      They renamed table-Surface to "Pixelsense." There's a link at the bottom of the new surface page.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    5. Re:Why did Microsoft rename their old "Surface"? by mark-t · · Score: 1
      Sorry... I missed the bolding. I was responding on a terminal that did not show the text any differently than anything else you quoted. Nonethless, you still could have gotten away with quoting only that single sentence.

      As for the notion that it's going to be mainstream, It's an affordably priced consumer electronics product, designed along the same vein as most other tablets available today, and as a is reasonable to presume it will be just as mainstream as any one of them.

    6. Re:Why did Microsoft rename their old "Surface"? by mark-t · · Score: 1

      I know what they renamed Surface to, I was asking why they bothered to rename it at all. What was the initial motivation behind it?

      While I'm aware that one partial explanation could easily be that MS simply wanted to clear out the namespace for their tablet device (I don't know if this is true, but I find it to be at least plausible)... but this notion does not actually address what the underlying motivation is... If that were the case, it invites the question of why they wanted to name their tablet "Surface" when they already had another device being sold with that name?

    7. Re:Why did Microsoft rename their old "Surface"? by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      As for the notion that it's going to be mainstream, It's an affordably priced consumer electronics product, designed along the same vein as most other tablets available today, and as a is reasonable to presume it will be just as mainstream as any one of them.

      Objection! Assuming facts not in evidence.

    8. Re:Why did Microsoft rename their old "Surface"? by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Between 600 and 800 dollars. Not cheap, but still definitely affordable.

    9. Re:Why did Microsoft rename their old "Surface"? by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      Between 600 and 800 dollars. Not cheap, but still definitely affordable.

      Objection! Hearsay. Microsoft has not announced prices.

    10. Re:Why did Microsoft rename their old "Surface"? by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Speculation, perhaps... more accurately, they are educated estimates. One could, on the basis that it is also an estimate, object to the notion that the universe is roughly 13.7 billion years old as well. The chief point is that the estimate is going to be accurate enough for all practical purposes.

      To understand why I'm inclined to accept as a given that MS's tablet will be affordable, consider that Microsoft is not stupid... They aren't coming into this game as a market leader... and for the device to succeed commercially, it must be priced competitively with other tablet devices that offer similar amounts of computing power.

      You can go on challenging my points with additional courtroom style objections if you wish, but it hardly changes reality.

    11. Re:Why did Microsoft rename their old "Surface"? by coinreturn · · Score: 1

      Speculation, perhaps... more accurately, they are educated estimates. One could, on the basis that it is also an estimate, object to the notion that the universe is roughly 13.7 billion years old as well. The chief point is that the estimate is going to be accurate enough for all practical purposes.

      My main object is that you said it was "mainstream." It most certainly is not. It is still vaporware. Yes, it may become mainstream, and yes, they must price it competitively, or it will go the way of the Zune, if it ever arrives at all. Also, your educated estimates do not compare to the collective scientific agreement on the age of the universe, which although is technically "speculation," it is based on evidence, while your estimates are not. There is no evidence on what the Surface will cost. And your estimates are in no way "reality."

    12. Re:Why did Microsoft rename their old "Surface"? by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Possibly.... but vaporware isn't exactly Microsoft's style. While they've been known to announce products before they existed before, to the best of my knowledge, they always seem to have followed through with such announcements once they've made them To that end, I expect that the device will become just as mainstream as most of the other tablet devices out there. That does not mean I expect it to do blindingly well, or to be an "iPad killer".

      I suppose if it really does come to naught, then the "surface computing" terminology won't be perceived as trying to "Microsoftize" the industry, as I expected, but that still doesn't answer my original question about why they renamed their old "Surface" product.

  37. Decent parts? Buy a mac, install linux... by nweaver · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You buy a $600 Mac Mini, drop in more RAM, then install the OS of your choice on it...

    One of the things Apple does is make sure that their hardware isn't the bottom-of-the-line crap that PC OEMs use.

    So yeah, with a Mac Mini, you're paying a $200 premium for the elegant packaging compared to the typical PE OEM drek of comparible specs, but you also get IO chips that don't blow dead goats.

    Apple is vicious about getting the most out of their suppliers, but at the same time, they demand a level of quality out of their suppliers thats lacking in the misbegotten cess-pool that is the rest of the x86 OEM world.

    --
    Test your net with Netalyzr
  38. The market changed by QuietLagoon · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The market changed from Microsoft's old model of expensive software on cheap hardware to Apple's current model of free or inexpensive software on expensive hardware.

    .
    In other words, Apple did not just facilitate the paradigm shift towards mobile devices, Apple changed the entire strategic fiscal structure of the market.

    Microsoft's hardware entourage had to be cut free. It would not be the first time Microsoft has left the decaying bodies of its partners behind, after sucking all the profits and life out of them.

    1. Re:The market changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple hasn't changed the model, they've just hidden the price of the software. You have no idea how much OS X costs, because you cannot buy it without paying for the hardware (which is paying for the software under the covers).

      Buying new versions of OS X doesn't count, because whether they are labeled as such or not, they are de facto upgrade prices. "Oh, but an OS X upgrade is only $20, while a Windows 7 upgrade is $90" you say, which sounds way cheaper, until you realize that Apple has released seven versions of OS X (10.0 through 10.6) in the time Microsoft has released two versions of Windows (Vista, Windows 7).

    2. Re:The market changed by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

      Apple hasn't changed the model, they've just hidden the price of the software.

      Which is exactly what Microsoft will be doing with their new tablet, with Microsoft making the hardware on which their OS will be running, the price of the Windows OS will be hidden in the price of the tablet. Microsoft could not compete in the previous model of selling the expensive OS atop cheap hardware. It had to switch to selling the OS and hardware combined, the model that Apple has been using in the mobile space

      .
      Thanks for confirming my point.

    3. Re:The market changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The difference here being that Microsoft will continue selling the software that runs on the new tablet to partners who wish to make their own. Microsoft is not preventing their partners from releasing new hardware, they're just setting the quality bar - partners will have to compete by releasing a better product or charging less.

      Of course the partners aren't happy about having to compete, but that's a separate matter.

  39. What other options do the OEM's have? by CuriousGeorge113 · · Score: 2

    The major Microsoft OEM's really don't have many other options. You can't OEM the Mac OS, and as much as we would all see a major linux distro get more widely adopted, that just not realistic. Especially in the corporate space.

    MS can piss off their OEM's to the Nth degree. They still need to sell MS products to move hardware.

    In other words, the OEM's need MS more than MS needs the OEM's. Especially now that they've shown (not proven) the ability to design and manufacturer a very decent Windows hardware platform.

    --
    No man is an island, But if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie them together, they make a pretty good raft.
    1. Re:What other options do the OEM's have? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The other option is to lose a lot of money trying to compete with Microsoft and then go bankrupt.

      It happens.

    2. Re:What other options do the OEM's have? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the corporate space everything is getting virtualized and moved to web apps. So a linux client would not have any problem today (especially given the current world economy state which means businesses are cost-cutting everywhere)

      Now if hardware makers want a future they must learn to subsidy one or several linux distros or build their own OS, just like Apple hardware profits subsidies Apple software, or like all the bad bargains they spent with Microsoft fuelled Microsoft growth.

      No one will make the effort to productise Linux on the desktop otherwise. There is no money to be made on a software-only desktop effort today. Desktop software is a loss-leader to get desktop hardware sold (except for Windows where MS managed to invert this trend to its own benefit). Consumers are not ready to spend huge amounts of cash for cardboard boxes with a software disk inside. They will spend the money for a hardware gadget with cool software inside.

      If hardware makers do not realise they need a software partner that lets them push support for their hardware at will, instead of following its own roadmap only, they deserve to die.

      Linux (server-side) they can submit new drivers for any of their new toys to Linus, and RedHat/Suse/etc will pick it up directly. Linux (desktop-side) they drag their feet and refuse to support many hardware features because of IP concerns (that they don't have for the much more expensive chips they put in servers). Is there any surprise Linux desktop struggles to exist?

      How exactly do they get a better bargain with Microsoft when Microsoft will only build support in windows for the hardware changes it supports, prevent them for shipping their own support via its certification control, and compete with them with surface-like initiatives besides?

  40. They can thank Apple by tomhath · · Score: 2

    Microsoft couldn't do this in the past because they were already defending themselves against charges of being a monopoly. Now that Apple has gained enough market share Microsoft is free to do whatever they want.

  41. They shouldn't be scared by Danzigism · · Score: 2

    There's no reason why OEMs should be scared or even feel threatened by this. Although I'm not a huge M$ supporter, they do this kind of stuff all the time. They layout a standard, show the OEMs, and then the vendors duplicate it and personalize it. There is still plenty of money to be made for OEMs that choose the Windows 8 platform for their devices. All companies like Acer and ASUS need to do is just release a tablet that actually comes with a digital ink stylus, or perhaps built-in mobile broadband support. Simply take the components that Microsoft hasn't included, and put it in yours instead. Tablets are innovating all the time so there's no reason to think of this as a threat. Consumers will continue to choose what they feel is right for them. If anything, a bold move like this will make vendors more confident in Microsoft's abilities and they'll stand by their side.

    --
    *plays the Apogee theme song music*
    1. Re:They shouldn't be scared by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol nice marketing spin.
      problem with your hypo is the vendors already have android tablets out there .. which means this M$hit move is competing against their own product lines directly.
      great confidence move there chump.

  42. Microsoft == Vader by ckhorne · · Score: 5, Funny

    "I have altered the deal. Pray that I do not alter it further"

    1. Re:Microsoft == Vader by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also known in anime/hentai circles as: "surprise tentacle rape! yay!".

    2. Re:Microsoft == Vader by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Original version or this version?

  43. If Microsoft stops lobbying for more H1-B visas by OutSourcingIsTreason · · Score: 0

    If Microsoft stops lobbying for more H1-B visas then I might give a shit about the "Surface". Until then it's a no because my labor has to compete with the inexpensive labor of people on restricted visas. Thank you Microsoft.

    --
    "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Mussolini
    1. Re:If Microsoft stops lobbying for more H1-B visas by cryfreedomlove · · Score: 1

      The modern high tech world is global and borderless. Today's version of national governments cannot reverse that trend for you.

    2. Re:If Microsoft stops lobbying for more H1-B visas by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

      Why thanks, voluntary-serf man! Have some *more* kool-aid!

      --
      Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  44. Seriously? by rickb928 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    MS devised Surface, very clever and a rational progression from Kinect. Quick, how many manufacturers have integrated Kinect into their products? I'm unaware of it being integrated into any hardware. Would a Kinect interface in a laptop be interesting?

    So, it's really like this: If you want your innovations in the marketplace fast, you better be putting them there yourself. Apple gets this.

    Microsoft can either plead with its 'partners' to build these things, or they can contract with a partner or two to make stuff for them.

    Dell, HP, Lenovo, Acer, etc are not going to risk much making cool PC stuff, they are just volume manufacturers. Some (Dell) aren't really manufacturers at all.

    So Microsoft will contract for stuff that is cool. Apple does this, and iPads get the better technology earlier. Microsoft's Surface would NOT, repeat NOT be on the market before 2014 if left to the manufacturers. They need to noodle over the design, drive out the cost, maximize profit, and guarantee a market. Microsoft needs to establish themselves in the market, get there before someone else does, and provide the MVP to at least leverage their capital and crush the opposition. Surface is a step past whatever the iPad interface is. Gestures that don't even need a touch screen interest me.

    Apple strategy. Evil is as evil does, no matter the name on the product.

    If you need examples of failure, the HP touchpad and RIM Playbook come to mind first. Toshiba, Acer, etc have tablets that are superfluous in the marketplace. If you want the iPad market, you have to do B E T T E R than the iPad.

    'as good as' leads me to just buy an iPad. Feh.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    1. Re:Seriously? by Circuit+Breaker · · Score: 5, Interesting

      > Quick, how many manufacturers have integrated Kinect into their products? I'm unaware of it being integrated into any hardware. Would a Kinect interface in a laptop be interesting?

      Microsoft won't license out Kinect technology (which they did not even develop themselves, but rather got an exclusive license for from PrimeSense). Furthermore, at the same time they signed the deal, they bought the only other company to offer similar products (I think 3DVision, not sure about the name), and closed them. So they now own an exclusive license for one technology, and all the patents for a differently implemented technology.

      There is no way for anyone to integrate that functionality. And if I were microsoft, I'd buy LeapMotion tomorrow to make sure that stays true for the future.

    2. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure. But it's a big risk which has the potential to set us all back half a decade.

      If MS screws this up, (fails to deliver, gets egotistical about it and really pisses off the manufacturers and vendors to the point where they walk away from Redmond), what's the fallout we can expect?

      Well, Win8 might die on the vine with no supporting hardware available. Which means we're stuck in the Android and Apple App universe where you still can't get any real work done.

      -Which might not be so bad. It wouldn't hurt to see the world have to forcibly switch over to App-based productivity software, (which is really Linux-based).

      This is what everybody has been waiting for, after all; Linux ruling the world and Microsoft dying.

      Overall, things would be better, but the growth pains won't be insignificant.

      If MS screws this up, that is.

    3. Re:Seriously? by steelfood · · Score: 1

      Would a Kinect interface in a laptop be interesting?

      Yeah, it would finally enable this. That would be cool.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
  45. Common, Apple caught everybody by surprise by ninjacut · · Score: 1

    Its the right strategy from Microsoft, not having the right hardware for Windows 8 would have meant sure shot failure which they cannot afford and not planning to do. Also Microsoft is not stopping OEMs from using Android or Linux for tablets either. So why are the OEM's complaining? Best for them is to beat Microsoft, and come up with better hardware, experience and competitive price. They need to realize without it they cannot compete with iPad anyway.

  46. You Knew by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OEMs: You knew and were warned that you were getting screwed without a condom for years but pretended it wasn't happening because you liked the money. Now you get to live with the STD. Tough shit. Thanks for all the fish.

  47. Apple is more profitable by sjbe · · Score: 4, Informative

    MS have much fatter profit margins then Apple...

    No they don't. Both companies have net profit margins around 29.5% with Apple slightly higher in the most recent quarter than Microsoft.

    1. Re:Apple is more profitable by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      On their core products MS have much higher margins, they just have a lot more dead weight in other parts of the company than apple do to bring the average down.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    2. Re:Apple is more profitable by sjbe · · Score: 1

      On their core products MS have much higher margins

      That wasn't what you were arguing before. You said "MS have much fatter profit margins then Apple..." which is demonstrably not true. You did not bring up market segments. At the end of the day, Microsoft has gotten into a number of business segments by choice. When you buy MSFT stock, you are buying all of the business, not just the core businesses. So even where true, saying the core business is more profitable is a meaningless statement unless you expect them to get rid of the non-core businesses.

      While it is (generally) true that software normally has a higher profit margin than hardware, at the end of the day people buy Apple products for their software. (people make a big deal about the design stuff and that is important but what *really* differentiates Apple stuff is the software - put Windows on a Macintosh and there really isn't much to set it apart from any PC from Dell or HP) While Apple does sell some software as a standalone product (and realizes margins on it similar to Microsoft), most of their software products are bundled with hardware. Fundamentally they are both software companies but it is hard to compare the two because of the bundling.

      The vast majority of their products have negligible unit costs, and development costs which were recovered long ago.

      This is a huge misconception about software. While the software itself can be reproduced cheaply, the main costs in ANY software company are sales, marketing and overhead. Engineering only amounts to about 10-15% of a typical software company's costs. But it costs serious coin to sell the software, even for a company like Microsoft. The unit costs are nowhere near negligible (we're talking billions of $) even on their Windows and Office products.

      Disclosure: I am an accountant

    3. Re:Apple is more profitable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With no growth in PC's and no presence in the phone or tablet market for the next 6 months... that MS margin will continue to shrink (unlike manufacturing, you just don't turn off SW... the 100K of 'fingers' that type the OS and Office products still need to be there if they ship 10K units or 10M unit... lest, shudder, MS SW quality suffers;-).

      Apple's will continue to grow as they grow their 'low end' Mac (high end PC) market, and stranglehold the iPad/Tablet market.

      Microsoft... how many people need Office 2015 on an old PC, when all they want is IE10 (free), and Adobe Flash.... It is imperative that they sell to the under $1000 mobile market, and if their OEM's can't compete, they will take over manufacturing, because they need to make WIN8 sell.

      This is the crux of the MS move. MS needs to own the HW to set the 'base quality' of the OS+HW interaction, and to get the 20% of the profits of a 'device' at $400 ($80) and $999($200), rather than 30% profits of a software kit ($210 for Windows+Office = $70). If you can get that on 50% of the devices sold per year... you can tell you stockholders the company has staunched the profits hemorrage.

      This shows the switch from 'corporate sales' (function over form) to consumer sales ('design+experience+function')

      In the old days, the Software (Windows+Office) were what you HAD to have... and you got the least amount of PC you could run it on.

      As Horace Diedu pointed out, the market has shifted... it wants a quality experience with a device with almost free ($10) software. This has always been Apple's DNA, and reinforced since the release of the iPhone.

      We didn't know it then, but when Steve said Apple couldn't figure out how to make a $500 computer that wasn't crap, he pretty much summed up issue... both the price point and the quality point. People want enough quality to make their lives easier. And $500 is a key price point for a 'computing device'... So Steve built for both... His laptops are approaching 800, but they aren't crap. But his flagship mobile device is priced at $499.

      Microsoft... well, it took them what... 5 more years to figure it out... and from the looks of that announcement, they still haven't worked out the details... but one thing is for sure.

  48. No...the year the desktop fell ill. by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1

    It will be seen as the year when the desktop computer started its real decline and the ordinary user started to replace desktops and laptops with small-screen machines, the majority of which run Linux and just about all of which run POSIX-compliant Unix-like operating systems. Meanwhile at home televisions are being replaced by Internet-connected machines which run...Linux. Microsoft is being squeezed in two directions.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  49. 2nd trailing a LONG way behind number 1 by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    360 is second a LONG way behind Nintendo and PS3 is close behind PLUS 360 still fails in Japan so Sony is far from out of the picture meaning there will be a new round. Also, MS has no presence in mobile gaming at all. As for profit on hardware, is that before or after the losses on the original platform have been accounted for and does it include the countless units that had to be replaced under warranty?

    Anyway, MS can do hardware. They have done keyboards and mouses for a long time and they are "okay". No, I wouldn't touch them but some people do.

    Not as many as buy Logitech...

    Oh and for the final nail in the coffin, the 360 had a rather important thing that MS hoped to launch,HD-DVD. Boy, did that bomb. Blu-ray won instead. Who was behind that again?

    No, the 360 did alright but MS is barely breaking even on games and that is only after some creative accounting.

    I predict the surface will be another dud. Why?

    The one spec that is conspicious by its absence. MEMORY. Not storage, main memory.

    Tablets typically come with 1gb nowadays. Do you want to run Windows Desktop with 1gb of memory? You can't even buy netbooks that underpowered anymore. All the memory guzzling of Windows software, all the memory restrictions of a tablet, 10.6 inches (note how well these sell, NOT) and lower resolutiuon then the leader of the pack.

    MS only did okay with the 360 because Sony screwed up really badly with the PS3. MS Office only beat Word Perfect because Corell dropped the ball and the IBM PC Compatable only made it because Apple, Commodore and Atari complety screwed themselves over.

    MS only wins a race if everyone else trips up. Is Apple likely to do that?

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  50. Profits and company culture by sjbe · · Score: 1

    M$ profit margin is, I believe, higher than Apple's. M$ charges $400 for a copy of Office - digital download. What's the margin on that do you think?

    You would be wrong to think that. Apple has a (slightly) higher profit margin as of the most recent fiscal quarter. (MSFT around 29.3% and AAPL at 29.6%) Apple does enough volume that they can drive the margins on the hardware they have made for them pretty thin for their suppliers. Believe it or not, with the right products you can have very good profit margins selling physical objects. You just can't sell a commodity product for big margins. That doesn't presently apply to Apple. Apple's hardware is nice but what really sets their products apart is the software and design. People have proven they are willing to pay a fairly steep markup for the value those add.

    Apple spent years perfecting their supply chain management and they've done the engineering but stayed out of manufacturing itself which explains a lot of their profit margin. Can M$ get that smart that quickly?

    Microsoft is arguably just as experienced in supply chain management. It's not as if they manufacture the Xbox themselves. MSFT has some pretty good engineers too even if they are hamstrung by bad decisions from years past. The problem Microsoft has is that they are built around selling through channels and don't have the experience Apple does in designing an integrated platform. Their company culture is built around software only and it is pretty hard to shift that. Luckily for MSFT, they have a huge war chest to work with and that insulates them from the mistakes they are almost certain to make.

  51. Microsoft cares no more for vendors than devs by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

    They create and throw out products and platforms willy-nilly whenever it suits them and with absolutely no regard for the customers and clients that their hardware and software vendors serve. Want to be that guy who has to find someone to support a VB6 or Silverlight app on a desktop box in 5 years? Good luck with that. You're much better off with open source on Linux.

    Signed, a frequently screwed MS developer

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    1. Re:Microsoft cares no more for vendors than devs by jimmyfrank · · Score: 1

      I'll support it, it's not that difficult.

  52. Microsoft, please look at my $800 HP laptop!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, you Microsoft guys, look at this HP laptop I have! The price was $800, about the same as your Surface thing, but it has a full-size keyboard, a 17" screen, a Core i5, and 6GB RAM. I can even run your Visual Studio bloatware on this thing. Has an ethernet port, a DVD drive, and at least four USB slots. Did I mention it cost the same as your Surface? Who is going to buy the Surface?

  53. Repeat of history by Kupfernigk · · Score: 0
    No. Apple got lucky through a very cunning plan. The iPhone and then the iPad were goods aimed at people with a high disposable income. Which mostly rules out technical people. They planned for volume and they planned to get as much lock in as possible for their manufacturers by buying up component production. They basically identified a new market and went all out for it. Perhaps this was facilitated because Jobs knew he did not have many years left and would go down as the man who made Apple or who destroyed it - just as Hitler thought that he would either become the ruler of all Europe or preside over the complete destruction of Germany and, at times, almost seemed not to care which.

    Basically, they flooded the market and the only possible volume competitor was Samsung because they were a major leading-edge manufacturer themselves. Samsung actually responded pretty fast, but they had lost the biggest tranche of the target market. It's significant that their best selling tablet is a big phone. Their volumes do not generate the profits needed to stay ahead technically as Apple has done.

    This will stop when the technology is good enough, which I think is quite close. Once the parts are there for anyone to make a good enough tablet, product differentiation becomes harder and price comes into play. This could be as soon as 2013 - battery life is now good enough, screens are good enough, manufacturers are differentiating on features like water resistance.

    I think MS is getting involved now because the commodity hardware will be good enough to run even Windows on a small format machine. They are OEMing in an effort to keep some additional margin for themselves. But that may not save them from growing irrelevance.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  54. Post-PC Era by rexbinary · · Score: 1

    Welcome to the Post-PC Era. Invented by Apple, designed in California, built in Shanghai.

  55. a surprise because they have never turned on a par by Locutus · · Score: 2

    never turned on a partner before? As many others have stated, Microsoft is a company for profits and nothing stops them from doing what they decide is their direction to get those profits. laws or no laws, contracts or no contracts and surely nothing like how long you have been a partner matters.

    The story here is not who was not told or how surprised they were, it's what they plan to do now they know they signed those exclusive contracts and now got burned by Microsoft themselves.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  56. Ah and so it begins... or ends... or whatever by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 0

    MS ALWAYS does this, they can't help themselves, they ALWAYS cripple their products in some idiotic way that makes zero business sense.

    Like Windows Phone, 7 and 7.5 support just 1 core and just 1 resolution. Why? God knows, surely a company that has made software for devices with non-standard displays for decades can handle scaling a UI and even MS has had (less then anyone else) experience with multi-core OS support.

    But no, Windows 7 and 7.5 LAUNCHED with max specs that were already made obsolete by competitors phones already in consumer hands.

    Windows Phone 8 is the same, its resolution is still maxed at a spec that is now considered mandatory with existing phones out right now with higher resolutions while the first MS phone with WP8 still has to launch.

    It is almost as if the dev's at MS take a long hard look at what everyone else is doing, then lock themselves away for 5 years, come out and act all suprised that their new product isn't beating the tech their competitors had 5 years ago. It is not just late to the party, it arrives when everyone else has already left.

    And it is a pity because IF MS got it right, their products might actually be desirable. The Surface IF it had been better specced, might actually be okay. But the one spec that worries me most is the one that is missing. Memory. Not storage, working memory. The Pro is like tablet desktop. Now I don't know about your desktop but for me, I have used OSX, Windows and mostly Linux and they ALL love their main memory. More they cry, feed me more sticks! I cannot give you any more captain, I am all sticked out! But they want more. Gamer mainboards exist now with 8 slots, just to to feed the appetite of windows programs for more memory.

    Now... how much will the Surface Pro have? If MS was on the ball, with the times, had business smarts and understood their customers, an ABSOLUTE minimum of 4 and preferable 8 GB... if I am optimistic? It will be 2. Hopefully at least 1 although 512mb wouldn't suprise me a bit.

    Anyone know the answer? It will tell you what MS is like as a company.

    1. 8gb+ MS is on the ball, they understand their market and their customers and how people use their OS.
    2. 4gb+ MS understands the market but is a bit cheap.
    3. 2gb+ MS thinks people run one app at a time because frankly that is all Ballmer can handle.
    4. 1gb MS can't even start up task manager to see how much its OS gobbles up.
    5. 512mb MS engineers have no idea how much memory is needed because they do all their work and entertainment on Apple gear.
    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Ah and so it begins... or ends... or whatever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now... how much [RAM] will the Surface Pro have? If MS was on the ball, with the times, had business smarts and understood their customers, an ABSOLUTE minimum of 4 and preferable 8 GB...

      They don't list it on the spec sheet, but I believe during the launch they said the ARM version would have 1GB, and the Intel version would have 2GB. So, that falls under your:

      2gb+ MS thinks people run one app at a time because frankly that is all Ballmer can handle.
      1gb MS can't even start up task manager to see how much its OS gobbles up.

      You're absolutely right, though, 2GB won't be enough. What surprised me most were the microSDXC card support, and the weight of the device. 903 grams for the Intel version is extremely heavy for a tablet, and I suspect that's without the keyboard flap. The microSDXC card is definitely a plus, though. With the spec supporting 2TB cards, this tablet could last a long, long time (perhaps to Microsoft's detriment).

  57. I suspect things will work out ok by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft will be highly motivated to coexist with the OEMs. There's no point in cutting off those sales channels.

    My guess is this: Surface will be a higher-price product, and will come with no crapware installed. This will leave the OEMs free to sell into the lower-price segment. Microsoft will allow the OEMs to bundle crapware to help with profit margins. It will also discount the OS to counter the objection that Surface has an unfair advantage.

    There will be some awkwardness at first as they figure out exactly how to divvy up the market and the money. But in the end they'll all find a way to play nice together.

  58. Car Analogy by Infiniti2000 · · Score: 2

    From TFA: "Car analogies might be overdone"

    The fucking hell you say!

    1. Re:Car Analogy by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      That's like saying 4-door sedans are overdone! Ridiculous!

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
  59. Amazingly ironic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I still remember when the totally inferior PCs started to overtake Commodore Amigas and Atari STs in every household which had these: Microsoft and the PC were deemed as "superior" because they were extensible and "anyone could build one" (I was sure building my 386 myself).

    It took something like 5 years (yup, that is sick) to get games on the PC that were able to match things like "Shadow of the beast" on the Amiga.

    Sick times.

    And now it's the full circle: Apple has taken insane market shares with their iOS (in a market they basically created) and so now MS wants to, eventually, go down the "closed hardware" route.

    They should be careful that said: I doubt they'll manage to be "cool" and to produce very slick (and bugless) devices. By going "closed hardware" they're losing one of the biggest advantage they've had during decades.

    I find this somehow ironic...

  60. Race to the Bottom by Saint+Dharma · · Score: 1

    If Surface heats up, the other OEMs have two stark options. They can continue their race-to-bottom, devouring each other in consolidations and acquisitions until only the brand names are left and every PC component and system has been outsourced to Malaysia -- or they can start building names for themselves as innovators.
    This.

    Adapt or Die. That is the mantra of the computer industry. Apple has seized on this notion and have reaped the rewards for it. Microsoft is learning, but they have a long way to go. Personally, I am glad that they didn't let their OEMs know what is going on. "But Dharma, you charismatic stallion, why would you support an Evil Empire like Microsoft," you ask, It's quite simple....Microsoft is willing to step out of its' comfort zone. Look at the XBox, look at the Zune, look at the Windows Phone. Sure, all of those products had the missteps and out and out failures, but they got past that and made a better product up the road, and the consumer has been better for it on the whole.

    HP and Dell have forgotten how to innovate because they stopped making things. And when they stopped making things, they stopped thinking about how to make things better. Making things in Malaysia does not count here, because those people over there are not making things. They are following a blueprint that has already been set in stone. They do not innovate. They are robots made of meat and it seems to me that this is what business in the 21st Century wants is robots made of meat.

  61. Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "It sound like some people I know who "Keep getting all thses virus things no matter what I do!""

    Remember the Sony BMG root kit?
    Remember how no Antivirus detected it? Not even Anti root kit scanners?
    Remember how only one tool initially detected it?

    Now consider for a moment how many other government software/firmware moles/rootkits may be lingering within millions of people's proprietary systems (hardware/software-OS).

    Wikileaks published a lot of information on companies willingly selling rootkits to governments and organizations. And do I really need to bring up HBGary?

    So many fools using multiple proprietary scanners on their systems, the makers of which could all be in bed with big bro, the programs and/or updates could contain rootkits, and seriously, what the fsck is up with Microsoft and Flash both having so many remote exploits being patched all of the time?

    The very products you trust, imo, could be the very e-poison from which you e-drink from.

    To this day I laugh inside when twits tell me their system is "clean" because they scanned it with several proprietary tools.

    Face it, even on Linux the quality of the root kit scanners are piss poor. You have to boot into a separate environment (like Remnux) to evaluate the malware, but most people won't do it, they'll wipe and reinstall and rely only on signatures which can be compromised. And when they find out they have an APT which continues to reinfect their computer(s)? Would they be intelligent enough to consider a firmware (PCI/BIOS) infection which survives hard drive wipes? Do they also have infected thumb drives laying around they plug into other computers around home and/or friends/family/work?

    Chkrootkit has a function to list the strings of binaries, but it's up to you to determine whether or not the content of the strings are malicious. I've tried several root kit scanners on Linux and all of them are, imo, crippled pieces of trash. The crowd will yell back at you, "But most of these require root to exploit!" No, not at all, there are hundreds of ways to exploit a Linux box, many not requiring root, but a particular program/version. I won't even bite down on the subject of ways to subvert package managers. Heck, how many Linux repositories use SSL? SSH? Torrents with established "good" check sums for thousands of packages?

    And I've not mentioned Flash and Adobe Reader for Linux and the past problems with those... and the NVidia driver for Linux, had in the past, one or two severe security issues whereby a remote exploit could take over the system! (Google it. The news of one exploit was in 2006.)

    Our proprietary hardware and software are both at risk, and likely subverted world wide on millions of computers by governments and select organizations. The fact it takes years until a researcher trips over a particular piece of malware which none of the antivirus companies are detecting is inexcusable.

    Were I head of a commercially developed antimalware company, I'd develop a website similar to Virus Total, but instead of the users uploading single files one by one, I'd give them a FOSS program which checked every part of their hardware, embedded and manually inserted, checksum the firmware (of all media drives, graphics cards, anything with firmware) and BIOS and tear apart the results, funneling them into separate result pages, each result for each component going to its own page for comparative results, rather than building a profile on one user's system. I would offer the users the option of publishing a one page result for their unique computer, but it would be opt-in only. Yes, checksum the firmware, including the router, and demand companies publish checksums and use GPG to sign their firmware, all of this information would go to the site as described. A massive database of important, but anonymously pulled and published information.

    It's just going to get worse.

    On the side, I've been saying to myself for years, IMO, "When Microsoft finally starts to show signs of

  62. What MS dosen't tell you!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dosen't surface have problems with the direction of light which on some table models stop it from working properly? I would say in my opinion it fails on that!!!

  63. Re:sheer bloat of operating system by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 3, Insightful

    See, that's just it, everyone keeps saying that Win 7 doesn't exactly do anything spectacular that WinXP didn't, except for its re-architected security. (Vista being the Giant Bluff Beta).

    So now that they're moving away from the Aero Shiny thing, why can't they use one of these iteration rounds to really drill down the code, under the hood, and make it absolutely sizzle? Portions of the conversation keep floating around Laptop vs Tablet but there shouldn't be any differences! A Tablet should just be the Final Generation of a Laptop, with solid state memory instead of the spinning drive, and other improvements. Then you make Metro and Classic (Windows Explorer) be alternating interfaces to the same back end code. There really isn't a reason one tablet-sized machine can't do both. You dock the thing in an office to a big screen and "do work", then you undock it to play Angry Birds and read the NY Times (Your Media May Vary) at home. Then Mom checks her email.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  64. OEMs destroyed PCs "as a high value product"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then they did good. The PC is not an expensive status symbol and fashion accessory like Apple's products are. The PC is an open tool that makes computing accessible to almost everyone and that is the beauty of the platform. Yes, PCs are commodities and that's part of what made the platform so successful and ubiquitous. What this should really signal to the OEMs is that it's time to make the jump to Linux and start the big push away from Microsoft. Let Microsoft rush itself into the tablet market and find that there's no bridge left to cross back.

    Without invoking talk of "year of the Linux desktop", let's say that we are about to enter a phase where we have an upcoming Windows dud (Win8) that is likely to fail as hard as Vista and what should be an all-time low of confidence in Microsoft from OEM vendors. This is an opportunity and I hope they use it well.

    1. Re:OEMs destroyed PCs "as a high value product"? by PPH · · Score: 1

      Was it the OEMs that refused to allow customization of their desktop? Or in any way stepping outside of the Windows look and feel standard?

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  65. Re:Laptop & Desktop & Portable by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'll repeat a shorter version of my theme to you.

    There's gonna come a time when they're almost all the same, except phones. "Desktop" = "Portable In a Dock to a screen".

    They're struggling a little on Moore's law this generation, but one good boost of game changing technology will kick it all back into overdrive.

    You see the first hints of it in the All In One Screen-Computers.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  66. Same principle .. by PPH · · Score: 2

    ... is incorporated in slaughterhouses. The design of the entrance is such that the cattle entering are kept calm and unaware of their impeding fate until its too late.

    It keeps them from stampeding. Or switching to Linux.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  67. Logical by Etdashou · · Score: 1

    Perhaps if the manufacturers would have done/chose good hardware, nice setup and given good technical support Microsoft would not do that...

  68. offtopic - sig by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    "Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!"

    Completely off topic - Why didn't you give your son the awesome name Dante? Why alter the spelling? He would have been able to say he was named after the cool Heaven & Hell Guy from the 13th century.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    1. Re:offtopic - sig by maroberts · · Score: 1

      The answer to this is in my My journal entry

      --

      Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
      Karma: Chameleon

  69. I disagree... But by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is slashdot. We all know better than everyone else, therefore without senseless disagreement in the forums, the site would fail to exist.

    The reasonI disagree is because I feel the lack of demand for Windows Phone is more because the only companies who make them have long histories of lack of commitment to their phones. Nokia made a fortune for decades by selling new phones when a feature could have been adde through an update, but because software updates are free to the consumer, they sold new phones instead. Having been a developer on Nokia phones for years, I can say even the developers often couldn't update the phones without a JTAG cable and sometimes soldering on wires to connect it.

    Samsung and LG have dipped their toes in te water, but their commitment is half assed. HTC... Don't make me laugh. They toss the OS on the phone, load it up with crapware, ship it and say screw it.

    Apple changed the way we perceive phones. If Nokia had adopted Android as opposed to Windows Phone, they'd have released 10 new Android phones back to back and screwed all their users from version to version and Android would have sucked instead.

    Apple's success wasn't entirely because of iOS. It was very much about the commitment to the actual platform. They provided an operating system, tools, PC and Mac software which was good (unlike Android sync crap and Zune) and then gave content distributors a reason to hype their product for them too.

    Android would have been screwed if Samsung didn't try to duplicate the iPhone experience by committing to a small number of variations of the device which were each maintained for long periods. People like to know their phones will have all the cool features for a year or two after they buy them.

    Also, Apple and Samsung focused less on tech (let's face it, you can getter better tech elsewhere) and instead focused on style. Nokia makes a crap phone that only people in poor parts of Asia and the Eastern Block would think looks cool. LG and Samsung's Windows Phones look like utility bricks. And HTC... Well... Looks like HTC. Dell tried and ended up making something which looks like "The Budget Windows Phone".

    If Microsoft wants Windows Phone to succeed (and Windows 8 tablets), try have to try and make one device a year with NO focus on the underlying tech and a huge focus on the overall experience. It has to be snappy, easy and sexy. Sell the features and style, not the tech.

    I hope they polish Metro or made it djinn able enough so others can. Metro is amazing, but it needs some more sex appear to work. The start screen is either too busy or busy in a non-astheticly pleasing way. But it works so damn well it's forgivable. Additionally, when using Metro split-screen, the splitter bar is too wide or maybe chunky. It gives it a kindergarten or preschoolish feel. App design using existing controls is troublesome since drill down entry is hard to work out in the screen format the way they did it. Classic Windows desktop doesn't integrate as well in split screen as it should.

    I think the fatal flaw of Surface is that they didn't make one or the other. They should have made x86 only (Windows RT is lame... No classic desktop apps and no visual studio on device... So development sucks for it) and they should have made a ultra and a lite version of it. Core i3 ULV with 8" screen and Core i5 with 10" or 11".

    I will buy one of each of the surface tablets anyway, but I don't like that it seems too PCish. Specs don't really matter. Functionality and price are all that matters

  70. Re:Decent parts? Buy a mac, install linux... by dr_eaerth · · Score: 1

    About 7 months after I got my mac mini, the nasty slot-loading pioneer DVD drive could no longer detect that a disk was loaded. Replaced it with an external. So I'm not too impressed with the hardware quality. About equal to the PC I owned that I didn't build.

  71. Zune 2.0 by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wow, you're basically the only Non-AC guy who mentions Zune.

    That is the comparison I see the biggest here, except this time it's right in MS's home camp.

    Apple takes world by storm with iPod. MS Scrambles.

    They start with their usual "commodity" strategy and license 20 3rd party hardware makers with some cert specs and calls it "Plays For Sure". So far, so fine. Except Apple was on to something with the whole Integration thing, so generic makers aren't working this time. So then MS does a giant evil backstab and makes the Zune, switching from their classic biz style into a Me Too but minus the 5 years of secret R&D that Apple was doing. So it flopped.

    Apple crushed the phone market with the iPhone, and I'm a casualty. I had a Win Mobile 6 phone, and I hated it. It was an overgrown brick in my pocket. While I dislike some of Apple's snooping, the iPhone makes it easy to download apps and it doesn't auto ring by itself twice a day like the HTC phone did.

    So suddenly Apple figures out that Mac OS isn't actually going anywhere, but it has some good concepts. So they switch the game to Phone & Tablet, and suddenly Microsoft is panicking, after a 20+ year monopoly on Windows? They want to make their own hardware now? THAT has GOT to piss off the OEM network to no end.

    MS gave up ever influencing music, and washed their hands of it.

    But this one? This feels like a Bet the Farm move. Remind me to look up the news 4 years from now when the fake urgency wears off. But this feels different.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    1. Re:Zune 2.0 by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Speaking of Zune and iPod ... have you seen this parody that was created internally by Microsoft?

      Microsoft Designs the IPOD package
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9HfdSp2E2A

      It sums up "Why Microsoft Just. Doesn't. Get it." (With apologies to Shatner's / Kirk's stutter.)

      Ironically it was made by Microsoft! Googleï for these words: "Microsoft spokesman Tom Pilla on Tuesday confirmed with iPod Observer that his company initiated the creation of the iPod packaging parody"

    2. Re:Zune 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What apple "snooping"? No one cares about you and your paranoia.

    3. Re:Zune 2.0 by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      > Wow, you're basically the only Non-AC guy who mentions Zune.
      Thanks. Not sure why people seem to leave out important details like that. I'm not a fanboy of either Microsoft or Apple so I try to understand the success AND mistakes of BOTH companies to better understand them.

      > Apple crushed the phone market with the iPhone
      But why did it take Apple to show the world that phones don't have to suck? ;-)

      Bringing this back on topic to the tablet for a minute:

      There is a reason why a pencil + pad is the number one creative tool in the world. Simplicity + nothing to get in the way!

      Looks like Microsoft had a chance to bring about a digital version but since they care only about one thing: profit, aka no cannibalization, it had to be killed. Customer demand and Innovation be damned if it cuts into their existing products. Apple on the other hand sees devices _augmenting_ their revenue, products, and platforms.

      Their tablet 'Courier' was killed because it had no email (?!?!) "Gates' response by explaining that Microsoft makes billions from Exchange, and so a product with no e-mail is a problemâ"a machine that doesn't do e-mail isn't going to help shift Exchange licenses."

      Now granted a tablet without email probably would of died anyways, but why was this even considered in the first place. "Hey guys! Let's ship a tablet -- but it won't let people to be able to communicate with others." WTF?

      See: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2011/11/killing-courier-the-right-decision-maybe-not-the-right-reasons/

      > This feels like a Bet the Farm move.
      Yup, I would agree with that assessment.

      For some real fun, look at how many people are in the Microsoft Store vs the Apple Store. It is "cool/hipster" and fun to be in an Apple store. I don't see too many people "bragging" to their friends that they went to the MS store. One almost feels sad for MS. They try so hard and yet fail so bad.

      Microsoft doesn't just understand "sexy marketing", sorry, branding, the way Apple doe, mainly because, aside from the XBox 360, their products are perceived as being BORING.

      About the only thing Microsoft invented was MS Bob and Windows NT Almost every other software product they originally bought off a 3rd company and slapped their name on it.
      Internet Explorer .. Spyglass Mosaic
      Direct3D .. RenderMorphics

      Microsoft is always late to the party. They are just another "me too" company.
      i.e.
      http://www.dwheeler.com/innovation/microsoft.html

      > Remind me to look up the news 4 years from now when the fake urgency wears off.
      Yup, will be interesting in a few years that's for sure! Especially the upcoming ARM & Intel fight, and Intel vs nVdia & ATI/AMD !

      Will MS be able to re-invent itself? IBM was sort of forced too at one point. MS is exactly in the same position as IBM was.

      One thing MS could do to reverse their negative image would be to stop fucking consumers over by gouging them $100+ for their OS and charge a reasonable $20 - $40. OK, so OSX isn't that cheap but you get the point.

      Sorry, didn't mean to go on for so long but damn, you raised a nice point and got me thinking. ;-)

    4. Re:Zune 2.0 by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Microsoft is always late to the party. They are just another "me too" company.

      i.e.

      http://www.dwheeler.com/innovation/microsoft.html [dwheeler.com]

      And who can forget this ?

      And BTW, Mountain Lion is going to be $20. I think that officially qualifies as "reasonable" to nearly anyone but die-hard neckbeards.

    5. Re:Zune 2.0 by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      LOL - That youtube link is priceless. I hadn't seen that clip "Bertrand Serlet on Windows Vista" before. Thanks for sharing!

      OH WOW. $20 for Mountain Lion!? That's great news. Maybe Microsoft will start competing again. Nah, that would make too much sense. :-)

      I wonder if because of the success of the iPod / iPhone / iPad that Apple has realized Desktops and especially OS are commodity items? Maybe MS didn't get the memo? ;-)

    6. Re:Zune 2.0 by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Have you ever seen the Zune packaging though? The original Zune 30 came in this sexy little box that opened like a wardrobe and even had a little drawer inside. Everyone I showed it to including die hard apple fans agreed it was one of the coolest boxes they'd ever seen for a device.

      The Zune is a perfect example of what's going on--and why Microsoft is doing the right thing here.

      Microsoft released Play for Sure--and everyone made shitty unusable products with it. So Microsoft (too late) created the Zune 30 which is still one of their best products ever made. The things are indestructible, look good and work amazingly well as a PMP. They also added innovative features years before ipod like wifi-sync, fm radio, games and more. But the ZuneHD ended up going against the entire iPhone ecosystem and nobody was going to develop apps for a single PMP.

      This time Microsoft isn't going to sit around with its thumbs in its ass because its hardware partners are lazy, incompetent stooges. If they innovate, great, if they don't, great. Either way Microsoft wins. They need this. They need a reference hardware standard that shows off what the software is capable of. There's nothing stopping any partners from releasing competing products except for their complete lack of competence. It's about time there was some real competition in the PC marketplace. And you know who wins? The OEMs. This isn't screwing the OEMs, this is forcing them start competing again--which will push them to innovate in order to survive. The alternative is to get steam-rolled by Apple who actually hires average to above average engineers.

      Apple isn't exceptional they're just acceptable but in a market full of buffoons that comes across as extraordinary.

  72. If not MSFT, where else can OEMs get their OS? by BLToday · · Score: 1

    If not MSFT, where else can OEMs get their OS?

    Canonical, Google, Red Hat, Novell? I don't think so. The OEM are stuck with working with the devil because there are no other viable option. Basically, MSFT is going to try to take the high-end, high-margin Apple market and the OEMs will be left with the low-end, razor thin margin market.

  73. Re:Decent parts? Buy a mac, install linux... by GuB-42 · · Score: 2

    Because :
    - You want a desktop PC
    - You are ready to install an OS
    - Elegant packaging is not the primary reason you want to buy a mac

    Then your best bet is to build a PC yourself with quality components. It will probably be better and cheaper than the mac.

  74. Re:Common, Apple caught everybody by surprise by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

    Its the right strategy from Microsoft, not having the right hardware for Windows 8 would have meant sure shot failure which they cannot afford and not planning to do. Also Microsoft is not stopping OEMs from using Android or Linux for tablets either. So why are the OEM's complaining?

    Best for them is to beat Microsoft, and come up with better hardware, experience and competitive price. They need to realize without it they cannot compete with iPad anyway.

    It did not work for Windows Phone 7 it has not worked for Nokia [and the rest]. If it didn't work before...and even Microsoft didn't trust them to produce decent enough hardware(sic) why should they try now?

  75. Bloomberg says Pegatron... by jerk · · Score: 1

    ...in this article, citing "two people familiar with the matter."

  76. Re:Decent parts? Buy a mac, install linux... by papasui · · Score: 1

    Then it would of been in warranty and they would of serviced it for free, unless of course you bought it used and it wasn't really only 7 months old.

  77. surprise ? by Tom · · Score: 2

    Anyone caught by surprise by this one should give me a phone call, I have a few bridges for very competitive prices that I know you really want to own...

    Not the "surface" thing per se, but that backstabbing. MS has been doing that for decades. Everyone who got in bed with MS got burnt, sooner or later. The OEMs had the luxury of being in the "later" category, but any CEO who does not have a contingency plan in the drawer for this very, very predictable scenario (again, not in the details, but in principle) ought to be fired and sued by the shareholders.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  78. Still not Caring, Still not Buying by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Stick the Surface where the Sun don't Shine.

    Eat my electrical shorts, Microserf.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  79. REACTOS by emil · · Score: 3, Interesting

    HP, Dell, Acer, and whoever else they can recruit should pledge $1 million for REACTOS development.

    http://reactos.org

    Windows 8: enough of this foolishness.

    1. Re:REACTOS by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      I approve of this message. We need an alternative that can run Windows programs, but is not windows. Just like we have alternatives to MS Office, MS Media Player, MS Explorer, and MS Visio.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    2. Re:REACTOS by Tharkkun · · Score: 1

      HP, Dell, Acer, and whoever else they can recruit should pledge $1 million for REACTOS development.

      http://reactos.org

      Windows 8: enough of this foolishness.

      Only 1 million? That might get you a boot loader.

    3. Re:REACTOS by marcosdumay · · Score: 2

      REACTOS + Gambas + marketing may make it.

    4. Re:REACTOS by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1

      Or, very marginally more realistically, Lenovo should update OS/2. (It runs Windows programs better than Windows). They could afford to do it, and have the right connections and motivation.

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    5. Re:REACTOS by justforgetme · · Score: 1

      $1 million won't get you anywhere. I've seen startups run through hundreds of those and still not deliver actual value.
      No, better just let them hedge bets fearing each other. If my memory serves well usually betrayed outfits tend to support FOSS.
      That actually is progress.

      --
      -- no sig today
    6. Re:REACTOS by stoborrobots · · Score: 1

      OS/2 is being developed under the name eComStation, by IBM amongst others. It isn't being sold by IBM, but it is still around...

  80. Re:*** Announcement project*** or Cost Metrics by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Part of the problem is Microsoft tries to fix the unit costs of their OS per unit, when the literal price of the unit drops, meaning what used to be a $100 OS component of a $4000 machine became a $200 OS component of a $2000 machine became a $150 OS component of a $350 machine.

    At some point, the utility factor of paying ransom to Microsoft becomes too high and the market self-corrects by cutting their payment.

    The easiest way to do that is hang Microsoft to dry and not support them. When you're surviving on $1.25 (not a joke) margin on a physical machine, this becomes critical.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  81. Re:Decent parts? Buy a mac, install linux... by danbob999 · · Score: 2

    Are you telling me that the intel CPU in a Mac Mini last longer than an intel CPU in a PC? Or that the Seagate/Western Digital hard drive in a Mac Mini last longer than the exact same hard drive in a PC?
    Apple do not use higher quality parts. They uses the same as everyone else. A PC at the same price point will last just as long, but will be more powerful.

  82. Re:sheer bloat of operating system by PerfectionLost · · Score: 2

    I think they are ultimately doing this with powershell, and the windows servers that will have no GUI. As they separate design and function more they will be able to deploy multiple UI on a solid core.

  83. Deja Vu by AnalogDiehard · · Score: 2

    Back when Windows 95 was announced, IBM was a competitor with their OS/2. IBM kept requesting but never got the technical details of W95 until the day of release. That intentional withholding just one spark of the antitrust case against Microsoft.

    Seventeen years later MS pulls the same trick again and have confirmed that they are never, ever to be trusted.

    --
    Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
  84. Re:Laptop & Desktop & Portable by a90Tj2P7 · · Score: 2

    There's a long, long way to go there, outside of casual browsing. The role of PEDs right now is more or less about remote access to or portable copies of data stored elsewhere. They're media and communication devices, but not workstations or storage devices. Sure, there may come in time in the future where they're much more capable of heavy processing and multitasking, but not in the immediate future, and certainly not already - which is what your post was claiming. These devices are nigh useless for much more than simple apps, browsing the internet, syncing email and entertaining yourself. Especially in enterprise, they're just tools for accessing or carrying around work you've done on an actual computer. Even laptops didn't kill desktops. There's a long way to go, and there's a lot more to it than just having more processing power and memory.

  85. If I wanted to buy Apple products... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I wanted to buy Apple products, I'd buy Apple products. I wouldn't buy lame copies of Apple products five years behind. Furthermore, I'll be wondering what happened to my Windows product, and where I can get something like that.

    Is it possible, I know this sounds crazy... that there's a room for a new PC OS (not Linux, a proprietary OS, based on something like BSD). Whatever happened to OS/2? How quickly could one of these jilted vendors clone enough APIs to make XP applications run at XP speeds? And if it runs on a tablet, fine; but there's no reason to b0rk the PC just to make the tablet work. Sheesh!

  86. Re:Decent parts? Buy a mac, install linux... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You would also support a (CPU) monoculture that will hurt the market in the long run.

  87. Microsoft Surface is Far From New... by Whammo_777 · · Score: 1
  88. This is why we can't have nice things by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    50% Flamebait
        30% Underrated
        20% Funny

    pop quiz, how many times can this happen before you post at a negative?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  89. Vaio by phorm · · Score: 1

    What made you choose a Vaio? This is just my personal opinion, but it does come from over a decade of working with various brands etc. Sony used to make good hardware in various markets, but I never found them to be particularly good in the laptop/notebook market for the price-point. I've never bought a $3500 laptop, but I'd wager than a good portion of that price is simply the brand. Overall, I've found that the Vaio laptops were often thinner, but more prone to failure/damage and not any better spec'd than their somewhat less expensive counterparts.

    E.G. In a generation where a Toshiba, HP, and Dell laptop would be able $8000-1200, the Vaio might be $1000-1500+ but not offer any better hardware. For a long time they often offered *less* than other manufacturers by only offering Sony-centric hardware (Sony memory-stick reader instead of a multi-card reader, etc). I knew a lot of asian (generally Chinese) students who were big on the Sony brand and - as the designated "tech guy" - often asked me to check out their laptops when they broke. There were terrible issues with display hinges, optical drive failure, and docking ports etc.

    That's not to say that other manufacturers are great. My issues with HP hardware and support (known defects which they deny, major issues with graphic card overheats, etc) have been pretty nasty, so I'd actually rather go Sony than HP, but generally I've found that most others go through cycles of good/bad but are generally predicable overall.

    My recommendation (again, just IMHO). Don't got with the just-out-the-door latest laptop. Give them at least a few months to have a few reviews and watch the reviews, etc. Unless you happen to just hit a major technology milestone or the next-year models, there's probably not going to be a huge difference between this month and a few months ago. Get what you need. The biggest, baddest GPU+CPU is also going to generate a lot of heat. That MacBook air is in many ways built for comfort over speed (GPU-wise etc). Also, check some of the less-common brands.

    I ended up with an Asus laptop - which many stores don't carry a lot of compared to the HP's/Toshibas/Lenovo's etc - and it's served me well. Good warranty. No hardware issues. It runs current games with good performance, and while it gets hot running battlefield 3 or compiling, it's pretty cool for normal use. It took me about a month of shopping around and checking reviews. Next time might be a Toshiba, Lenovo (or who knows, maybe even a Sony), but whatever it is will be a balance of comfort and power.

    1. Re:Vaio by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Intel awarded me a $3500 gift certificate which must be spent on a single laptop containing some new chipset they just came out with (thus, the no MacBookPro 17, which was my first choice...)

      At that price point, I was looking at either an 18"+ portable theater, or an ultra-light, and once I decided on ultra-light, Sony won. I had just gotten a PS3 at the time, and hadn't started hating the PS3 (yet), the Vaio came with a defective backlight and was seven kinds of hell to get repaired - built-in webcam is dead now, left mouse button is half broken, but otherwise it soldiers on. Based on Sony's treatment of PS3 owners and the quality issues in the Vaio, I'm done with Sony as a company for quite a while.

      While the $3K+ Vaio was in for its second factory service in the first year, I bought a $600 Asus pre-ultrabook to cover the gap, it won't play StarCraft II, and takes roughly 2x as long to compile a program, but for 20% of the cost, I'd say it's 80% of the goodness of the Vaio.

      Vaio screen is higher resolution (1600x900), brighter (when the backlight works), and viewable from wider angles, but we still use the ASUS for in-bed Netflix watching because the Vaio has cooling fan roar like a jet plane.
       

  90. Re:Laptop & Desktop & Portable by farble1670 · · Score: 2

    Even laptops didn't kill desktops.

    tell that to my 8-core macbook pro w/ 16GB of ram.

  91. No such thing. by CountBrass · · Score: 1

    There's no such thing as an 8-core Macbook Pro.

    --
    Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
    1. Re:No such thing. by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      sorry, 8 logical cores.

  92. It's not about controlling soft- and hardware by Kergan · · Score: 1

    But the iOS success has really made it clear: Control the hardware supply chain and you can produce products (e.g. the iPad, the iPhone) that are actually cheaper than your competitor's products, as well as better.

    This point gets made often, but I'm deeply suspicious about it.

    Methinks Apple happily contributes to it so as to distract from the fact that its impeccable supply chain is even more key. Apple moves its entire --and colossal-- worldwide inventory in five days. No one comes even close, by a very wide margin.

    There's no fundamental incompatibility IMO for an OEM to line up only two lines of well designed laptops (consumer/pro) whose models only differ in their display (11", 13", 15", 17"), and whose components are broadly shared between the various models.

  93. Re:Laptop & Desktop & Portable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Neat. Now when my tablet dies I've lost my desktop PC as well as my phone. That is a GREAT IDEA.

  94. Dell & HP are worthless anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dell & HP are worthless.

    Their hardware is made by the low bidder in China.

    Their support is done by the low bidder in India.

    What brands do is force crapware onto PCs and them mark them up to pay the upper management.

    Outsource management. Fire them all. We don't need them. We never did.

    Do the same with every anational company.

  95. Re:sheer bloat of operating system by jbolden · · Score: 1

    When Vista was still called Longhorn there were 3 projects that were going to be part of it:

    1) A full database filesystem like you have on mini computers and mainframes.
    2) An entirely new security architecture with DRM built in at every level so that any author of any document could use effective DRM.
    3) A new spitzy interface.

    1 & 2 requires getting the hardware guys and the app guys to cooperate while (3) Microsoft could do alone.

    There are elements within Microsoft that think Windows needs a massive overhaul to bring their domain back to life and there are elements that think that the success of Windows is based on backwards compatibility and tampering with that would open the doors to competitors. Both are right.

  96. Clear message by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    "We are so big we don't need you guys anymore, go away and bother someone else"

    Lets hope they are militant about this, so that they will hasten their extinction.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  97. Re:Decent parts? Buy a mac, install linux... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of the things Apple does is make sure that their hardware isn't the bottom-of-the-line crap that PC OEMs use.

    The Mac Pro fans would like to have a word with you...

  98. Asus and Acer "in lockstep with Redmond?" by Loopy · · Score: 1

    Intel, HP(Compaq) and Dell are pretty much the only major OEM players that have worked directly with Microsoft for anything other than business deals and high-level stuff, or were up through 2011 or so. HP/Intel have been the two primary partners for low-level tech development such as UEFI, with Dell playing a sort of Mongo to HP's Sheriff Bart simply because they were the biggest OEM before HP/etc. outsourcing to ODMs in China (Acer, Foxconn, ASUS) killed Dell's profit margin advantage.

    You can bet that HP/Intel will share in the benefits of any new tech that comes out of the Surface product due to the above close relationship. I can almost guarantee Microsoft will delay giving anything new and profitable to Chinese ODMs because as soon as they get it, history has shown it will be on the shelves in knockoff products as soon as they can retool to get it done (usually 6-9 months).

    And really, considering the fiasco with Palm/Touchpad, does anyone really think HP had any interest in trying it again on their own? If this tablet goes well for MSFT, HP will be happy to become a partner and develop their own version(s) with similar build quality and the usual tight integration with Microsoft.

    TL;DR = nothing to see here but another disgruntled or otherwise axe-grinding article against the PC industry. The people at HP/MSFT/Intel actually still making things happen are I'm sure laughing their asses off (to the bank?) at these sorts of drama-laden missives. ;)

  99. Re:Decent parts? Buy a mac, install linux... by Algae_94 · · Score: 1

    Being able to replace it under warranty doesn't change the fact it was a poor quality drive that started to fail prematurely.

  100. it's a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This way of Microsoft screwing with their partners can turn into exactly what's currently needed... and that's big players providing computers without OEM's or integrated with Linux/Android/ChromeOS and the like.

  101. Re:Laptop & Desktop & Portable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah because the suv isn't a major part of the public vehicles on the road.

  102. Re:sheer bloat of operating system by macs4all · · Score: 1

    I think they are ultimately doing this with powershell, and the windows servers that will have no GUI. As they separate design and function more they will be able to deploy multiple UI on a solid core.

    I just GOTTA ask: Why would MS remove (or rather not add) their GUI to their server products? Is it an attempt to get some street cred with the Linux crowd's Computer Priesthood? That's the ONLY reason I can see for not having at least a GUI AVAILABLE (maybe they do, I don't know. The Server 2008 R2 machines I work with seem to have a GUI). But this day and age, with CPUs having a zillion cores and even simple desktop machines (let alone server-class computers) having more RAM than existed in the entire world just a couple of decades ago, there is just no excuse (other than fostering the Computer Priesthood) to make people have to type incantations into some 1950's command-line.

    Seriously. Aren't we kinda past all that?

  103. Re:sheer bloat of operating system by PerfectionLost · · Score: 1

    You install the GUI on top of the base command line portion. It's for squeezing resources out of your machines.

  104. "Then Mom checks her email" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My Mom have her own tablet. She is not dependent on me to get home to check her email.

  105. Microsoft is killing DELL HP PC's And SELF, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks to Microsoft non future thinker, they managed to kill the desk top, Ruin sales for the past 2 years for all Laptops and Desktops and make people run to ANDROID and Apple, why you say? Hmmmm Since their Vista god awful disconnection of their customers and their spybot software validating issues, people are just tired of thir awful programs. As soon as a customer gets to catch up, intel and microsoft, try to unvail a new bad product that is just as slow as the last. Consumers are smart, most still using XP, why its simple better and people are finilly maxing out the speed of windows, with things like Soilid State Drives and High Memory. SO why in the hell would anyone in their right mind go buy an ATOM notebook with a boated program like Vista or 7 which is not user friendly changing and doing what ever you want with it friendly, people dont care to change. THUS just going to a tablet. Tablets are useful in the sence that you can bring it anywhere, you can use it standing up. Why dont companies think? Just stop and use the damn thing not just use it. MAKE money using it, not selling it us most of us are not. I just dont understand why an I3 i5 Processors exist? What you mean a core 2 duo dual core, so its the same thing the same speed, and costs the same amount of money it did 7 years ago? its 2012 and my Core 2 Duo, was 700 dollars then and its still 700$ today but with a shiny sticker on it pretending the prossesor has massively changed. REALLY you people really wonder why nobody wants Vista and a Desktop Ball Chain stay in one spot computer that runs slower then it does with XP. IF your XP program can now run so fast especially with an SSD, why would anyone buy a PC today, there is nothing different, I bought the memory and a cpu chip as an upgrade for 20$ total, so why would i want to buy another same laptop with really hard to navigate screens, who that uses windows xp or 98 or 3.1 or 95 or 2000 would ever want to use Vista Renamed 7? REALLY this market is now prime for Lynix if they smart, since lynix is just like windows today. BUT the biggest killer to Microsoft after not only pissing everyone off with their bloated crap and changes, is GOOGLE and android. Android is a breath of fresh air, Google knows in order to get people interested make it so people can make a program, bootleg a program and information that is free and everywhere how. This makes business, fun, expedition by regular people multiplying growth of Android and google as its a perfect replacement for Windows Validation Virus. I am also aware that DELL ASUS, Gateway Start offering Android Tablets, and Goodbye Microsoft. Done with your bs slow crap see ya. Sorry you had all of us with XP and today XP is fast, so why would anyone want to start again just to be able to acomplish the same tasks with their newer computer only slower? If you don't know what im talking about try loading 7 or vista to pre 04 Laptop of the best kind, NOW! imagine putting XP on a 2012 Laptop? Which would you rather use for Video Editing, the newer slower one, or the older Faster one which does everything in the same way but faster? hmmmmm Sure you could get some new bloated programs with things like good old clipy the annoying pop up, BUT again what is the TASK can you complete the task with the same results using XP and know how to msconfig yes yes you can SO GOOD BYE PC. I dont understand why there is no Tablet besides Toshiba running on XP that i can hook my printer too and put a Pcmcia Phone Card in from Walmart, business would be so much faster, especially if it had that scanner thing. I can't walk and use my laptop so its basically useless for gaining an edge. You can kind of half ass do it with a Apple tablet, but im not into not printing things out and buying really poorly manufactured garbage products which require more specialized garbage apple products and don't work with any other brands. So no thanks Apple even if you where the last thing on the planet i would just rather not pay for the free things everyone who uses a PC gets. Shit that's the fun part, i