A Look At Competitors to the Surface and iPad

"Asus and other Microsoft OEM partners have also launched their own versions of Windows RT tablets that will compete with Microsoft's Surface. It's interesting to see the different design approaches being taken, some of which are similar to Android devices currently on the market. The Asus Vivo Tab RT, for example, is based on a 1.3GHz Tegra 3 SoC with 2GB of DDR3 memory, 32GB or 64GB of on board Flash storage, and looks a lot like their Transformer Prime 10-inch slate. The internal electronics are similar to Surface, with NVIDIA's Tegra 3 claiming the lion's share of Windows RT designs at launch. Microsoft's new touch-centric OS handles smoothly on the tablet and performance looks to be impressive, especially with respect to multitasking and application switching." There's also the newly-launched Samsung Galaxy Note II (Android-based, and a so called "phablet," rather than a tablet), the Lenovo IdeaPad Yoga (an upcoming Windows RT tablet with a keyboard permanently attached), and the Archos 101 XS.

Comments

what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[alen]

there has to be at least one reason to buy it

iOS does Exchange ActiveSync email,
you can develop your own enterprise apps for it
lots of other corporate apps in the app store

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Bill_the_Engineer]

Why do we have to have the one brand that rules them all?

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[alen]

because if im going to spend $500 or more do i buy the product that has sold 100 million units and has lots of software and developer support? or do i buy the new one that doesn't seem to have a feature to make it better, has almost no developer support and may be killed off in a few months like the HP tablet

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[ThatsMyNick]

Office. Good enough reason for some, I would say. And as the ecosystem build apps that can run on both your PC and your phone.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Anonymous Coward]

You didn't answer the question. He asked why there has to be one platform. You answered why you would prefer one platform over another. Good for your karma, poor for discussion.

And as it stands, there are already two popular platforms that meet those criteria. A third isn't going to hurt anything, if it even catches on.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[SomewhatRandom]

Microsoft announced that Office will be available for iOS and Android in March 2013.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[ThatsMyNick]

I somehow dont expect them to have the same features or ease of use as Windows RT.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[SomewhatRandom]

Correction: The press release from the Microsoft Czech subsidiary outlining the release has since been denied by Microsoft:

"The information shared by our Czech subsidiary is not accurate. We do not have anything further to share at this time."

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Anonymous Coward]

my precious

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[feranick]

Maybe. But again: consider the current user base of iPads (and iThings in general). It would be quite idiotic to neglect those users of the benefits of Office to push their own platform, which has a 0.something market share. A full featured Office for iOS would allow MS to make millions and to keep those iThings aligned and connected with the rest of the MS infrastructure.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Jeng]

There needs to be one device that does everything I want.

Why? Because I want it that way, I don't want to buy this one device for one feature and another device for another feature, that would be idiotic.

There doesn't need to be a brand that does it all, and there doesn't have to be just one device that does everything I want. There can be many devices from many brands that do everything I want.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[alen]

there doesn't have to be one, but what does RT bring to the table? Android has lots of apps. why buy RT over Android?

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[proslack]

Why not? Microsoft is a *software* company at its core.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[alen]

and how much is that going to cost?

i'm sure all these corporations that are on XP will start putting in PO's to buy MS Office on RT and upgrade their regular office suites for $300 a user just to get MS Office on a mobile device

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[sl4shd0rk]

100 million units and has lots of software and developer support?

Haha. you silly. Trade in your blackberry.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[0123456]

I somehow dont expect them to have the same features or ease of use as Windows RT.

You mean it will be missing even more features than the RT version and you won't be allowed to use it for non-commercial use as well as commercial use? Maybe people will just install it to look at.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Missing.Matter]

Office built in for free
Side by side application multitasking
Multi-user operating system
Expandable storage
More peripheral device support
More manufacturers at a variety of price points and options
More form factors (foldable hybrid, detachable screen, pure tablet, etc.)
Open file system for managing and organizing files
Networking for connecting to other PCs, transferring files, serving media, etc.


Not sure why you're talking about Windows RT with respect to corporate though. Windows RT is aimed squarely at the consumer market. Windows 8 tablets like the Surface pro are for Enterprise. There, the list for what Windows 8 does over iPad is much much longer. (Either way, nothing stopping you from developing your own enterprise apps for Windows RT.)

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[ericloewe]

Because Windows will never have developer support. /s

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[ericloewe]

Office. 'nuff said. If you need Office, substitutes won't cut it.

If media consumption is all you care about, there's probably no big reason to choose Windows RT over an iPad (for now at least)

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Anonymous Coward]

USB and SD cards... nuff said

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[ThatsMyNick]

See correction below. Microsoft has commented that the Microsoft Czech subsidiary information was incorrect (may be it is happening earlier than the information reported, or may be it is not happening at all). So it does seem Microsoft does not care about Office for Android & iPads. May be they are changing into a hardware company as it has been reported.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[pedropolis]

The Surface Pro isn't competing with the iPad. At it's likely price point, you're talking Ultraportables, Notebooks, and the Mac Air.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Missing.Matter]

If a corporation is considering an iPad for certain tasks, they're doing so because of the touch interface and form factor. There is no reason to consider an iPad otherwise. Ultraportables, Notebooks, and the Macbook Air do not offer this advantage at any price. Surface Pro and other Windows 8 tablets further offer the advantage of being able to write on the screen. This is preferable for some professionals.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Jeremy Erwin]

That's only true if you have a limited budget. Ideally, your office or household would have a panopoly of computers, sharing data, and you would just pick up the computer that fits your needs at the time? Do I need a keyboard?A large monitor? Something that can be used in one hand.. etc..

I mean, suppose you want to read a novel. If it's a sunny day, and glare is a problem, you pick the kindle.If you want color, you pick a tablet--eg. the retina ipad.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[David Gerard]

Its special trick appears to be a version of Office built in.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Tough Love]

Office. Good enough reason for some, I would say. And as the ecosystem build apps that can run on both your PC and your phone.

Google will be forced to respond by throwing money at (most probably) Apache foundation to bring up OpenOffce on Android faster and eliminate that one advantage. Of course Google would be a lot smarter to throw money at LibreOffice, but Google has some Apache bigots on staff that sometimes get in the way of doing the smartest thing. But... throw enough money and OpenOffice will get there quickly enough. LibreOffice will soon follow of course, because the nice thing about the Apache license is, you can pull that code into a GPL project.

Google should obviously have taken steps to accelerate Open/LibreOffice development a long time ago, but they are fixated on that stupid ChromeOS project nobody care about, and that makes them think that client-side functionality is a bad thing, i.e., uncloudy. Larry probably better think about getting off those drugs, Burning Man is over.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[man_of_mr_e]

How about:

    * Actual, physical USB ports?
    * Actual, physical SD-Card storage?
    * Actual, physical Keyboard (with Surface and Transformer-types) and ability to use any usb mouse/keyboard
    * Full Bluetooth support (tethering, file transfer, messaging, etc..)
    * non-proprietary connections to common devices like Monitors, Printers, etc..
    * Ability to join a windows domain
    * Ability to use Office
    * The vast majority of commonly used iOS and Android apps are either already available or will be available in the next 6 months.
    * Different hardware configurations (such as those that include not just capacitive touch but also high resolution graphics tablet technology with styluses)
    * Competition (ie price wars)

Nope.. can't think of one reason.... but there are certainly a lot more.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Tough Love]

Oh, and nobody cares about building apps that run both on a PC and a Windows phone. Not even a little bit.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

Microsoft office?

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Nerdfest]

Microsoft cares about Office for iOS and Android about as much as Apple cares about FaceTime and iMessage for other platforms, and for the same reasons.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

No, No they did not. MS headquarters baiscally said their Czech office was smoking crack.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/10/3483076/office-for-ipad-ios-android-2013

Pay attention to the update at the bottom of the story.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Anonymous Coward]

because if im going to spend $500 or more do i buy the product that has sold 100 million units and has lots of software and developer support? or do i buy the new one that doesn't seem to have a feature to make it better, has almost no developer support and may be killed off in a few months like the HP tablet

Comments like this really make me wonder what the hell happened to Slashdot. I thought what we did around here was DEMAND openness, instead of sitting around hoping that it just sort of happens?

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[feranick]

You are comparing apples with oranges. Apple doesn't sell FaceTime or iMessage, it sells iThings or Macs. MS sells software. Now unless they are going to bet the future or their mobile presence on RT alone, neglecting 80% of the market share is certainly a possibility, but, again, not a one that makes any business sense. If you go by the same rationale, MS should have never made Office for Mac, but it does. Google, for instance has its own stake in the mobile market (and a much more significant one than MS), but it recognizes that just neglecting Apple's is simply not an option. That is why you see Chrome, Gmail, YouTube and (soon) maps for iOS. Great products that are only apparently in contradiction with Google's mobile strategy. At the end if you sell services (like Google), or software (like MS) you want the largest user base as possible. Hiding your hand under the sand may give you great confidence that your mobile product will have an edge, but that might never translate into a sizable share of the market.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[JDG1980]

Why do we have to have the one brand that rules them all?

There are already several good brands of Android tablets on the market. Competition among brands is going quite well, and isn't the problem. The question is why anyone would want a third tablet OS. If you care about openness you go with Android; if you want the most apps and smoothest UI, you go with iOS. I don't see where WinRT fits in here.

The Surface Pro is a different story – I can see that appealing to businesses who want a tablet with decent touch support combined with legacy compatibility. But Windows on ARM looks to be dead on arrival.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[JDG1980]

Microsoft announced that Office will be available for iOS and Android in March 2013.

If this is true, then someone, somewhere in Microsoft is starting to contemplate the possibility that Windows may not be the OS of the future.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Nerdfest]

Microsoft didn't sell hardware ... now they do. If they could get away with pulling an Apple and locking everyone else out, they would. Look at the "Metro" store. Google puts out cross platform stuff because they want to sell ads on all platforms. As for their mobile OS ... if Apple did not have any serious competition in that area, do you think iOS would get more open or more closed? Would Google make more money or less? It ain't necessarily altruistic, but it's good for users.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[UnknownSoldier]

> Why do we have to have the one brand that rules them all?

Because wasting man-years to re-develop solutions is the height of stupidity, inefficiency, and waste. That is one of the biggest problems of Capitalism. Redundancy and Waste.

Microsoft and Sony spend billions on R&D just so that they can "win" ; because if they "lose" that means they won't be around. Instead of working together, and lowering their expenses they have their ego, pride, and greed so far up their ass that they would rather waste people's lives redeveloping the _same_ thing just so that the other guy is forced to "play the game."

Greed is the root cause of companies to focus on profit at the expense of advancing society.

I'm not saying consumer choice is a bad thing, BUT it needs to be balanced with pragmatic utilitarian for the general society.

Just _how_ many devices/things do we _really_ _need_ ? i.e. How _many_ printers do we need to chose from? Cars? Game Consoles? Computers? Laptops? Tablets? etc.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[aristotle-dude]

Because Windows will never have developer support. /s

Windows RT only allows third party developers to write "Metro" apps that access the WinRT API. WinRT is the API for Metro apps on both Windows RT and Windows 8.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Anonymous Coward]

Multi-tasking that's worth a damn?

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[feranick]

Nobody can say how much at this time. However it must be priced competitively with iWorks. In fact if they might have a killer app if they sell it for 30$ for consumers and 50$ for businesses. You would have a way to tap in no time the existing and extensive iPad/iPhone userbase, connecting with the existing MS infrastructure. Heck, they wouldn't even need to distribute it: the App store would do it for them (although Apple would get a cut of the profit).

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[feranick]

What's the point? Google can "translate" their online Office utils into an app, just like they did with the Gmail app (and maps, etc). It doesn't make any sense to have an application designed for PC into mobile, like Libreoffice/Openoffice. Mobile apps need to be designed as mobile apps since the beginning. Otherwise we are back to Windows CE all over again.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[na1led]

The one thing RT has going for it is Microsoft Support. Think about how much Microsoft has integrated with many of the apps we use, like Office, Servers, etc. I'm sure Microsoft will have a plethora of apps specific for businesses who wish to sync with Exchange, Sharepoint, Office, Remote Access, VDI, and much more. Plus, there is the XBOX 360 integration which Microsoft will have the leverage to port many games over to the RT. Microsoft will throw everything they have into this platform to make it thrive.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[na1led]

There are a few things only available to Windows Mobile, like One-Note synching for example. Consider how many businesses use Exchange or Sharepoint, or Terminal Services, and you'll see how Windows RT will dominate in those areas. Not to mention all the new features that Server 2012 will have that provide cloud capabilities on Windows RT, and don't forget the XBOX360 integration. Might even have Windows Media Center access on Windows RT, that would be cool.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[ericloewe]

That doesn't mean the developers are going anywhere. It may cause some to leave, but Windows is, and will be for the foreseeable future, huge.

Developers may also be attracted to the write once, compile for phone, tablet and PC scheme.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Anonymous Coward]

The same comparison could be made between Windows and Mac OS on PC. Why would anyone ever want to use the latter when the former has all of the software, hardware, support and developers?

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Anonymous Coward]

Herein lies the problem. Rather than thinking how this work (Office work) can be done on a tablet, Microsoft has taken the table and reverted to the keyboard/mouse idiom. MS, in my opinion, really ruined the netbook with XP. Netbooks couldn't run XP with memory, so MS required a hard drive which made netbooks really crappy notebooks. The potential is there for Surface to do the same for tablets. The only difference is that in this scenario, only Microsoft is hurt should it fail because Android and iOS won't go down that path.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Anonymous Coward]

Competition among brands is going quite well

That's funny. I guess if you remove the iPad, then yeah, it's going great fighting for the left over scraps.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[feranick]

What is the profit of their hardware business compared to the software one? The former is pretty much an experiment. The latter is their essential bread and butter which is essential for their survival. Please name one of the hardware units within MS that were widely successful from a revenue POW. None. MS is a software company regardless of the petty projects they might have in the works.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[aristotle-dude]

No, No they did not. MS headquarters baiscally said their Czech office was smoking crack.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/10/10/3483076/office-for-ipad-ios-android-2013

Pay attention to the update at the bottom of the story.

No, they issued a denial because the Czech office released information that it was not authorized to release. I don't think anyone thinks that the Czech office was pulling something out of their arse. Office for iOS and Android are real projects in development at Microsoft as contingency plans incase Windows RT falls flat on its face.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[aristotle-dude]

You cannot join a domain with Windows RT devices like the Surface RT. You are confusing the Surface RT with the Surface Pro. The latter will cost as much as a Macbook air if not more.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[BlackSnake112]

Maybe microsoft does not sell computers per say but it has sold some hardware over the years. How many people have used a microsoft mouse or keyboard? I know a number of people who have their old ms keyboard that they refuse to give up. It is getting harder to get a new computer with PS2 ports. I still have a microsoft mouse on a KVM switch. I think I got that mouse in 1997 or 1998. The mouse still works. I hate that is is right handed only I do switch from right to left depending on what I am doing. I broke the bones in my hand years ago. It did not heal correctly. One hand is not good with detailed work.

As for today's tablets and computers. Microsoft has stayed away until now. Maybe microsoft finally realized that it needs to be involved more with the hardware venders. It is bad for the bottom line, but if microsoft actually had some kind of hardware test that all configurations had to pass in order to be sold it would be a good thing. It is not just powering on the machine. Do some things that 90%+ of people could do with the machine. Run the hardware through some tests and see how the hardware plays well together. I know the manufactures do some tests. I think they need to go further.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[cavreader]

"Microsoft and Sony spend billions on R&D just so that they can "win"

Well it's a good thing they have the money to actually do R&D to discover new technologies and ways to apply them. It takes a lot of resources to move R&D forward and there are a lot of times when the money is spent the end result will not recoup the time and money invested.
". Instead of working together, and lowering their expenses they have their ego, pride, and greed so far up their ass that they would rather waste people's lives redeveloping the _same_ thing just so that the other guy is forced to "play the game."

And if they did this how many seconds would it take for peanut gallery to start a crusade against monopolies? Competition is a good motivator to push advances.

"Just _how_ many devices/things do we _really_ _need_ ? i.e. How _many_ printers do we need to chose from? Cars? Game Consoles? Computers? Laptops? Tablets? etc."

You only need the devices YOU want. Nobody is forcing you to buy every new or upgraded gadget as soon as it hits the market.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[PhunkySchtuff]

Two things.

One - and this is one an end-user will care about. Microsoft Office.

Two - and this is one that the enterprise cares about. Active Directory (specifically, Group Policy)

Having a real version of Office will be very useful (although there is an announced version of Office for iOS, but I'm sure it'll be almost office, like the Mac version is) however having the fine-grained control over the device that AD provides is an improvement in a lot of areas over Apple's MDM capabilities.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because Android / Google Tablets are made by an advertising company. I don't want an ad agency providing my information technology tools.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

I think the czechs meant html5 office via subscription is on its way, not native versions up for a one time sale. But what I think or you think doesn't change that we don't actually know anything other than MS hasn't officially announced it, which doesn't mean that its real and not announced, inaccurately announced, or just plain does not exist.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Anonymous Coward]

You are going to be sadly disappointed in that case as Office RT is a substitute.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[slapout]

"I don't want to buy this one device for one feature and another device for another feature"

So, you want your car to make toast?

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Jeng]

And margaritas.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[ThatsMyNick]

It is free.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[narcc]

Android and iOS are not the be-all, end-all of mobile operating systems. BB10 and Windows 8 have advantages over both and may or may not be a better fit than the two current leaders.

Windows RT seems like a wash, though I can see it competing successfully against iOS and Android in the enterprise just by having Microsoft Office. It could have been a real contender, but they locked "Metro" apps to the Store and put up a few pointless barriers for enterprise customers. If they change their tune and allow "Metro" apps to be "side loaded" easily by any and all customers, I would expect that it would be quite a hit. If they could then additionally manage remote management features on-par with RIM, they'd own the enterprise tablet market overnight.

So, yes, I want a third or fourth mobile OS. Competition is great.

(If we can foster enough diversity, maybe we could even get a standard for apps going. Even something simple like a universal HTML5 app package would be great for consumers.)

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[narcc]

Microsoft didn't sell hardware ... now they do

What? They've been in the hardware game for a while.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[socceroos]

Never got this. What on earth makes you think that Win8's multitasking is actually any better? Is it because you can get to the next open app with a nice gesture instead of a buton?

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[feranick]

I'll ask again. What is the MOST profitable (by large) of all MS enterprises? XBox, peripherals, etc don't produce nearly close enough revenue to the software division.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Keen Anthony]

- Smoother performance (less an issue perhaps vs Jelly Bean)
- Good multitasking
- full MS Office (beyond Office 365 in a browser)
- XBox Live integration
- D3D development, Visual Basic too
- Higher likelihood of timely OS updates
- external storage
- freedom from iTunes

I can't argue for more and better software. Obviously there are some advantages to already having Windows programming experience in Direct 3D, C++, XAML, VB, etc. However, there's only a subset of .NET in RT, and there's no Win32 or XNA or anything else that would really unlock the potential of Surface RT. Surface Pro will have XNA and every other development system you could use under Windows 7. That is the clear winner over iPad for me, but I'm looking for a tablet now and RT is going to be a difficult sell when there's not even side loading unless you're enterprise.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[kqs]

Wow, and I thought Apple users were the maniacally loyal ones.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Anonymous Coward]

Correction. Microsoft didn't sell hardware, they are now _starting_ to. They are still primarily a software company for now, and Apple is primarily a hardware company.

So it makes sense for Apple to not put emphasis on its software for other platforms, doesn't for Microsoft unless they want to bet the farm on the hardware route.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Neil Boekend]

The problem is that if the user can't choose another brand then most brands are not really pushed to improve much. Yes, the open market and it's market forces has a lot of explicit waste, but things will not be cheaper when there are abused monopolies. Android keeps IOS on it's toes, keeps it improving. The features of WP will in time force Android and IOS to become better.
If the competition is removed then usually development stagnates and price stays the same.
Proof: ISP's.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[RaceProUK]

Never got this. What on earth makes you think that Win8's multitasking is actually any better?

Because MS has been working on it for the last two decades?

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Anonymous Coward]

Czech yourself before you wreck yourself

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[drinkypoo]

Never got this. What on earth makes you think that Win8's multitasking is actually any better?

Because MS has been working on it for the last two decades?

And how old do you think iOS is? It's based on OSX which is based on NeXTStep.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[n7ytd]

Just this week Steve Ballmer stated that this is not the case. He now views Microsoft as a "device and services" company. Of course, what they are, and what he wishes that the world thinks they are could very well be different things. They've tried very hard though, with XBox, Zune, and Windows Phone to break into the business.

Apple has always viewed itself as a hardware company who happens to bundle the software with the hardware, and it seems to be working out pretty well for them.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[RaceProUK]

Windows is older than OS X/NeXTSTEP by four years. So I should have said 'best part of three decades'.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[drinkypoo]

Windows is older than OS X/NeXTSTEP by four years. So I should have said 'best part of three decades'.

NeXTStep was also based on various versions of BSD, so its pedigree goes back even further. Like SunOS4 it received multiple infusions of code from BSD 4.this and that.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[RaceProUK]

Wonder how many more links before we're back at the Difference Engine :)

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[Anonymous Coward]

And the problem you have with Android's multitasking is........?

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[UnknownSoldier]

So laziness needs to be re-enforced with greed in order to motivate people to build a better mousetrap?

Now I understand that is the current reality, but methinks that is not a good long term strategy.

People/Companies [for the most part anymore] don't take pride in building a good, quality product, and to keep improving it. Capitalism re-enforces the idea that cheaper is better (i.e. more popular) because quality is to expensive.

Capitalism is the "Good Enough" mentality. Why spent the time and effort to build a cleaner, more efficient widget, when your competition will have it all made in China and sell it for half your cost. That that does is promote a "race to the bottom."

At some point money needs to be taken out of the equation.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[socceroos]

Multitasking is *not* rocket-science. There are good and bad ways to do it, for sure, but none of the major OSs do it badly. iOS departed the furthest from the orthodox desktop paradigm in an attempt to control user experience, but Android is pretty much your normal multitasking with some agressive app hibernation built in. None of them do anything fantastical. Win8's multitasking is Android multitasking is Win8's multitasking. Oh, they have a slightly different UI.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[RaceProUK]

It's not so much the method (aren't all OSes pre-emptive multitaskers these days?), but the implementations thereof. Without seeing figures though, I'm not going to try and work out which is best.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[hazydave]

The first modern version of Windows, NT 3.0, was release in 1993. The basis of OSX is of course BSD UNIX riding on CMU's Mach kernel. The original Mach project was first working sometime in 1986 or thereabouts, Mach 3.0 was released in 1990. BSD UNIX was first released in 1997. The initial higher level APIs, known as Carbon, evolved out of the original MacOS, which was first released in 1984. Of course, one could go back to the VAX/VMS heritage of Windows NT to 1980, but then again, the BSD UNIX decends from AT&T UNIX, which began in 1969 or thereabouts.

In short, they both go back a long way.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[hazydave]

Once again (for those who've either been sleeping or just dumb), Google is a technology company with ad revenue as their major source of income. Not an advertising company. The people who actually create those ads, or the ones you might see on ABC or NBC supporting programming, those are ad companies (well, technically, they're probably media content creators hired by ad companies to create the ads). ABC and NBC are not ad companies, they're media/entertainment companies with ad revenue as their major source of income. As opposed to Home Box Office, Showtime, or Sony Films, which are media/entertainment companies with sales to distributors (Comcast Cable, DirecTV, AMC Movie Theaters) and in some cases, direct to consumer, as their primary sources of revenue. Apple, for example, is a technology company, making a little money in ads, quite a bit in hardware (direct-to-customer retail stores and through distributors) and, of course, as a distributor of media for other companies via the iTunes store. Google is also making money in hardware and direct-to-customer media storefronting for other companies.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[hazydave]

Microsoft has repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly claimed the Windows RT is NOT for businesses. They don't support Domains on it (easily could), they ship with a not-for-business version of Home and School Office, etc. It's not a given that all this business software is magically going to show up on WinRT -- particularly since, on the full Windows 8 Pro devices (tablets, regular PCs), this stuff already exists.

The X-Box 360 connection is definitely one they should pursue -- that's pretty much the Microsoft product with the most user love out there. Gamers really do like the 360, particularly now they've fixed most of the bugs. I was kind of shocked that they didn't try to tie Windows 7 Phone into X-Box gaming, but rather, set such horrible specs (slower GPUs than the iPhone 3GS) that real gaming wasn't an option. With the newer consumer stuff, phones and RT tablets, they'll certainly be on par with many iPads and Android devices out there. iOS has already become the leading mobile gaming platform, pretty much blowing away Sony and Nintendo, but that kind of established that beachhead for Microsoft, if they go that way. Google hasn't done anything special to promote Android as a gaming platform, aside from supporting pretty much any ARM SOC you like, and yet, it's already pretty well supported there.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[hazydave]

BB10 and Windows 8 have advantages over both and may or may not be a better fit than the two current leaders.
Well, it's easy to see the Windows 8 advantage over BB10 -- it actually exists.

Windows RT is going to be a strange puppy... it says "Windows", but doesn't run anything users identify as Windows programs. I do wonder how Microsoft plans to deal with that customer confusion, particularly given that full Windows 8 tablets are likely to show up in stores, same form factor, same price, and offer full Windows compatibility. This isn't going to be the Surface Pro, which is based on the same i5 CPU found in $500-$650 laptops, and will likely sell for over twice that of an RT tablet. But tablets built on the Z2760 will match the price, power, and performance of a two-core ARM at the same clock speed -- not quite a performance match for the Surface RT, but close, since the Surface is only running 1.2GHz or so on a T30 or possibly even T30L, not a T33. These should any useful WinRT apps that show up just dandy, but also real Windows programs (well, 32-bit only, modest RAM amounts, Atom core, maybe not so well, but "not so well" beats the hell out of "not at all" for most users). You might even see Window 8 Z2760 tablets selling for less than RT tablets, since it's not required for x86 tablet makers to bundle Office, but they have to on Windows RT.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[hazydave]

Microsoft and Sony spend billions on R&D just so that they can "win" ; because if they "lose" that means they won't be around. Instead of working together, and lowering their expenses they have their ego, pride, and greed so far up their ass that they would rather waste people's lives redeveloping the _same_ thing just so that the other guy is forced to "play the game."

Thing is, when companies like this spend all this money to "win", the consumer really does benefit. Competition isn't useful in many areas, but it's been great for progress in the electronics industry. Without the competition, there's not the same motivation to deliver a better experience than the next guy. That's going to mean a lesser product... until some other company looks at that, decides they can do better, and starts to compete again. This is why we have "phones" in our pockets more powerful than the PCs on our desktop 10 years ago. Sure, a company has to outdo itself a little to sell upgrades... but the frantic pace of technology growth, particularly in the consumer sector, is driven by competition. Which is why it happened in the USA, in Japan, in South Korea -- not the USSR or North Korea.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[hazydave]

Also, Ballmer recently called Microsoft a "Devices and Services" company, despite the fact that, at the time, they made exactly one "device" (the X-Box 360), and sure, sell some services, but primarily, software. If this is really a change in their thinking, they might be branching out to other platforms with some kind of software as a service version of Office.

Then again, Office itself is highly overrated. Android will have Open Office ported soon, it's already got a few perfectly good office suites. My current and previous company dumped any Office requirements long ago -- you can write in any format you like, just be sure to publish to PDF and, when you're done, put an editable copy up in Google Docs. I have several office suites on my Transformer tablet, as well as Google Drive itself, that can grab from Google Docs, let you edit offline, then sync back up. MS-Office is simply not that necessary... and I suspect this is pretty common, at least among engineering organizations. Never got that Linux version of Office, so Office became the unnecessary thing.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[hazydave]

Did they change the video connector on the Surface RT? The original specs called for a proprietary video connector, which could break out via adapter to either HDMI or VGA. It's still on the web site as being proprietary... here's the footnote: "Requires Surface HD Digital AV Adapter, sold separately".

And no, you can't join a Windows Domain with an RT device. The Wacom/Samsung Note style pen interface is only on Surface Pro, not on the Surface itself -- for using classic/real Windows apps. My current and last companies moved off of Office long ago -- really only of interest in Windows-only companies.

Much of the rest of this has been working in Android for years now.

Re:what does RT do that the ipad doesn't?

[man_of_mr_e]

Surface is RT, but not all RT's are Surface. Lots of third party RT's with various connectors. Some with docks, some with proprietary, some with mini-hdmi, etc..

And again, some RT's will have styluses with digitizers.

It's all about.

[mk1004]

Does anyone really believe that the Surface will end up with any reasonable market share of the tablet market?

Re:It's all about.

[tgd]

Does anyone really believe that the Surface will end up with any reasonable market share of the tablet market?

That's not really the interesting question. The question is, will Windows 8 modern apps, Windows 8 RT and Windows Phone 8 end up with a reasonable share of the market? Because the combination is what will determine the ecosystem size.

Windows 8 will likely, at some point, end up on 300-500 million PCs, like Windows 7. Windows 8 tablets? Who knows. RT tablets? Really who knows. And as much as I like WP, that's an even longer shot. But if a developer says "I can write my software one, against the WinRT APIs, and it'll run on 300 million PCs, 50 million tablets, and some number of phones", it doesn't really matter if Microsoft sells 5 million or 25 million Surface tablets. Especially when people realize "hey, that application I bought runs on all of these... and my settings and data is on all of my devices...".

There's more to an ecosystem than a single device.

Re:It's all about.

[AwesomeMcgee]

Absolutely true. If the Win8 on desktops gains acceptance (yes, big IF) then it opens the door for people to go looking for a tablet, see one that acts and behaves exactly like the computer they use at work and home and say "I already know how to use this, the other's not so much; so I'll buy this one" and same goes for phone though to a lesser extent. If win8 really hits like they say it will (doubtful) it does create possibilities for lots of bleed over of users.

Re:It's all about.

[Missing.Matter]

I don't think even Microsoft cares if the Surface itself ends up with a reasonable market share of tablets. What they want is Windows 8/RT to end up with a reasonable share. Its hard to remember with all the current Surface hype, but Surface isn't the only Windows tablet being released.

Re:It's all about.

[Jeng]

But if a developer says "I can write my software one, against the WinRT APIs, and it'll run on 300 million PCs, 50 million tablets, and some number of phones"

That is one lofty goal there, I'll believe it when it happens.

There will be fragmentation.

Re:It's all about.

[gtirloni]

I see a lot of posts here on /. complaining about Android fragmentation, iTunes store issues and dozens of other issues both users and developers have. Everybody cries for an alternative.

And now that Microsoft makes an decent alternative available, people are crying "why another option?" "what's wrong with android / ios?"

Seriously?

Re:It's all about.

[Anonymous Coward]

But if a developer says "I can write my software one, against the WinRT APIs, and it'll run on 300 million PCs, 50 million tablets, and some number of phones",

There is no cross compatibility between Windows Phone 8 and Windows RT apps. They share UI features, but the code is different. There is also no definite guarantee that apps will be cross compatible between Windows RT and Windows 8 either. Depending on the app, you can target either platform, or both if you choose. It isn't as simple as ticking a box when you compile either. When an app goes onto Microsoft's store, a team checks for compatibility before allowing it to say 'certified for Windows 8 and Windows RT'

It's fairly simple for a lot of stuff to make cross compatible, but you can't run RT apps on Windows 8 without doing some extra work, and vice versa.

Re:It's all about.

[mk1004]

That's not really the interesting question. The question is, will Windows 8 modern apps, Windows 8 RT and Windows Phone 8 end up with a reasonable share of the market? Because the combination is what will determine the ecosystem size.

Windows 8 will likely, at some point, end up on 300-500 million PCs, like Windows 7. Windows 8 tablets? Who knows. RT tablets? Really who knows. And as much as I like WP, that's an even longer shot. But if a developer says "I can write my software one, against the WinRT APIs, and it'll run on 300 million PCs, 50 million tablets, and some number of phones", it doesn't really matter if Microsoft sells 5 million or 25 million Surface tablets. Especially when people realize "hey, that application I bought runs on all of these... and my settings and data is on all of my devices...".

There's more to an ecosystem than a single device.

There are a lot of 'ifs' in there that will determine how viable of an ecosystem MS can make. The Write Once, Run Anywhere ideal, IMO, has too many limitations due to the wide ecosystem to ever be a draw for developers. But you make some good points: Seamless integration between devices can be a big selling point. Can MS get there from here?

Re:It's all about.

[Weezul]

At this point, there aren't enough non-standard apps running on tablets to make the software matter. I'll happily use one program under Mac OS X and another under Android. And Android might eventually save the desktop linux application space, well maybe.

Imho, there is a much bigger question around form factor here, but that's not the same for everybody. I'm thrilled with the Note myself, big enough, but never too big.

As an aside, there are occasions where you'll find the Note too big, but only if you wear women's clothing. I'd never worn any women's clothing when I bought it, but then I went to Burning Man for the first time this year, and started going to burner parties. Invariably burner dress necessitates a little gender bending, like say tights, sarong, skirt, or wearing only body paint. I therefore now own clothing with pockets too small for my phone, notably my hippie raver belt was designed for women. It's okay though since I've never wear that stuff during a normal night out where I might need my phone. Anyways, I'm completely happy with the Note when I'm not wearing women's clothing.

Re:It's all about.

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed. A better article title would be "A Look at competitors to the iPad".

Re:It's all about.

[grumpyman]

With the kind of backing MS has, probably ended up like Xbox.

Re:It's all about.

[shutdown -p now]

The way the interface-formerly-known-as-Metro is designed, it's pretty hard for a developer to make an app that works well on the desktop, but poorly on a touch device like a tablet - you have to try really hard to bend the conventions that are forced upon you, and then you'd also have to pass Store certification somehow. This, coincidentally, is why the apps usually don't work too well on the desktop compared to normal windowed Win32 apps. But they work well enough for many...

Re:It's all about.

[tgd]

There are a lot of 'ifs' in there that will determine how viable of an ecosystem MS can make. The Write Once, Run Anywhere ideal, IMO, has too many limitations due to the wide ecosystem to ever be a draw for developers. But you make some good points: Seamless integration between devices can be a big selling point. Can MS get there from here?

Well, to some extent its already there. While they weren't doing it even as much as a month ago, most of the built-in Windows 8 modern apps have recently been updated to use the Microsoft-Account based settings synchronization, so they do tend to keep in sync between computers -- the same way Xbox games stay synced between consoles since they added cloud profiles. Skydrive is supported everywhere, so documents -- by default -- are available everywhere (phone, tablet, laptop). IMO, it was a bad judgment call to not support WP7 apps on Windows RT tablets, but there's already a decent set of "write once run in a few places" examples. WP8 and Windows 8 aren't exactly build-compatible, but its already pretty easy to cross compile 90% of an application between them, the same way you can cross-compile XNA-based WP7 and Xbox360 games. I haven't delved into WP8 at all, but from what I've read the gaming APIs are fairly close (but I don't believe identical) to the APIs on Windows RT and Windows, as well as Xbox, so cross compiling games between the platforms should be getting easier.

If I had to put $20 on it, I'd also bet that the next Xbox runs "windows store" apps -- they're very much functional with something like Kinect for interactions, and SmartGlass applications are already .NET based. There's also already a few games for the 360 that have announced they'll have Windows 8 support and you'll be able to pause/resume between them.

So, the answer is... yes. And, to a big extent, they already are. For some reason Microsoft never chose to advertise all the cross-device and cross-platform capabilities you get with their Live properties.

Re:It's all about.

[drinkypoo]

I see a lot of posts here on /. complaining about Android fragmentation, iTunes store issues and dozens of other issues both users and developers have. Everybody cries for an alternative.

I see more cries for reform.

And now that Microsoft makes an decent alternative available, people are crying "why another option?" "what's wrong with android / ios?"

No, they're crying "Why is Microsoft fragmenting Windows". I figure it's because WinRT checks more of the boxes that WinCE checked that Win8 doesn't. I think Win8 would crater the ARM platforms that Windows is going to run on. But that doesn't mean WinRT is a good idea. It means Microsoft should have worked harder on making Win8 scale down. By creating an additional, incompatible platform, they're just creating another Windows CE. In case you didn't keep up with WinCE (their second-most-aptly named product, after aIEeeee!) it was almost-but-not-quite-Windows that sucked on ice and was completely fragmented by processor. Why are they doing that again?

Re:It's all about.

[mk1004]

If I had to put $20 on it, I'd also bet that the next Xbox runs "windows store" apps -- they're very much functional with something like Kinect for interactions, and SmartGlass applications are already .NET based. There's also already a few games for the 360 that have announced they'll have Windows 8 support and you'll be able to pause/resume between them.

Now that you've pointed that out, I don't think that I'd bet against your idea that the next Xbox runs "windows store" apps. Interesting.

Re:It's all about.

[hazydave]

Windows 8 will likely, at some point, end up on 300-500 million PCs, like Windows 7.

Or 30-50 million, like Windows Vista. It all depends on how they sell the Metro interface to desktop users. That's the most obvious way to drive any adoption of the RT tablet. The full Windows tablets, on the other hand, are useful to anyone already using Windows on a PC or laptop, other than performance concerns.

It actually does matter, to Microsoft, if it's selling RT tablets, because these are what drive the adoption of WinRT/Metro applications. If everyone's buying regular PCs and x86 tablets, still all running Win32/64 applications, this is good for the traditional PC of course, but it kills Microsoft's goals in mobile. They need WinRT succeeding, to drive the phone, if not necessarily the tablet.

Re:It's all about.

[hazydave]

That's the other thing -- what's really compatible with what?

Ok, nothing but Windows 8 is allowed to run Win32 apps. Unless they're from Microsoft. On a tablet. What about a phone -- do I get Office RT on a smartphone? I have the same office apps on my Android tablet and phone, identical apps, so I'd want that too, were I to move to Windows devices (not likely, but just sayin'). We have been told that Windows 7 Phone apps will run on Windows 8 Phone, Windows RT, and Windows 8. But how about actual WinRT apps... do these just work everywhere? Or at least the same app on phone and tablet? Or is this fragmented like iOS, with phone apps that run on the tablet, but tablet apps that don't work on the phone. Or do Windows Phone 8 apps run anywhere else, or just on the phone?

I simply have not seen any answer to this, and it seems already to be unnecessarily fragmented. Particularly considering that in the other stores (iTunes, Google Play, Amazon), the apps follow the user to any device, they're not locked to one or two devices like most desktop apps are.

Wut...

[Anonymous Coward]

" the Lenovo IdeaPad Yoga (an upcoming Windows RT tablet with a keyboard permanently attached),"

Or, a laptop.

Re:Wut...

[cbhacking]

Kind of, except you can fold the keyboard all the way back behind the screen, making it a slightly-thicker-than-normal ARM tablet (it has all the tablet features, like touchscreen and minimal hardware buttons around the screen). The keyboard can also be folded past 180 degrees to act as an adjustable stand.

No.

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone really believe that the Surface will end up with any reasonable market share of the tablet market?

The word on the street is that this is MS' next 'Zune'.

--Huggy Bear.

Nowhere near enough internal memory

[ackthpt]

FOo

RT is a LOSER

[kms_one]

But the Wintel Surface 8 Pro looks very exciting. I can't wait to get my hands on one.

Re:RT is a LOSER

[0123456]

But the Wintel Surface 8 Pro looks very exciting. I can't wait to get my hands on one.

Why?

I mean that seriously: what does it do that a $200 netbook doesn't do at least as well?

Re:RT is a LOSER

[Mr_Silver]

I mean that seriously: what does it do that a $200 netbook doesn't do at least as well?

Play HD video for starters. My netbook chokes on anything greater than PAL and flash video playback of nearly any resolution is choppy as hell.

I'd also throw in there boot instantly and launch the browser instantly. Last time I started my Windows 7 netbook, it took forever to start (applying patches), then I had several pop-ups for software updates and to top it off Firefox took an eternity to get to a point where I could click on something and it happen.

Part way through, I just picked up my iPad and used that instead. Far far quicker.

Re:RT is a LOSER

[BanHammor]

You have a very crappy netbook then, because all sorts of Optimus-powered ones can do all of that with ease.

Re:RT is a LOSER

[Anonymous Coward]

Just a FYI,

The reviews I've read indicate while the browser is good the video playback is sub-par and choppy...

Re:RT is a LOSER

[cbhacking]

I'm not aware of any $200 netbooks with 1920x1080 screens (or netbooks at anything else in "netbook" price range, either).

A $200 netbook won't have an SSD, 4GB of RAM, and a Core i5 (quad-core, 64-bit, virtualization-capable, etc.) CPU. That means, among other things, no Client Hyper-V.

Netbooks don't have touchscreens or stylus input. Their keyboards can't be removed or folded out of the way for easy use when not at a desk. They're highly portable laptops, but not -on-the-go devices like tablets.

Netbooks, especially cheap ones, don't have cases strong enough to use as a skateboard (yes, you can do this with a sirface, meaning you relaly don't need to worry about the screen getting cracked in your luggage or something) or dropped onto a cement floor.

Netbooks, especially cheap ones, tend to have screens and keyboards smaller than the Surface, which makes typing a pain.

Netbooks don't have rear-facing cameras, and frequently only have one (crappy) speaker.

A $200 netbook might be able to run Win8 Pro, but it won't come with it, so you'll have to buy a copy from elsewhere and install it yourself if you want to connect it to a domain or use BitLocker.

Re:RT is a LOSER

[BlackSnake112]

What netbook? I had* an 3 year old 9 inch dell mini that can stream just fine. I don't have it in front of me but if I remember right it has a 1.6 atom, 2GB of RAM, 32GB ssd (PCIE RAM type not hard drive type) and it is running win 7. I did upgrade the RAM to 2GB. I bought the RAM before it arrived and upgraded it as soon as I got it. It has run linux, OSX 10.5, that tablet looking linux, XP, and win 7. I did notice dell stopped selling this model quickly. The replacements had soldered on RAM so no upgrading that. Getting more then 1GB was a pain. It takes about 30 seconds to boot from totally off to the desktop. I never used sleep mode so can't answer that. We streamed quicktime moves a lot for testing at work with it. Ticked off many a apple fan since this toy laptop could do everything their little apple could. Remember we are talking 2009 here the I series CPUs just came out. Maybe I just got lucky. The other atom based pcs sucked running windows XP or 7. They also had 1 GB of RAM. I still say that 2 GB of RAM makes win 32bit very happy.

*I gave the mini to my mom. She wanted a small light laptop. She uses it all the time. I upgrade the hard drive to a 64 GB one. The original SSD started to fail. That machine is still going strong for her. She watches a friends child. That kid plays flash games and streams movies all the time.

Re:RT is a LOSER

[kms_one]

Yup!! What he said. I have a netbook (several actually) and they are often unusable for productivity due to the screen size and sloowwww processor. This device seems like something that I can actually get work done on. I almost got a (very favorably reviewed) Slate recently but decided instead to wait for Microsoft's tablet. I think it's definitely worth the extra $$ to get one that actually runs Windows 8 natively. A walled garden is only as usable as its app base which is puny for Windows RT.

Re:RT is a LOSER

[shutdown -p now]

I mean that seriously: what does it do that a $200 netbook doesn't do at least as well?

Anything that's more convenient in the tablet form factor - e.g. reading from the screen, reading news, playing Angry Birds...

Re:RT is a LOSER

[Mr_Silver]

It's a Samsung NC-10 which I increased the memory to 2GB and replaced XP with Windows 7 Home Premium.

I'm sure there are netbooks out there which do handle HD video - however I've not seen any. This is possibly because they are more expensive and therefore go against the ethos of netbooks being cheap.

Re:RT is a LOSER

[Mr_Silver]

What netbook? I had* an 3 year old 9 inch dell mini that can stream just fine. I don't have it in front of me but if I remember right it has a 1.6 atom, 2GB of RAM, 32GB ssd (PCIE RAM type not hard drive type) and it is running win 7. I did upgrade the RAM to 2GB.

It's a Samsung NC-10 which I increased the memory to 2GB and replaced XP with Windows 7 Home Premium.

The SSD may make the difference, mine has a HDD and I'm wary of upgrading it on the basis that I'm not sure it's worth the cost based on how little it is used over the iPad - which whilst being more limited, is a lot more convenient for browsing and email.

Galaxy Tab 7,7

[Anonymous Coward]

None of the websites mention the of the best tablets out there in the 7" range (i.e. still fits in your jeans pocket), the Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.7. Hardware wise it runs circles around the new iPad Mini (and its competitors) even though it was released months ago: higher res screen (the iPad Mini's ppi is on par with a first gen iPhone from almost 6 years ago!), faster CPU/GPU (both dual core Cortex A9 1GHz vs 1.4 GHz), more RAM, and expandable via micro-SD and standard USB peripherals, e.g. hard drives, PC keyboards/mice...

The problem it had was that it was released ahead of its time, when the software wasn't ready (Honeycomb) and updating to silky smooth ICS took quite some time, also due to the providers (e.g. Verizon for the LTE version). Nevertheless ICS is available now, along with CM9, and if this tablet was released NOW instead of beginning this year it would crush most tabs in the reviews!

That Archos 101 XS

[blind biker]

I'm digging it. A cover that doubles as a keyboard is nice to have. Sure, it's a crappy keyboard, but for the thickness and the price, it can't be beat. Also, comes with ICS, has decent power under the hood, and the screen is OK. And comes at a very competitive price.

Re:That Archos 101 XS

[Missing.Matter]

My friend who has one was complaining about the screen... I see in the specs it's a TFT as opposed to IPS that are in most tablets these days. Haven't seen the screen myself. How is the brightness on the display?

Re:That Archos 101 XS

[blind biker]

Thanks for the warning. IPS is super-important to me, as viewing angle limits can cause headaches, to me. So only IPS for me.

I've not seen the Archos XS IRL, yet, only a couple of reviews. Your friend's account is very useful!

Re:That Archos 101 XS

[Missing.Matter]

I should note it was a review unit... so I don't know how it compares to the shipping units. It wasn't pre-production though so I'm guessing they shouldn't be the same.

Re:That Archos 101 XS

[blind biker]

If the review unit has a non-IPS screen the chance that the shipping unit has an IPS screen is low :/

It's the software, stupid.

[silverhalide]

Nobody cares about tablet specs outside of screen size, battery life, and price. It's all about the software. Is it fast, responsive, and usable?

Is it easy to develop for? Will it be around for a while to justify developers investing in it? Does the company have a history of keeping platforms around?

Re:It's the software, stupid.

[blind biker]

Nobody cares about tablet specs outside of screen size, battery life, and price.

I hear that a lot, since yesterday, mostly from Apple fanbois. I'm not saying you're one of them, just that this "nobody cares about tablet specs" has become an awfully popular phrase as of very recently.

Re:It's the software, stupid.

[thoth]

There is a lot of truth to it... the kinds of people that would buy a tablet, are also largely uninterested in geek stuff like hardware specs.

Re:It's the software, stupid.

[eepok]

I agree that those are frequently the most important, but for those of us looking for netvertibles (Asus Transformer, etc.), other important specs/features include:

-USB Ports
-SD card slots
-Repairability/upgradability (understanding that the trend is to create self-contained devices for increased device purchasing)
-Camera(s)

Wish-List
-- PC OS (not a phone OS)

Re:It's the software, stupid.

[grumpyman]

This is exactly why the el cheapo Chinese Android tabs (whoever manufacturer name it bears) will take over the bottom end of the market.

Re:It's the software, stupid.

[shutdown -p now]

If you're looking for something like Asus Transformer, then surely it makes more sense to look at Asus line-up of Win8 devices (rather than Surface), since it is, essentially, the further development of the Transformer concept, but with OS that is intentionally designed to fit it well?

Transformer Book is particularly interesting - it's Intel (so you really get a "PC OS", and can dual-boot Linux if you want), it's bigger than your average tablet (the options are 11", 13" or 14") and so more convenient to use as a laptop, and one nifty addition they've made is putting a 250Gb hard drive into the keyboard dock alongside the extra batteries. Oh, and it also has USB 3.0 and Ethernet in the dock. This could make for a very nice jack-of-all-trades device.

Re:It's the software, stupid.

[eepok]

Thank you, sir, for doing the research I did not. The Transformer Book looks to be the right step in the right direction with my only concerns being, weight, heat, battery life, and cost (due to the hardware included). Since it's not yet in consumer or reviewer hands, I'll keep those concerns until I hear otherwise.

But that 11.6" version is already calling my name...

Re:It's the software, stupid.

[shutdown -p now]

Well, it's certainly not light - apparently it's around 900 grams undocked. The battery life is also what you'd expect from a Core i7 device, as opposed to ARM - I can't find the source again, but I've seen figures quoted as coming directly from ASUS putting it at 6 hours of battery life for the tablet by itself, and 10 hours when docked. Which is still pretty decent if you treat it as a laptop doubling as a tablet, I suppose, rather than the other way around.

Note that there are other options from Asus, which are Atom-powered, and hence lighter and last longer. The next one down the line is the 11.6" Vivo Tab, for which they claim 10 hours for the tablet and 19 hours docked. The weight is also in the same ballpark as iPad and Surface; but it's still an Intel device, and you still get the keyboard dock that lets you turn it into a laptop, albeit with reduced features compared to Transformer Book.

Re:It's the software, stupid.

[silverhalide]

The original iPad, when it was released in 2010, didn't have earth-shattering specs compared to the field at the time. They were good, maybe better in some areas. But iOS was like nothing the tablet market had ever seen before. It was good, fast, easy-to-learn, and reliable software that actually worked with fingers, and lo and behold, it turned out that's what the tablet market was missing.

Sure, Apple's marketing machine helped, but one could argue Microsoft or HP has (had?) just as much marketing budget as Apple and they failed to push tablets into the mainstream for years.

So call them "fanbois" all you want, but face reality - they make up the majority of the market. They are busy people who do not have time to put up with shitty software. Sure, there are aging nerds out there that refuse to let go of the hardware spec chase. If you think about it, they care about it because back in the day, that's what made the big difference in software performance. I know because I used to be that way. Nowadays, hardware is a commodity, cycles and RAM and plentiful, and the only differentiator is which ecosystem can actually deliver good software that takes advantage of the hardware.

It looks like Android is making good strides in this area, and hopefully the competition will continue to force all the tablet manufacturers to deliver better software for everyone across all platforms.

Listen up, Manufacturers!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I am a math teacher, and all I want is a tablet that:

1. runs linux.
2. has a real, active digitizer pen.

I have a setup that does this (Wacom/laptop) and can do really clear & useful notes (with voiceover) or screencasts for students to view outside of class, but the only thing really stopping my for doing this in tablet form is the lack of availability. There are some x86 tablets that have active digitizers, but they are underpowered single core ATOM machines that are quickly losing their reign of usefullness

Unfortunately, these active digitizing tablets running proprietary android are clunky to use, and you have to beg that the right app is available in your walled garden appstore du jure, and that it is supported under the particular device. Plus, I'm not going to invest my time/money in software that can be discontinued at any point by Mysteryappwriter#78234 or hardware that can be discontinued/EOL'd at anytime by some manufacturer-and-guardian-of-the-OS overlord.

Re:Listen up, Manufacturers!!!

[Jeng]

A rooted android device is going to be your best bet.

Re:Listen up, Manufacturers!!!

[the_B0fh]

And that will solve his or her discontinued software from Mysteryappwriter#78234 how?

Seriously, is every problem going to be answered by "a rooted android" by an android fanboi?

Re:Listen up, Manufacturers!!!

[Jeng]

And that will solve his or her discontinued software from Mysteryappwriter#78234 how?

Because he will be in charge of what is on his device, much like if he installed linux on the device, which is what he said he wanted.

Re:Listen up, Manufacturers!!!

[Shadowmist]

And that will solve his or her discontinued software from Mysteryappwriter#78234 how?

Because he will be in charge of what is on his device, much like if he installed linux on the device, which is what he said he wanted.

I'm just as in charge with my iPhone5 as I was with my Android Optimus. Every bit of software aside from what came with the OS is there because I PUT IT THERE. I couldn't really care less about what zealots from either platform would say, save that I think the above statement is a non-issue. If I wanted something that I'd have to handroll every step, I'd build a custom desktop, and I have. If I'm buying a tablet though, I want instant gratification. I want it to work when I take it out of the box, and I expect certain features available from the getgo. because that's what tablets are about... consuming and using data, not having another device I have to software rebuild from scratch in order to just use.

Re:Listen up, Manufacturers!!!

[Jeng]

I'm just as in charge with my iPhone5 as I was with my Android Optimus.

break

Plus, I'm not going to invest my time/money in software that can be discontinued at any point by Mysteryappwriter#78234 or hardware that can be discontinued/EOL'd at anytime by some manufacturer-and-guardian-of-the-OS overlord.

When I was trying to decide how to respond to the original post I thought of many ways to tell the person that their request was ridiculous, but instead figured I would give the person a place to start and I figured that a rooted android device would probably be the best place for him to start.

So yes you are just as much in control of your apps with iPhone as with Android and as with Linux.

Don't forget the chinese tablets

[Anonymous Coward]

I bought an Ainol Novo 7 Fire a few weeks ago. It is a great tablet and compares well to the Nexus 7, only $70 cheaper and has more ports and a microSD slot. I had it on my doorstep 7 days after I ordered it. There are a lot of Chinese tablets out there from Ainol, Ramos, etc. The whole experience buying from Aliexpress was eye-opening to where things might be going in the future. We can see the online retailers are squeezing out retails stores now. In the future, there is not much stopping retailers in other countries from squeezing out American online retailers besides shipping time and cost. If everything is manufactured overseas anyway, the shipping cost has to be paid by the consumer anyway. American retailers just bury that cost in the price.

A.. what now?

[Kreigaffe]

A PHABLET? Uh, no, it's a fucking tablet. I will slap anyone I ever hear use the word "phablet". That's just fucking stupid.

Tegra 3 a liability

[Guspaz]

Reviews indicate that single-threaded performance is a huge bottleneck for the Surface (Microsoft Office maxes out a CPU core just when you type text), so the fact that the Tegra 3 (with its Cortex A9s) is being used everywhere (and at a low clockspeed to boot) is a big problem. Had they gone with even a dual core Krait, (which at reasonable clockspeeds can have more than double the single-threaded performance) they would have been much better off.

Re:Tegra 3 a liability

[Jeng]

And this time Microsoft can't blame the low specs on the manufacturers like they did in regards to Vista.

Re:A.. what now?

[Chibi Merrow]

The word "phablet" may be stupid, but the Galaxy Note II isn't a tablet.

Lest we all forget...

[HerculesMO]

If you develop a Windows 8 Metro style app -- it will work immediately on the tablet.

The amount of apps that I expect to see will be large, because Windows already has a huge developer ecosystem.

But time will tell. I'm not in a need for any tablet as of now (have my iPad 2) so I'm fine keeping that for a while.

Re:Lest we all forget...

[Anonymous Coward]

If you develop a Windows 8 Metro style app -- it will work immediately on the tablet.

So you'll be able to sell it to all three people with Windows tablets.

If you develop a Windows XP app, it will work on 95% of Windows boxes (maybe more, I'm not sure how many old NT/98/etc machines are still running), and 100% of boxes people are likely to buy software for other than ARM tablets.

Why would Windows devs want to develop new apps that restrict them to a tiny subset of Windows systems, unless Microsoft pay them to do so?

Re:Lest we all forget...

[roc97007]

Bingo.

Re:Lest we all forget...

[Shadowmist]

If you develop a Windows 8 Metro style app -- it will work immediately on the tablet.

So you'll be able to sell it to all three people with Windows tablets.

If you develop a Windows XP app, it will work on 95% of Windows boxes (maybe more, I'm not sure how many old NT/98/etc machines are still running), and 100% of boxes people are likely to buy software for other than ARM tablets.

Why would Windows devs want to develop new apps that restrict them to a tiny subset of Windows systems, unless Microsoft pay them to do so?

To get on the ground floor of a new platform? If the platform takes off than that's a lot of smart money to be made.

Re:Lest we all forget...

[shutdown -p now]

So you'll be able to sell it to all three people with Windows tablets.

You can also sell it to all the people with Win8 desktops and laptops. Which is going to be a fair number no matter what just because people keep buying new PCs, and that's what'll come preinstalled on them.

If you develop a Windows XP app, it will work on 95% of Windows boxes

True, but how many boxes will it be run on in practice? Developing the app is one thing, but then you have to let your potential users know about it somehow, and be willing to buy it. App stores really facilitate this, which is why developers have been flocking to iOS in such insane numbers.

He asked the obvious followup

[SuperKendall]

You didn't answer the question. He asked why there has to be one platform.

There's no need to answer that because that answer is obvious. There does not need to be one platform.

Then the obvious question after that is, why is Windows RT capable of BEING another platform enterprises would want to use?

My answer to that would be; it can be an enterprise platform even just resting on Office suppot. But it will not be replacing iPads, it will be replacing laptops for some people that only need office (say secretaries or some executives).

Re:He asked the obvious followup

[narcc]

Why would it replace laptops but not iPads?

Do you think that business users are going to carry along two tablets? To what end? For what purpose?

Re:He asked the obvious followup

[SuperKendall]

Why would it replace laptops but not iPads?

It could also replace iPads. It's just that it's more likely to be a laptop replacement, because of the primary draw - Office.

When selecting between the Surface and an iPad you'll have a lot more software choice on an iPad, so it would mean fewer people would opt for a Surface.

But if all you need to do is Office, do you really need a laptop? The Surface could replace a laptop for a lot of business users in a way an iPad cannot quite yet manage.

Do you think that business users are going to carry along two tablets?

They may well have a laptop and an iPad. I could also see people carrying a Surface and an iPad because of software.

Re:He asked the obvious followup

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would it replace laptops but not iPads?

Do you think that business users are going to carry along two tablets? To what end? For what purpose?

Why would they need an iPad if they had a surface? Honestly, if they have a web browser, and a few basic apps like a calendar and an e-mail client, then they are probably ok.

Corrections

[SuperKendall]

Office built in for free

That is the biggest draw for sure.

Expandable storage

Only for media.

More peripheral device support

The iPad at this point has a greater range of peripheral support.

More form factors (foldable hybrid, detachable screen, pure tablet, etc.)

With all of the accessories I also think the iPad has the upper hand here. You can buy a ruggedized waterproof iPad case for example...

Open file system for managing and organizing files

Which non-technical users do not want.

Networking for connecting to other PCs, transferring files, serving media, etc.

Which the iPad also does.

Windows 8 tablets like the Surface pro are for Enterprise. There, the list for what Windows 8 does over iPad is much much longer.

The Surface Pro is not an iPad competitor. It is a Macbook Air competitor.

In fact I'm not sure if the same is not also true of Surface RT...

Re:Corrections

[Missing.Matter]

Only for media.

Which is more than can be said for iPad. Further, by media, what you really mean to correct me with is that application installs are only on the built in storage. You can put any file type on the surface, not just media, as the file system is open.

The iPad at this point has a greater range of peripheral support.

Of course excluding every mouse out there. But already with the built in USB port Windows RT has support for keyboards, mice, scanners, printers, USB memory, cameras, game controllers, external harddrives, external CD/DVD drives, etc.

Which non-technical users do not want.

The question was not "what does RT do that the ipad doesn't that only technical users care about." This is a big plus for someone like me and others similarly situated.

Which the iPad also does.

How? When I'm on my network, I can't connect directly to my iPad and pull files from my iPad, or when I'm on my iPad I can't copy files directly to my computer. I use Dropbox to transfer all my files and I'm not aware of an easier way.... any help would be most welcome.

The Surface Pro is not an iPad competitor. It is a Macbook Air competitor.

If I want a touch screen computer for a corporate environment, the Macbook Air will not be on the list due to its lack of a touch screen. The list will consist of products like the iPad and Galaxy tablets, and now the Surface Pro.

Re:Corrections

[Missing.Matter]

With all of the accessories I also think the iPad has the upper hand here. You can buy a ruggedized waterproof iPad case for example...

Sorry, forgot this one. Sure can make a franken-iPad by cobbling together different parts and accessories, but the iPad is still the iPad not matter what you really want to buy. With Windows tablets you have different form factors (hybrid-slide out keyboard, detachable keyboard, rotating screen, etc.), different size displays, different wireless options (NFC for instance, not something available for iPad), different materials, different resolutions, etc. All these come in at different price points. This choice is indeed a feature in comparison to the rather homogeneous iPad lineup.

Re:Corrections

[SuperKendall]

Which is more than can be said for iPad.

I can get external WiFi hard drives if I want more storage space and play media from them.

Further, by media, what you really mean to correct me with is that application installs are only on the built in storage.

That is correct. But that matters more than you would think.

Of course excluding every mouse out there. But already with the built in USB port Windows RT has support for keyboards, mice, scanners, printers, USB memory, cameras, game controllers, external harddrives, external CD/DVD drives, etc.

The iPad also has a USB port. How do you know ANY of those things (apart from mice) will have drivers in WindowsRT? Remember, this is NOT Windows. It is NOT running windows applications to handle, say, a scanner. Meanwhile the iPad already has a number of dedicated scanners.

I know WIndowsRT will not attach to my car, for example, in the same way my car is an iPad accessory.

This is a big plus for someone like me and others similarly situated.

Fair enough, though with iPhone explorer you can do the same thing with an iPad or iPhone (browse the file system and place/copy files).

How? When I'm on my network, I can't connect directly to my iPad and pull files from my iPad, or when I'm on my iPad I can't copy files directly to my computer.

You can with the right application. You mentioned Dropbox as one of them. It's not as easy but it is possible. There are other apps that let you browse SMB shares (Goodreader I think is one)

If I want a touch screen computer for a corporate environment

I can't see that being the only criteria for any enterprise use.

Re:Corrections

[Missing.Matter]

I can get external WiFi hard drives if I want more storage space and play media from them.

Wifi harddrive? Really? Those things have terrible transfer rates, cost at least twice as much as regular harddrives, and further require extra power draw. I haven't used one with an iPad so I'm not sure how the experience is there, but I have not been pleased with them.

Regardless, the iPad still does not offer always-in extensible storage. Max you can ever do is 64GB. For around $100 I can put in a 128GB SD card into the surface for total always on-board storage of 160GB (which incidentally is about the same price to go from 32 to 64 GB on the iPad).

That is correct. But that matters more than you would think.

I'm not so sure. On my desktop install, I have full office, Adobe CS6 (Photoshop, Illustartor, InDesign, Premiere), Matlab, Visual Studio, and a couple games and those massive beasts only take around 20GB of storage, which is around what the Surface has for Appdata. On my windows 8 install I have around 70 apps installed, and the total diskspace they consume is around 2GB. Remember, these are metro apps which are for the most part very light.

The iPad also has a USB port. How do you know ANY of those things (apart from mice) will have drivers in WindowsRT?

By way of $30 dongle. You can't just connect anything you like to it. USB drives, mice, and external harddrives for instance are not supported. It is intended as a "camera connection" kit for transferring pictures from a camera, and not much else.

As far as windows RT peripheral support, yes mice, keyboards, USB drives, and portable harddrives will universally work through standard drivers. Aside from them Dell and HP are supporting Windows RT with their printer lines. Yes, many still aren't supported, but the list is growing. Microsoft already announced Xbox 360 controllers will work with Windows RT.

Look, the same people shipping windows RT products are also the ones making peripherals and writing drivers for said peripherals. If Dell is selling a Windows RT tablet, they're going to make damn sure their printers and other accessories will also work with their Windows RT tablet in particular and other Windows RT tablets as a consequence. This is not true with Apple, where device makers can only hope that by making their printer or other hardware compatible with iPad (where at all possible) they can at least get one of Apple's customers to purchase through them.

You can with the right application. You mentioned Dropbox as one of them.

Ah, I see. Thanks, but not really what I was looking for.

I can't see that being the only criteria for any enterprise use.

Of course it's not the *only* criteria. But say I want to equip a salesman with a tablet. I want him to be able to accept signatures, to run custom sales software, to connect to our corporate network via VPN, to be able to download inventory data, to create purchase orders... etc. Netbooks, Ultrabooks, Macbook Air, etc. can probably do 90% of that. But accepting signatures is a great feature for a mobile salesperson. Or even the ability to pass the device around a room easily, which a tablet allows and a clamshell form factor prohibits, is a great feature. Windows 8 tablets do all of the above and the extra 10%.

Re:A.. what now?

[93 Escort Wagon]

A PHABLET? Uh, no, it's a fucking tablet.

So you're just objecting to the spelling - it needs to be FABLET?

badly phrased title

[roc97007]

> A Look At Competitors to the Surface and iPad

Oh, c'mon. Lumping the Surface together with the iPad is at very least premature, and more than a little presumptive. Whatever Microsoft is calling "surface" these days is only a few clever commercials so far, and the iPad and it's main competitor (Android tablets) have been out for years. The competitor to the Surface is every single tablet out there, including the few and slightly wonky Windows 7 tablets. The iPad, with its known track record (however one feels about that) isn't something you pair with a product that hasn't reached consumer's hands yet.

Re:badly phrased title

[93 Escort Wagon]

I also notice there isn't a submitter cited - so I'm wondering if this is some sort of weird paid contribution from a Microsoft marketing person.

Competitors to the Surface and iPad? Really? Would anyone outside of Redmond think the Surface even belongs in that phrase?

Seriously - right now, the iPad pretty owns the space; but if you want to talk about competitors, it would make sense to talk about tablets that have actually hit the market already and been purchased - like the Nexus or Kindle Fire.

Re:badly phrased title

[ThatsMyNick]

Actually, the submitter is MojoKid from HotHardware.com (the website linked in the summary). I guess the editor dropped it out, as the submitter's name did not add anything to the summary.

Re-Corrections

[cbhacking]

Expandable storage only for media?
Well, I'm not sure if you're counting documents and so forth in there, but if so, carry on. With that said, what are you going to need more than the Surface's built-in storage for *other* than media? However, if you decide you must have it, use the various Windows system tools (disk management, Powershell, whatever you want) to either turn "C:\Program Files\WindowsApps" into a symlink* to a folder on the SD card, or make the SD card's mount point *be* the WindowsApps folder (or anywhere else you want).
* Yes, Windows supports true symlinks, and has since Vista. No, I'm not talking about junctions or kernel-object-only links. The command is "mklink" and, while its syntax is slighlty different from "ln", it can do all the same things.

The iPad has more peripheral device support than USB2? Bahahahahahahahahaha, that's a good one. There are probably thousands of iPad peripherals by now. There are over 100,000 USB2 (or lower) peripherals. I'm not talking about screen covers and bluetooth keyboards here (although it supports those... and USB or BT mice and other BT-connected PC peripherals, for good measure), but things like printers, scanners, cameras, media players, external storage, game controllers, USB speakers/headsets, GPS devices, add-on cellular radio (for a hell of a lot less than buying it integrated on an iPad), and so forth.

Ruggedized cases are a win for the iPad, but form factors are a win for Windows RT (if not specificlaly for Surface) and a loss for iPads. You can get your iPads in two sizes, and two resolutions. That's it. Via added-cost, third-party peripherals, you can make them sit up like a laptop screen or connect a keyboard, but you can't make them have a 12" screen, or a different aspect ratio, or anything like that.

First you complain about not being able to use the SD card for anything except media (even though that's not true) and then you claim that people don't want file management at all. Make up your mind, please... and also consider that "technical users" are users too, and it's nice to have a tablet OS that doesn't make us jump through hoops to get full filesystem access.

The iPad supports Windows networking and can join Homegroups? This is news to me. Actually, it looks like it can do Windows networking - at least somewhat - but doesn't support Homegroups. I expect that it can handle media servers just fine. I expect that it *can't* handle WMA/WMV codecs, although I may be mistaken about that too (Windows, including RT, handles mpeg4 MOV video files and AAC audio just fine).

If the Surface Pro is a MBA competitor, even though the MBA doesn't have a touchscreen, stylus support, the ability to remove or fold the keyboard out of the way entirely, or any of the other tablet features of Surface? Like it or not, Windows 8 tablets (as opposed to Windows RT ones) are definitely still tablets; they are just *also* PCs, and compete in both markets (although admittedly they are unlikely to beat the iPad on price).

Re:A.. what now?

[mcgrew]

Well, cheer up, the guy who coined "blog" wound up being homeless. Maybe whatever nitwit came up with "phablet" will suffer an even worse fate.

Overlooked tablets

[Anonymous Coward]

I vote for Nook HD+ --- nobody seems to want to review it, but it's an inch bigger than the iPad Mini, has more pixels (HD+) with a ppi (256 ppi) close to the full iPad retina (264 ppi), and it's $60 bucks cheaper than the mini. It's built on android ICS.

Want to be a competitor?

[gmuslera]

Have the device open. It could be useful with Windows 8, or not. Being able to install on it Windows 7, Linux (chrome os, meego/mer, ubuntu, all of them if possible), and even MacOSX, and use on it what you really prefer could help to sell the actual hardware, what is what they are interested on, as mark a differece with the rest.

A lot will have Windows 8 or Android, and offer similar enough hardware, what could separate you from the rest is what you could do different with software, and being open is being different right now.

Re:Want to be a competitor?

[Anonymous Coward]

For some reason it isn't enough for Microsoft to make money, they want to make money on certain items in certain ways, if things aren't just so they will drop the product rather than make money other than the way they intended.

They want to sell the hardware and the software. If the software is not being used with the hardware they will quit selling the hardware.

Symlinks are not supported if apps cannot use

[SuperKendall]

Yes, Windows supports true symlinks, and has since Vista. No, I'm not talking about junctions or kernel-object-only links. The command is "mklink"

The last time I tried using mklink I gave up when I realized most applications couldn't follow the symlink. What good is a symlink if it's only usable by the shell?

Windows developers are NOT expecting symlinks.

My bet is that most WindowsRT applications will break if they encounter a path with a symlink.

There are over 100,000 USB2 (or lower) peripherals.

And the number that Windows RT has drivers for?

you can't make them have a 12" screen

You can if you attach an external display. The iPads can all mirror displays over VGA or HDMI.

then you claim that people don't want file management at all.

Most people do not, but if you really want to you can do that with an iPad using an application like iPhone Explorer. I can place files onto the iPad anywhere, and also take them off.

The iPad supports Windows networking

Yes.

can join Homegroups?

Use SkyDrive or an SMB share.

I expect that it can handle media servers just fine. I expect that it *can't* handle WMA/WMV codecs,

When you have as many applications as the iPad does, you would be pretty foolish to expect that would not be possible.

If the Surface Pro is a MBA competitor, even though the MBA doesn't have a touchscreen, stylus support,

The MBA supports Griffin style pads just like any PC.

the ability to remove or fold the keyboard out of the way entirely, or any of the other tablet features of Surface?

I am dubious how much those features will get used by people that bought the surface because it has a trackpad.

Windows 8 tablets (as opposed to Windows RT ones) are definitely still tablets;

Of course they are still tablets. I just don't see them being chosen over an iPad much, but I can see a number of cases where the Surface would be chosen over an Air or other PC laptop.

Re:Symlinks are not supported if apps cannot use

[narcc]

Most people do not, but if you really want to you can do that with an iPad using an application like iPhone Explorer. I can place files onto the iPad anywhere, and also take them off.

It's not just technical users that want a user accessible file system -- it's also the average business person, the average student, etc. iPhone Explorer clearly helps meet a need, but it's far from sufficient for most users.

Unless I'm mistaken, iPhone Explorer is a Mac app that lets you treat your iPhone/iPad like a USB drive, yes? It's not quite the same thing as being able to jam a USB stick into the side of the machine (like business persons often do) and pulling up their file/presentation/whatever. They'll need a Mac and this program to act as an intermediary.

With any luck, Apple will come to their senses and do what's in the best interest of their customers.

Re:Symlinks are not supported if apps cannot use

[JonySuede]

mklink /d /h

try a hard link

Re:Symlinks are not supported if apps cannot use

[SuperKendall]

Unless I'm mistaken, iPhone Explorer is a Mac app that lets you treat your iPhone/iPad like a USB drive, yes?

Mac or Windows.

So they can use whatever they'd have been putting a UDB stick in to read the presentation.

Or they would give the presentation from the iPad which is more likely. Or they would just transfer the presentation to the computer using a network.

With any luck, Apple will come to their senses and do what's in the best interest of their customers.

They already have, it's just some customers hate to modernize.

Re:Symlinks are not supported if apps cannot use

[narcc]

I don't follow you're reasoning.

When I'm invited to speak, typically there is a laptop connected to a projector to with which presenters will use to access their presentation. Presenters will, before the start of the session, copy their presentation on to the computer, or (on occasion) plug the drive in at the beginning of their presentation.

Now, if i wanted to replace the laptop with an iPad, how would the presenters get their presentation to the tablet?

Where I think Windows 8 and Windows RT will do well is this kind of common use case, where I have a file on a USB drive that I need on another device. With W8/RT I just plug the stick in to the side and open the file. With the iPad, I use a computer as an intermediary, provided that the necessary software has already been installed.

That's just one example, but you get my point. Not having a user accessible file system *introduces* new problems that it takes a far more competent and skilled technical person to solve. Not geek/tech guy problems, but normal business user problems. Normal student problems.

If Apple gave users a user accessible file system, it would dramatically improve the utility of their tablet. As we've seen from other platforms, you can still have a simplified "unskilled user" view without giving up the many benefits that "normal" FS access gives you.

Re:Symlinks are not supported if apps cannot use

[SuperKendall]

When I'm invited to speak, typically there is a laptop connected to a projector to with which presenters will use to access their presentation.

I've spoken at many conferences. While they MAY be a computer onto which you can put a presentation, you ALSO pretty much always have a VGA connector at the podium, or you are just connecting to a projector. The iPad works great for that.

Now, if i wanted to replace the laptop with an iPad, how would the presenters get their presentation to the tablet?

Email it to someone who can put it on, or simply put in the USB stick you ALSO had a copy of your presentation on before you left because you are not a moron. I always carry multiple copies of my presentation with me and assume that every computing device I bring with me can and will fail.

Also of course it's pretty freaking easy to ask ahead of time what the speaking arrangements are like.

If Apple gave users a user accessible file system, it would dramatically improve the utility of their tablet.

It has not caused a problem in years of actual use. Being able to browse it from a computer is enough of a shortcut to fit any real-world snafus.

Re:Symlinks are not supported if apps cannot use

[narcc]

It has not caused a problem in years of actual use.

This is simply not true.

Not long ago on work trip a colleague needed to send a file back to the office. He had a laptop and an iPhone. No wifi was available where we stopped and he had no way to get the file from his computer to his iPhone to send the file. The application you mentioned was unknown to either of us at the time and was, consequently, not installed.

I copied the file to my phone's SD card and emailed it to him so that he could send it from his phone. No special software or additional new knowledge required.

That's a problem and a problem that would not have occurred had the iPhone had a user accessible file system.

(Just curious, as I can't check for myself at present, the file was an Excel spreadsheet. Had he had the software you mentioned, could he have attached the file to an email once copied to the phone?)

Re:Symlinks are not supported if apps cannot use

[Curate]

The last time I tried using mklink I gave up when I realized most applications couldn't follow the symlink. What good is a symlink if it's only usable by the shell? Windows developers are NOT expecting symlinks. My bet is that most WindowsRT applications will break if they encounter a path with a symlink.

I think you're referring to .lnk files, aka shortcuts, which are a shell concept. The shell needed this concept because for a long time, Windows didn't have symbolic links. As an earlier poster said, Windows Vista+ does support symbolic links. The shell doesn't know anything about them. They are implemented in NTFS, and any app should just work with them. There are certainly ways apps can burn themselves with symbolic links (just like with Unix symbolic links), but with ordinary usage like opening/reading/writing/closing files, it's totally transparent.

Re:Symlinks are not supported if apps cannot use

[SuperKendall]

Were the supported in prior versions of NTFS? That's what I was using for a file system at the time, but that was pre-vista... I just would be surprised if NTFS gained additional abilities it did not have before. I seem to remember I was using CygWin, not the normal DOS prompt or Explorer (I definitely would not have been using the DOS prompt...)

I don't think it was lnk files, but I might be mistaken. Thanks for the information.

Re:Symlinks are not supported if apps cannot use

[Curate]

Were the supported in prior versions of NTFS?

No, they did not exist prior to Vista.

I just would be surprised if NTFS gained additional abilities it did not have before.

Disclosure: I'm a developer at Microsoft and I work on NTFS. So, I'm not as surprised as you are. :) NTFS is under active development. It gets new features every release. I've actually implemented some of them.

I seem to remember I was using CygWin

Well, I have no idea how CygWin's 'ln' command (I assume it was called) decided to implement symbolic links under the hood. I'd guess it was probably creating shortcuts rather than real symbolic links. More recent versions might create real symbolic links. Incidentally, 'mklink' was introduced in Vista, and it is an internal command in cmd.exe (i.e. there is no mklink.exe).

Re:Symlinks are not supported if apps cannot use

[hazydave]

There are over 100,000 USB2 (or lower) peripherals.

And the number that Windows RT has drivers for?

Not to accidentally promote Windows RT or anything, but supposedly, Windows RT ships with the same collection of drivers for USB devices that ships with full Windows 8. It is very true that, back in the days of Windows NT on Alpha and PowerPC, it was really just a recompile, even for a driver, to get it working on the other CPU architectures, assuming the Windows HAL was correctly used. So this does seem credible. No idea how you'd go about adding drivers, though -- they would certainly not be allowed in the Windows Store -- drivers need to do things considered illegal for a WinRT program. Same reason the only binary compiler you're going to see is Visual C++ -- the VC++ runtime has a special exemption in the Windows Store, but nothing else using the same basic functions (allocations, exception unwinding, etc) gets through. Other compilers could, though, target the .NET common virtual machine platform, they say.

With that said, pretty much everything mentioned here already works with USB and Android. Which makes some sense -- Linux typically has better support these days across the board for hardware than Windows, since new versions of Windows drop legacy hardware, new versions of Linux pretty much don't. My tablet will connect to external HDDs (Win32, NTFS, as well as Linux formats) just dandy. Have not tried a great deal of devices. And of course, Android will have the same security issues with new drivers that Windows RT or iOS would -- just that it's pretty easy to root the tablet and install any driver you like, in the usual Linux way, if you do need to do that.

Misleading subject line

[walterbyrd]

> "A Look At Competitors to the Surface and iPad "

Seems to imply that iPad, and Surface, and industry standards, and anything else is an alternative. But practically nobody is using a Surface. It's like saying "A Look At Competitors to Windows and FreeBSD "

Waiting for the $99 10-12 inch pad

[Nyder]

Once they get the $99 10-12 inch pad, so I can read comic books off it, I'll be down.

To where again?

[SuperKendall]

mklink /d /h
try a hard link

Yes of course hard links work, since to the application it looks no different than a file or directory.

But the original point was you could use potentially a soft link to store stuff on an SD card that was meant to go on the internal storage. You can't hard link across mounts.

It's all about apps!

[EGSonikku]

"It's the apps stupid!"

In the tablet world I'd argue the most important factors are apps, and screen quality. Right now compared to the competition Surface has neither. Right now MS has to argue that the Metro UI alone is a selling point. They don't have the apps, and compared to a modern iPad the resolution is lacking (c'mon 1366x768? Against iPads with 2048x1536? Or 1080p Android tablets?)

Seems to me MS is too little, too late to the tablet market, and justifying iPad amounts of cash for a device that offers less everything isn't a very good strategy.

Theres a Lot of experimentation at the moment

[Anonymous Coward]

All the companies are experimenting at the moment and thats awesome for the consumer. I have three mobile computing devices... a Galaxy Note ( I ) which I love. Fits in my top pocket and gives me access to apps and data (has a 64GB SD card in it). I have just got back from Patagonia and the fact I could swap batteries in and out was fantastic. Could go several days of FULL and heavy use with no access to electricity. I have a Sony tablet - that lives on my living room coffee table. It has an inbuilt remote control so Not only can I read XKCD, slashdot etc while Im on the lounge watching movies... but I can control what Im watching with the same device. Its good for a travel device to though - as it is nicely portable. I also have a Toshiba AT330. Awesome maching - performance is awesome and even better - I love the large screen for reading magazines and watching TV. The fact is - we can get devices to fit our needs at the moment (which is why I love android so much more than iOS - theres choice in hardware and the OS is so customizable) This is a GREAT time to be buying stuff that really meets your needs.

Re:A.. what now?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Nokia 770, N800 and N810 were all internet tablets with 4.3" screens, why isn't the Note II with a 5.5" screen a tablet?

Re:A.. what now?

[Chibi Merrow]

Because none of those Nokia devices were phones.

Re:A.. what now?

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't say the Note wasn't a phone. It is both a phone and a small tablet.

Re:A.. what now?

[Yunzil]

Obviously it's a phucking tablet.