Microsoft May Finally Put Windows RT Out To Pasture

onyxruby writes "Microsoft may finally be ready to put Windows RT out to pasture. After ignoring pundits, the public, and a staggering $900 writedown, the subsequent lack of sales for the second edition of the RT have finally gotten the message through. Speaking at a UBS seminar, Microsoft VP Julie Larson-Green said, 'It just didn't do everything that you expected Windows to do. So there's been a lot of talk about it should have been a rebranding. We should not have called it Windows (.DOCX). How should we have made it more differentiated? I think over time you'll see us continue to differentiate it more. We have the Windows Phone OS. We have Windows RT and we have full Windows. We're not going to have three.'"

Comments

The real reason for RT?

[Bugler412]

I think the real reason for RT was to spur Intel to get better power consumption on their chipsets for the real version of Windows, seems to have met that goal if you view it that way

Interesting

[Horshu]

This is the first site I've come across that has interprested Larson-Green's presentation to indicate MS is ditching RT. Every other one has assumed that they're just going to merge the WinPhone shell into RT and make Modern UI more scaleable across screen sizes.

Re:Shooting Itself in the Foot

[0123456]

And Metro sucks on anything other than a phone.

As far as I can see, the whole push for Metro was to try to convince people to develop apps for Windows phones, becuase there was no point in developing for a tiny market like that. Now, they've screwed their desktop users to try to get into the tablet and phone market, and they're dumping tablets.

Problem is more fundamental to RT

[Junta]

RT couldn't find a value proposition that created a market just like windows phone is struggling. Windows without legacy compatibility is just not attractive (live by the sword, die by the sword: windows on x86 has gobs of compatible software, windows on arm has next to nothing compared to google and apple devices).

The initial hard *need* for RT would be that Intel couldn't/wouldn't release an architecture that would even get in the same ballpark as ARM manufacturers in terms of cost and power. Now that need is greatly reduced with Intel's Bay Trail platform. Windows 8 x86 tablets are in the same ballpark as the Nexus 7. There are certainly cheaper android devices more and more, but Intel and MS could elect to participate at those price points if they want to at this point and still turn a profit.

Re: Problem is more fundamental to RT

[Vanderhoth]

Except they won't and you only get one chance to make a first impression. They had their chance and screwed it up, on just about every conceivable level. They can't compete with Apple for the high end / status symbol market or with Androids for the techy geek / cheap tablet market and windows 8 is a joke MS sold their primary market out for to try and get into the "me too" market.

Re:Problem is more fundamental to RT

[berashith]

I think they did it on purpose. Coke released a clear product, not to compete with a successful pepsi clear product, but to dilute the market, then fail, and cause the playing field to go back to the original status quo. Microsoft is highly interested in all consumers staying in the x86 market. When ARM started looking interesting to normal people, MS had to do something to protect its turf. Competing fairly would be hard and expensive, and kill off the current cash cows. Burying the new trend by placing a bad taste in the mouth of people who dont know which part of a technology stack to blame can get years of bad publicity for the up and comers.