Now, as to whether the purchase of Motorola is a sign that Google's on the decline is an interesting question.
Up until the Motorola purchase, I honestly believed that Android was at risk of total destruction by Microsoft and their ilk. This is no longer possible. If Android was pushed out of the market then Microsoft would no longer have any leverage over Motorola. Motorola have a large number of fundamental patents on mobile technology only some of which have to be licensed under RAND obligations. If they were pushed out of mobile they could completely stop any other mobile manufacturer of their choice. Possibly even, if there wasn't a fundamental intervention in patent law, which would also eviscerate Microsoft's patent strategy, block all other mobile manufacturers.
When you saw how much money was spent trying to stop Google getting Nortel, an important but still second rank player in the mobile patents game (first rank is basically Qualcomm, Ericsson, Nokia and Motorola; second rank would be Nortel, Alcatel Lucent, Samsung etc. I'm not including people like DoCoMo), think how much of a disaster it was for Microsoft when Google managed to get Motorola on the rebound. The entire patent game was changed by the Motorola purchase. What were once fights to the death are now merely price negotiations.
That's what you use a tablet without a keyboard for, because it's not convenient to use for anything else. Why do you assume that a tablet that can be also turned into something resembling a laptop would not be used as one?
My assumption is basically, because if I want a laptop I will get a laptop. Having the keyboard attached makes it easier to use for typing since you can rest it on your lap. Also because a laptop would have access to proper desktop applications; this device will not. Perhaps a "pro" tablet would be expected to be used in a different way.
Oh, and I'm not necessarily saying that Surface does this right - I'm more partial to the way Asus tackled it with Transformer (and they have a slew of Win8 devices announced along the same lines). Ask some of the owners of those things how they use them...
Agreed. At that point you have something which is more or less a proper laptop. That I can understand. However the cost becomes higher.
Your physical comparisons are mostly pointless, except for pixel density / resolution (which is, indeed, a glaring issue). Why is a 7" tablet better than a 10" one?
Weight is, for most people, the big issue. Your tablet is something you carry in your handbag (it's very interesting to note that adult women are the most heavy users of iPads) or work bag. People are mostly choosing them for the specific reason that they want to avoid carrying or even having a laptop. As far as 7" goes; that same explanation applies but I will expand: Apple originally planned the iPad more like a computer. They thought that people would have to input on it lots. For most people, and especially the use cases I mentioned, that's not true. A 7" tablet gives more than enough ability to input whilst these are very much personal hand held devices. The smaller screen size can be compensated for by holding it closer if needed.
I have no idea what you mean by "tested apps",
Come on. This isn't even funny I mean tested by people you know. You can type in "ipad Greek banking" and you will find that there is a special "custom-made debt-restructuring app" which was "handed out to the leadership team" and helped save Greece from financial collapse. Search for anything on the internet and you can find a review of related iPad apps telling you which one will actually solve your problem.
There are already probably more different physical accessories planned for the new iPhone 5 external connector than there are apps in the Windows store. This is the difference between "throwing some money at the problem and hoping it will stick" and having a self sustaining "eco-system".
On the other hand, there is no "reasonable number of WP based apps", bad or not, because Win8 does not run Windows Phone apps - it's a completely different framework, and only somewhat compatible (considerable porting effort required) on source code level.
The question is whether Microsoft's pricing the Surface the same as the iPad is a wise business move.
What everybody here seems to be missing is that these are mostly going to be bought by Microsoft employees who have been allowed to get them for free. This means that the higher the price, the more the expense, the more Microsoft gets to tax deduct. This price makes perfect sense when you realise that.
I use Linux all the time, but when my friends ask about using it, I honestly tell them it might not do everything they want it to do, because they'll expect it to run some custom Access DB they built to track their CD collection or something.
At last a sensible Linux user. Tis so easy. Don't push them, let them pull themselves. Just let them use Linux as well / in a VM / using proper hardware/ get them hooked and then let them eventually ditch Windows only when they get tired of having to deal with it.
Slight correction; I had old specifications for the surface screen. It's still worse than the Nexus than that with 768 vertical pixels instead of 800 but it's not quite as bad as originally thought.
Except we should actually review what a tablet is used for. Mostly viewing things; documents; emails; films; etc. in situations where you don't have a table to put a computer on.
iPad - Lots of good apps
Surface - no tested apps at all; a reasonable number of pretty bad WP based apps (not all "fart apps" nowadays)
Nexus 7 - Lots and lots of apps and plenty of good ones
Advantage iPad or Nexus depending on opinion and interests - Loser Surface
In the things which matter we have a consistent loser.
I don't want to be horrible, but I think you are thinking like a techie:-) (actually you will probably like that:-)
The perception is that the only reason you'd buy Android is because you don't have the money for an iPad.
This was at least partly true before, but seems to have changed with the Samsung lawsuit. This caused a massive increase in sales of top end Galaxy tablets. The reason seems to be that Android has finally been understood as "a tablet OS like iPad, not a computer OS like I can't use" and at the same time "so good Apple had to sue to compete". Plenty of people are also going for the Galaxy Note and Nexus 7, for example, through choice.
Pricing the Surface at the same point as the iPad sends out a message to consumers that says "we think the Surface is as good as the iPad". Microsoft clearly want to position Windows 8/RT on tablets as a premium product, it doesn't want to compete with Android, it wants to compete with Apple and iOS.
This is the same mistake as has been made by HP. The problem is there's another message here; "professional computing platform; not simple system for people to do what they want". This message is reinforced by the fact that Microsoft Office is there and Gmail and Google Maps are not.
That won't stop other manufacturers from making cheaper tablets, but Microsoft are setting the bar high. If someone else (e.g. Acer) make a cheap WinRT tablet it will be seen as an affordable version of a premium product, not a "cheap" product.
If you look up prices, you will see that other manufacturer's Windows tablets are actually coming in as more expensive. This looks like there are major design flaws in Windows 8.
You're asking Slashdot for a Apple vs Microsoft comparison on a product none of us have used? Well that's surely going to be reasonable and fact based discussion.
Ahh. Ad hominem. Well actually.. a) We have lots of Microsoft shills on Slashdot; this has the benefit that all the Microsoft positive "talking points" and news will be posted and everyone posting here makes really sure that anti-Microsoft points are clearly justified. b) This is one of the few places where the people writing aren't soon expecting to be making half of their income from Microsoft adverts. c) there are lots of people who can read specifications and work things out.
For example; there has lots of breathless talk about Microsoft's keyboard covers all over the media. On Slashdot it's been clearly pointed out that the keyboard being pushed has almost no travel and you will have to buy an alternative more expensive one if you want to be able to type reasonably.
Within five minutes of this article going up, someone had posted the Microsoft story that this will be able to run "Windows" apps. This is the kind of thing which is reported without question elsewhere. Here on Slashdot you will see that actually the apps for this new tablet are a completely new ("Metro"/"Modern interface") type.
Or they've recognised a promising revenue stream and are going after it. MS won't let Windows go easily - it's too much part of their historic and current success.
I think you have misunderstood me. I agree Microsoft will fight to the death for Windows. However, that is not the death of Microsoft; The death of their competitors; the death some of their lesser products; the death of their partners certainly. MS office, however, is not on the table. Normally they would be willing to wait with even starting working in an Android release until long after WP9 just to ensure that there is space for the Windows division to benefit from having office. Now, however, we know that office will be available for Android before even WP8 has been released. There is a reason for that, and the reason is that they already know that there is a strong risk that Office gets completely displaced by the new office suites for Android or the ones developing for iOS as those become cross platform and available to more people than MS Office. An even worse fate would be if the current trend that people simply don't need an office suite - it turns out email + presentation tools is enough for most people - simply continues.
Microsoft is now fighting a multi-front war. They spent so much effort locking out Linux from access to desktop protocols that they have now locked themselves out of the future of computing, which looks like a combination of iOS and Android. They have also allowed a vast group of users who don't need an office suite to grow up. Even at the beginning of this year they were clearly stating that they would never produce Office for the iPad. If the main priority was Windows, then there would be no chance of any information about releases of Office for non-Windows devices until well after the launch had been completed. They would even be willing to take quite big risks if they thought it might pay off. As it is, the fact they changed their mind show they have clearly decided that doing that would be too big a risk for Office for the benefit it is likely to give. In other words:
they don't see as much upside for Windows 8 tablets as they claim
they see much more risk for MS Office than they claim
Releasing for Android is a clear statement that Microsoft do not believe in the Windows 8 strategy themselves.
Devil's Advocate: Does Google releasing iOS apps mean that Google is giving a clear statement that Google doesn't believe in the Android strategy?
Good question. The answer is that Google's Android strategy has always been simply to force the Mobile OS market open. They make their money on advertising and information distribution. Releasing iOS apps is the Android strategy because Apple would have blocked (under the "duplicating core functionality" clause of the App store terms) it if they didn't have the competition from Android devices with better maps. Google will get just the same money from the advertising through the map app as it would get from an Android phone. That's all they want.
This is partly that Google doesn't really care. It's also partly that most decent people don't want to compete by immorally leveraging monopolies, such as Apple's monopoly over iOS app distribution, even if they are probably in the clear on legal technicalities to do with definitions of the "apps market". Microsoft is a special case of a company which will do almost anything it can get away with. Apple seems to have been fighting Microsoft so long that it is beginning to become like them.
only allowed to use apps Microsoft (or Apple) choose to allow you to use
special app required for syncronisation and file transfers (though iTunes can be bypassed e.g. with drop box).
lack wired networking (though that's true of most Android devices too and is probably a good trade off)
your purchase goes to help fund tech-industry destroying lawsuits
not quite enough media storage for a decent music and video library (you really want 64GB)
Apart from that its mostly night and day. The iPad has a serious screen where you can expect to really view photos and documents. This is much more of a toy.
It's very interesting to note that my post that turns out to be completely right was one of the few that got a negative mod. I guess that the shills with mod points don't want anybody to notice that about half of the initial sales of surface will be from Microsoft to Microsoft.
Hand in your geek card now. You should be able to type on a Quinkey let alone a thing which has a full alphabet shown in front of you and allows you to do corrections. Damnit.
Mainly because people who make 400+ dollar purchases tend to do research before putting the cash down. They are unlikely to be fooled by the salesman into thinking it's an iPad equivalent. Also the screen specification, especially resolution matches a $200 device pretty closely and with Microsoft in the desperate situation they are it would make sense to seriously subsidise. Low end Android tablets without access to the real market place have already shown that there is a space here. Again, if you put down almost half a grand on a device like this your friends are going to be laughing behind your back. It's quite possible to put down $199 and just say something like "oh; I just wanted to see what it was like and just cost a hundred and a bit".
Microsoft is developing Office for iPad and Android. Honestly, I don't understand why they're doing it for Android. Maybe it was part of their cross-license agreement with Samsung?
Releasing for Android is a clear statement that Microsoft do not believe in the Windows 8 strategy themselves. Microsoft know that Android is the most likely dominant operating system of the future and the know that they must be visible there or they risk one of the better alternatives becoming more popular than Office. In the end, Windows will be sacrificed to save the company.
The high price of these tablets for a much worse specification than an iPad is also a statement. Windows will not die. Just as people are using VMS today, Windows will be with us in ten years time. However it will gradually become irrelevant for normal people and prices will be ramped up. They will squeeze every last little extra drop of blood out of customers with CIOs so incompetent that they have almost total lock in.
If you're clueless enough to follow a shortened/obfuscated link, you deserve whatever you get.
Well, normally, for something like being forced to see a Goatse, I would agree with you 100%. Especially as the link hiding services mostly provide ways to de-obfuscate links. Especially as you could turn off images and scripting before logging in. However, nobody deserves to be added to the surface pre-order queue and have it automatically listed on their facebook wall. Some things are just beyond inhumane.
God; I was afraid it was a link to a browser exploit that would automatically add you to the queue to get a surface. After thinking that Goatse seems quite innocent.
After tapping on glass, it's bound to feel like a significant improvement...
If you have Android there are competing virtual keyboards (including e.g. Swype) and you'll find they can be much better than normal alphabetic keyboard layout. In fact once you get used to them they are faster and more practical than a portable keyboard too.
Who would be dumb enough to pay the same price as a 3rd generation device to guinea pig a 1st gen device from a company that is known to suck at first releases?
The same people as bought Windows phones. Which is to say Microsoft Employees and associates. Unlike almost every other company which will deliver your device to you, they even force their employees to go out and buy through normal retail channels to make it look as if there's a rush of people who are interested in the product.
This is another repeat of the "Nokia wouldn't be able to make their phones special under Android so they would just compete on price". I'm still trying to work out how the shills can even say this "couldn't differentiate" bullshit with a straight face. Let's get this right:
with Android you have the source code and support for almost all available hardware; You are allowed to change the interface and a number of companies have already done son. Also you are allowed to add any applications you want of your own. This makes it impossible to differentiate your phone from other ones
With Windows; there is a small set of limited standard hardware; There is no support for proper cameras which is why PureView had to be crippled to work on it. The interface is controlled by Microsoft and is pretty much the same commodity system on all phones. The apps are forced to a secondary role by Microsoft controlled "hubs" which limit the possibilities for presenting data. All of this adds up to an operating system where Nokia has excellent opportunities to differentiate.
Based on their inability to differentiate using Android, Nokia were wise to go with Microsoft, where not only will they have to compete with the same much cheaper "Korean and Chinese manufacturers" (who seem to be actually getting MS backing to release ahead of Nokia) but they will also have to compete with Microsoft a company which sees its self as devices company.
'
Really; that's basically what you are saying. Astounding.
There are different levels of data with different levels of worth:
name and address - lets them send junk mail - pennies
hobbies interests and profession - lets them target you specifically - small dollars
recent web searches / current activities - lets them advertise product that you are currently trying to buy - tens of dollars per year
detailed personal information - lets them impersonate you - tens to hundreds of dollars
full personal account and password info - lets them clean out your bank account / take out loans in your name which are likely to be enforceable in court - thousands to tens of thousands
Notice that, in the end, your data may actually be worth more than you are. Traditional marketing had wet dreams around full access to the first two. Google provides services equivalent to the use of the first two and controlled access the next. Facebook is providing temporary use of the fourth by allowing apps to do things as if they were you and beginning to gather the fifth. Notice that your Microsoft Hotmail account is protected with your mobile phone number and that Facebook keeps both of those together even if you have never created a Facebook account. This gets to be worse if your mobile phone account is controlled from your email address as is becoming more and more common.
The difference is, when the people go to the streets to protest, the government is afraid because people may have guns, meaning, if pushed, they can use force against the government.
This stuff has to be stopped long before they get the chance to call you a terrorist. Small arms just act as a security blanket keeping you quiet. Nukes and heavy weapons are denied from "the people" everywhere. For fairly good reasons too.
The traditional place has always been cryptome.org. Please note that that's the place where early Wikileaks leaks were leaked giving some of us an insight into the possibility that Wikilieaks would turn out to be less than fully competent. The question you should ask yourself is a) how do I get it there safely (the same applies to Wikileaks drop of points) and anonymously b) how do I make sure there isn't a water mark or some other code which makes the information traceable to me or someone close to me.
As far as "blow up in your face" goes, if you are relying on Wikileaks to secure yourself then you are demented. You need to make sure that any leak you do is absolutely untraceable, especially by the site that you leak through. God knows how you do that. Unsecured WiFi? Freenet + Tor? Some distant internet cafe whilst travelling in disguise by bus (to avoid license plate recognition). Whatever; keep it simple; involve the minimum number of people (that should mean one - yourself). Now that's what "inquiring minds" really want to know. The google searches around this are remarkably and interestingly useless. If you are planning to leak material then I wouldn't bother trying them:-) Remember "the issue is whether you are paranoid enough".
No in theory. However, in real life most quantum crypto systems don't 100% match the theory so this is yet another hint that they have to be designed much more carefully than many people initially thought. For example, the typical analysis of a quantum crypto system assumes that one single photon is sent at time. In real systems that is sometimes true and sometimes not (two come out at the same time e.g.). If you measure carefully enough you may be able to pick a small proportion of the spare photons and learn something about the traffic. Probably this will give some hints to someone about how to measure some practical quantum crypto systems.
So; theoretical quantum cryptography is not broken. Practical quantum crypto is already broken. If you are investing in such a system, then ensure that you are using the strongest available standard crypto and the most carefully designed operational procedures as well as using quantum crypto. Otherwise you are spending money in the wrong place.
I don't know why my question got modded down to oblivion.
The most likely reason is because it mentioned Microsoft in a negative light. Whilst there's a fairly large number of people on Slashdot who are anti-MS and will mod things up which might give bad information against MS, there's also a group of very determined moderators who go in early and try to push those posts below the 1 level. This means that the posts a) quite likely won't get noticed at all and b) will certainly be missed by the initial rush of people coming in to the article just after it's been put on the front page. I see that with many of my popular posts which go +1 / 0 / -1 / 0 / +1... +5 / +4 / +5 and sometimes get vindictively modded down after a long time when no other moderators will be going through the article (presumably with the aim of taking away mod points??).
To some extent it's just the way the mod system works. On the other hand it's pretty clear moderation manipulation and it's interesting that Slashdot doesn't seem to do much about it. The most important thing is that Moderators must read at -1 and should definitely work to counteract moderation manipulation wherever they can detect it.
I know FAT32 is limited to 32Gb and I don't understand why you can't implement an SD format with an ext3/4 format. I can certainly format mine this way. Having it recognized by android is another matter. It would certainly be more satisfying for HTC, Google & Co to distribute an ext3/4 driver for Windows than to pay MS for something that is not necessary.
Probably there are a bunch of hardware patents that you only easily get licenses for when you take the whole standard via a RAND agreement. A device which didn't implement the new FAT formats would not get access to those patents and so would be practically impossible to implement.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, as to whether the purchase of Motorola is a sign that Google's on the decline is an interesting question.
Up until the Motorola purchase, I honestly believed that Android was at risk of total destruction by Microsoft and their ilk. This is no longer possible. If Android was pushed out of the market then Microsoft would no longer have any leverage over Motorola. Motorola have a large number of fundamental patents on mobile technology only some of which have to be licensed under RAND obligations. If they were pushed out of mobile they could completely stop any other mobile manufacturer of their choice. Possibly even, if there wasn't a fundamental intervention in patent law, which would also eviscerate Microsoft's patent strategy, block all other mobile manufacturers.
When you saw how much money was spent trying to stop Google getting Nortel, an important but still second rank player in the mobile patents game (first rank is basically Qualcomm, Ericsson, Nokia and Motorola; second rank would be Nortel, Alcatel Lucent, Samsung etc. I'm not including people like DoCoMo), think how much of a disaster it was for Microsoft when Google managed to get Motorola on the rebound. The entire patent game was changed by the Motorola purchase. What were once fights to the death are now merely price negotiations.
That's what you use a tablet without a keyboard for, because it's not convenient to use for anything else. Why do you assume that a tablet that can be also turned into something resembling a laptop would not be used as one?
My assumption is basically, because if I want a laptop I will get a laptop. Having the keyboard attached makes it easier to use for typing since you can rest it on your lap. Also because a laptop would have access to proper desktop applications; this device will not. Perhaps a "pro" tablet would be expected to be used in a different way.
Oh, and I'm not necessarily saying that Surface does this right - I'm more partial to the way Asus tackled it with Transformer (and they have a slew of Win8 devices announced along the same lines). Ask some of the owners of those things how they use them...
Agreed. At that point you have something which is more or less a proper laptop. That I can understand. However the cost becomes higher.
Your physical comparisons are mostly pointless, except for pixel density / resolution (which is, indeed, a glaring issue). Why is a 7" tablet better than a 10" one?
Weight is, for most people, the big issue. Your tablet is something you carry in your handbag (it's very interesting to note that adult women are the most heavy users of iPads) or work bag. People are mostly choosing them for the specific reason that they want to avoid carrying or even having a laptop. As far as 7" goes; that same explanation applies but I will expand: Apple originally planned the iPad more like a computer. They thought that people would have to input on it lots. For most people, and especially the use cases I mentioned, that's not true. A 7" tablet gives more than enough ability to input whilst these are very much personal hand held devices. The smaller screen size can be compensated for by holding it closer if needed.
I have no idea what you mean by "tested apps",
Come on. This isn't even funny I mean tested by people you know. You can type in "ipad Greek banking" and you will find that there is a special "custom-made debt-restructuring app" which was "handed out to the leadership team" and helped save Greece from financial collapse. Search for anything on the internet and you can find a review of related iPad apps telling you which one will actually solve your problem.
There are already probably more different physical accessories planned for the new iPhone 5 external connector than there are apps in the Windows store. This is the difference between "throwing some money at the problem and hoping it will stick" and having a self sustaining "eco-system".
On the other hand, there is no "reasonable number of WP based apps", bad or not, because Win8 does not run Windows Phone apps - it's a completely different framework, and only somewhat compatible (considerable porting effort required) on source code level.
Sorry; my misunderstanding there.
The question is whether Microsoft's pricing the Surface the same as the iPad is a wise business move.
What everybody here seems to be missing is that these are mostly going to be bought by Microsoft employees who have been allowed to get them for free. This means that the higher the price, the more the expense, the more Microsoft gets to tax deduct. This price makes perfect sense when you realise that.
I use Linux all the time, but when my friends ask about using it, I honestly tell them it might not do everything they want it to do, because they'll expect it to run some custom Access DB they built to track their CD collection or something.
At last a sensible Linux user. Tis so easy. Don't push them, let them pull themselves. Just let them use Linux as well / in a VM / using proper hardware/ get them hooked and then let them eventually ditch Windows only when they get tired of having to deal with it.
iPad - 2592 x 1944 pixels
Surface - 1366x768 pixels
Nexus 7 - 1280x800 pixels
Advantage iPad - Loser Surface
Errr... right.
Except we should actually review what a tablet is used for. Mostly viewing things; documents; emails; films; etc. in situations where you don't have a table to put a computer on.
iPad - 652 grams
Surface - 676 grams
Nexus 7 - 340 grams
Advantage - Nexus 7 - Loser Surface
iPad - 2592 x 1944 pixels
Surface - 1280 x 720 pixels
Nexus 7 - 1280x800 pixels
Advantage iPad - Loser Surface
iPad - 10 inches (approx - 241.2 x 185.7 x 9.4 mm)
Surface - 10.60 inches
Nexus 7 - 7 inches
Advantage Nexus - Loser Surface
iPad - 10 hours
Surface - estimated 7.5 hours Nexus 7 - 10 hours web browsing
Advantage iPad/Nexus - Loser Surface
iPad - Lots of good apps
Surface - no tested apps at all; a reasonable number of pretty bad WP based apps (not all "fart apps" nowadays)
Nexus 7 - Lots and lots of apps and plenty of good ones
Advantage iPad or Nexus depending on opinion and interests - Loser Surface In the things which matter we have a consistent loser.
I don't want to be horrible, but I think you are thinking like a techie :-) (actually you will probably like that :-)
The perception is that the only reason you'd buy Android is because you don't have the money for an iPad.
This was at least partly true before, but seems to have changed with the Samsung lawsuit. This caused a massive increase in sales of top end Galaxy tablets. The reason seems to be that Android has finally been understood as "a tablet OS like iPad, not a computer OS like I can't use" and at the same time "so good Apple had to sue to compete". Plenty of people are also going for the Galaxy Note and Nexus 7, for example, through choice.
Pricing the Surface at the same point as the iPad sends out a message to consumers that says "we think the Surface is as good as the iPad". Microsoft clearly want to position Windows 8/RT on tablets as a premium product, it doesn't want to compete with Android, it wants to compete with Apple and iOS.
This is the same mistake as has been made by HP. The problem is there's another message here; "professional computing platform; not simple system for people to do what they want". This message is reinforced by the fact that Microsoft Office is there and Gmail and Google Maps are not.
That won't stop other manufacturers from making cheaper tablets, but Microsoft are setting the bar high. If someone else (e.g. Acer) make a cheap WinRT tablet it will be seen as an affordable version of a premium product, not a "cheap" product.
If you look up prices, you will see that other manufacturer's Windows tablets are actually coming in as more expensive. This looks like there are major design flaws in Windows 8.
You're asking Slashdot for a Apple vs Microsoft comparison on a product none of us have used? Well that's surely going to be reasonable and fact based discussion.
Ahh. Ad hominem. Well actually.. a) We have lots of Microsoft shills on Slashdot; this has the benefit that all the Microsoft positive "talking points" and news will be posted and everyone posting here makes really sure that anti-Microsoft points are clearly justified. b) This is one of the few places where the people writing aren't soon expecting to be making half of their income from Microsoft adverts. c) there are lots of people who can read specifications and work things out.
For example; there has lots of breathless talk about Microsoft's keyboard covers all over the media. On Slashdot it's been clearly pointed out that the keyboard being pushed has almost no travel and you will have to buy an alternative more expensive one if you want to be able to type reasonably.
Within five minutes of this article going up, someone had posted the Microsoft story that this will be able to run "Windows" apps. This is the kind of thing which is reported without question elsewhere. Here on Slashdot you will see that actually the apps for this new tablet are a completely new ("Metro"/"Modern interface") type.
Or they've recognised a promising revenue stream and are going after it. MS won't let Windows go easily - it's too much part of their historic and current success.
I think you have misunderstood me. I agree Microsoft will fight to the death for Windows. However, that is not the death of Microsoft; The death of their competitors; the death some of their lesser products; the death of their partners certainly. MS office, however, is not on the table. Normally they would be willing to wait with even starting working in an Android release until long after WP9 just to ensure that there is space for the Windows division to benefit from having office. Now, however, we know that office will be available for Android before even WP8 has been released. There is a reason for that, and the reason is that they already know that there is a strong risk that Office gets completely displaced by the new office suites for Android or the ones developing for iOS as those become cross platform and available to more people than MS Office. An even worse fate would be if the current trend that people simply don't need an office suite - it turns out email + presentation tools is enough for most people - simply continues.
Microsoft is now fighting a multi-front war. They spent so much effort locking out Linux from access to desktop protocols that they have now locked themselves out of the future of computing, which looks like a combination of iOS and Android. They have also allowed a vast group of users who don't need an office suite to grow up. Even at the beginning of this year they were clearly stating that they would never produce Office for the iPad. If the main priority was Windows, then there would be no chance of any information about releases of Office for non-Windows devices until well after the launch had been completed. They would even be willing to take quite big risks if they thought it might pay off. As it is, the fact they changed their mind show they have clearly decided that doing that would be too big a risk for Office for the benefit it is likely to give. In other words:
Devil's Advocate: Does Google releasing iOS apps mean that Google is giving a clear statement that Google doesn't believe in the Android strategy?
Good question. The answer is that Google's Android strategy has always been simply to force the Mobile OS market open. They make their money on advertising and information distribution. Releasing iOS apps is the Android strategy because Apple would have blocked (under the "duplicating core functionality" clause of the App store terms) it if they didn't have the competition from Android devices with better maps. Google will get just the same money from the advertising through the map app as it would get from an Android phone. That's all they want.
This is partly that Google doesn't really care. It's also partly that most decent people don't want to compete by immorally leveraging monopolies, such as Apple's monopoly over iOS app distribution, even if they are probably in the clear on legal technicalities to do with definitions of the "apps market". Microsoft is a special case of a company which will do almost anything it can get away with. Apple seems to have been fighting Microsoft so long that it is beginning to become like them.
Anything else similar between the devices?
Apart from that its mostly night and day. The iPad has a serious screen where you can expect to really view photos and documents. This is much more of a toy.
It's very interesting to note that my post that turns out to be completely right was one of the few that got a negative mod. I guess that the shills with mod points don't want anybody to notice that about half of the initial sales of surface will be from Microsoft to Microsoft.
Hand in your geek card now. You should be able to type on a Quinkey let alone a thing which has a full alphabet shown in front of you and allows you to do corrections. Damnit.
Why would you ever expect the surface to be $200?
Mainly because people who make 400+ dollar purchases tend to do research before putting the cash down. They are unlikely to be fooled by the salesman into thinking it's an iPad equivalent. Also the screen specification, especially resolution matches a $200 device pretty closely and with Microsoft in the desperate situation they are it would make sense to seriously subsidise. Low end Android tablets without access to the real market place have already shown that there is a space here. Again, if you put down almost half a grand on a device like this your friends are going to be laughing behind your back. It's quite possible to put down $199 and just say something like "oh; I just wanted to see what it was like and just cost a hundred and a bit".
Microsoft is developing Office for iPad and Android. Honestly, I don't understand why they're doing it for Android. Maybe it was part of their cross-license agreement with Samsung?
Many people think that Microsoft makes almost all their money on Windows. However this is not true. in the last three years to July, "the Business group has been Microsoft's top money-maker in 10 out of 13 quarters" . Everywhere else; in development tools, with partners, with games and in anything they can get publicity or perception from Microsoft can afford to sacrifice other things. With the Office Division, Microsoft's future and money is available.
Releasing for Android is a clear statement that Microsoft do not believe in the Windows 8 strategy themselves. Microsoft know that Android is the most likely dominant operating system of the future and the know that they must be visible there or they risk one of the better alternatives becoming more popular than Office. In the end, Windows will be sacrificed to save the company.
The high price of these tablets for a much worse specification than an iPad is also a statement. Windows will not die. Just as people are using VMS today, Windows will be with us in ten years time. However it will gradually become irrelevant for normal people and prices will be ramped up. They will squeeze every last little extra drop of blood out of customers with CIOs so incompetent that they have almost total lock in.
If you're clueless enough to follow a shortened/obfuscated link, you deserve whatever you get.
Well, normally, for something like being forced to see a Goatse, I would agree with you 100%. Especially as the link hiding services mostly provide ways to de-obfuscate links. Especially as you could turn off images and scripting before logging in. However, nobody deserves to be added to the surface pre-order queue and have it automatically listed on their facebook wall. Some things are just beyond inhumane.
Mod parent down.
God; I was afraid it was a link to a browser exploit that would automatically add you to the queue to get a surface. After thinking that Goatse seems quite innocent.
After tapping on glass, it's bound to feel like a significant improvement...
If you have Android there are competing virtual keyboards (including e.g. Swype) and you'll find they can be much better than normal alphabetic keyboard layout. In fact once you get used to them they are faster and more practical than a portable keyboard too.
Who would be dumb enough to pay the same price as a 3rd generation device to guinea pig a 1st gen device from a company that is known to suck at first releases?
The same people as bought Windows phones. Which is to say Microsoft Employees and associates. Unlike almost every other company which will deliver your device to you, they even force their employees to go out and buy through normal retail channels to make it look as if there's a rush of people who are interested in the product.
' Really; that's basically what you are saying. Astounding.
Notice that, in the end, your data may actually be worth more than you are. Traditional marketing had wet dreams around full access to the first two. Google provides services equivalent to the use of the first two and controlled access the next. Facebook is providing temporary use of the fourth by allowing apps to do things as if they were you and beginning to gather the fifth. Notice that your Microsoft Hotmail account is protected with your mobile phone number and that Facebook keeps both of those together even if you have never created a Facebook account. This gets to be worse if your mobile phone account is controlled from your email address as is becoming more and more common.
The difference is, when the people go to the streets to protest, the government is afraid because people may have guns, meaning, if pushed, they can use force against the government.
Totally 100%. Look at Afghanistan and places like that where everyone has a gun and they totally had success resisting professional armed services with their own guns. No asymmetry between people with Apache's and mini-guns and people with normal civilian assault rifles.
This stuff has to be stopped long before they get the chance to call you a terrorist. Small arms just act as a security blanket keeping you quiet. Nukes and heavy weapons are denied from "the people" everywhere. For fairly good reasons too.
The traditional place has always been cryptome.org. Please note that that's the place where early Wikileaks leaks were leaked giving some of us an insight into the possibility that Wikilieaks would turn out to be less than fully competent. The question you should ask yourself is a) how do I get it there safely (the same applies to Wikileaks drop of points) and anonymously b) how do I make sure there isn't a water mark or some other code which makes the information traceable to me or someone close to me.
As far as "blow up in your face" goes, if you are relying on Wikileaks to secure yourself then you are demented. You need to make sure that any leak you do is absolutely untraceable, especially by the site that you leak through. God knows how you do that. Unsecured WiFi? Freenet + Tor? Some distant internet cafe whilst travelling in disguise by bus (to avoid license plate recognition). Whatever; keep it simple; involve the minimum number of people (that should mean one - yourself). Now that's what "inquiring minds" really want to know. The google searches around this are remarkably and interestingly useless. If you are planning to leak material then I wouldn't bother trying them :-) Remember "the issue is whether you are paranoid enough".
As I understand it:
No in theory. However, in real life most quantum crypto systems don't 100% match the theory so this is yet another hint that they have to be designed much more carefully than many people initially thought. For example, the typical analysis of a quantum crypto system assumes that one single photon is sent at time. In real systems that is sometimes true and sometimes not (two come out at the same time e.g.). If you measure carefully enough you may be able to pick a small proportion of the spare photons and learn something about the traffic. Probably this will give some hints to someone about how to measure some practical quantum crypto systems.
So; theoretical quantum cryptography is not broken. Practical quantum crypto is already broken. If you are investing in such a system, then ensure that you are using the strongest available standard crypto and the most carefully designed operational procedures as well as using quantum crypto. Otherwise you are spending money in the wrong place.
I don't know why my question got modded down to oblivion.
The most likely reason is because it mentioned Microsoft in a negative light. Whilst there's a fairly large number of people on Slashdot who are anti-MS and will mod things up which might give bad information against MS, there's also a group of very determined moderators who go in early and try to push those posts below the 1 level. This means that the posts a) quite likely won't get noticed at all and b) will certainly be missed by the initial rush of people coming in to the article just after it's been put on the front page. I see that with many of my popular posts which go +1 / 0 / -1 / 0 / +1 ... +5 / +4 / +5 and sometimes get vindictively modded down after a long time when no other moderators will be going through the article (presumably with the aim of taking away mod points??).
To some extent it's just the way the mod system works. On the other hand it's pretty clear moderation manipulation and it's interesting that Slashdot doesn't seem to do much about it. The most important thing is that Moderators must read at -1 and should definitely work to counteract moderation manipulation wherever they can detect it.
I know FAT32 is limited to 32Gb and I don't understand why you can't implement an SD format with an ext3/4 format. I can certainly format mine this way. Having it recognized by android is another matter. It would certainly be more satisfying for HTC, Google & Co to distribute an ext3/4 driver for Windows than to pay MS for something that is not necessary.
Probably there are a bunch of hardware patents that you only easily get licenses for when you take the whole standard via a RAND agreement. A device which didn't implement the new FAT formats would not get access to those patents and so would be practically impossible to implement.