Now all of these things also predated Android. And yet I repeat, they chose to copy Blackberry's design until the iPhone came out at which point they changed to copying the iPhone. So even if those things you mentioned were pre-cursors, the Android team either didn't recognise them, or didn't want them.
Does that matter? At the time the popular smartphone approach was what RIM was doing with the Blackberry so that's the way Android went, to try and get into that market. Apple changed the game by taking pre-existing ideas, concepts and demos and built their product around those, it was successful, they profited massively from it and owned the market for quite some time. So what's the problem?
The problem with that meme is that in the Apple vs Samsung case, designs for the iPhone were presented in evidence dating back to August 2005. More than a year before LG announced the LG Prada.
Which shows that nobody had to copy anybody to come up with a form factor like that, it was obvious as is proven by the fact that Apple and LG both ended up developing the same form factor device in parallel without influence from eachother.
I take your point but I still think the biggest problem in getting them into homes is going to be price.
As you say the value proposition is being able to stream your existing library to your loungeroom which may be enticing for the average gamer who isn't too interested in anything requiring a keyboard & mouse (a control system that isn't really suited to couch play) but at the cost of a few hundred dollars that may not be particularly attractive or justifiable.
Then there is the hardcore gamer market but realistically they're more likely to dump that extra few hundred into new hardware than a streaming device.
Lastly you have the casual game market - the one Ouya went after - but with a relatively high price and a small library that isn't going to go well either.
Maybe you're right and this will push Linux gaming system adoption past the tipping point, but I wouldn't hold my breath on that.
The laptop is cheaper, or has better specs at the same price.
What laptop can you get that has a touchscreen, high-resolution display and active digitizer with stylus for cheaper? And if you don't need those things then why would you be considering the Surface Pro?
It runs a version of Windows, but not necessarily the one the IT department supports or mission critical software is qualified to run on. That in itself generates extra expense which has to be factored into the TCO.
Well that's a "maybe", but there's no reason you can't install Windows 7 or even Linux on it, what kind of idiot sys admins do we have here?
You have to move your hand all of three inches to use a typical laptop’s trackpad, you don’t have to stop to pick up anything or lift and extend your arm awkwardly. So unless there’s actually a dire need to use the computer while walking around those features are an utterly redundant ergonomic disaster, and a cheaper laptop is the better choice.
So why are you even considering it then? You're just complaining that an apple isn't an orange, well it isn't supposed to be and if it's an orange you want then buy an orange.
As far as my question But what's the difference between a surface pro and a laptop? is concerned you've pretty much answered it - and hopefully answered a question for yourself - the Surface Pro is a laptop but with additional features on top, if you don't need those then paying for them seems kind of redundant don't you think?
Missing the point. Nobody wants 2 devices to do the job of one.
Which is why they can just use 1 Windows PC.
Meanwhile, the fact that they ship with linux and will have valves marketing/sales muscle behind them mean that there will likely be a huge pile of installed Linux boxes in the nearish future.
You really think people are going to pay hundreds of dollars for a steambox just to stream content from their PC to their TV? This concept is just a value-add, Valve needs to make the steambox a compelling standalone product for people to buy it.
Its silly to pretend that won't entice some development for the platofrm.
That's what people said about Ouya too. Just because it exists doesn't mean people are going to use it.
Even though it has the capability, it's not really the same in practice, because they don't allow non-metro apps to be developed for it. You can't just recompile desktop Firefox for ARM, because it won't be signed, and therefore won't run.
That's been their biggest mistake in the whole "Windows RT" fiasco. What made Windows so successful was a decoupling of the hardware and software - so no need to buy hardware from a specific vendor just to run a specific operating system so you could run a particular program - but also the ability to run whatever you wanted on it without restriction.
If Windows RT did not restrict what you could run then I probably would have bought a Surface.
Most people who actually have to do work want a laptop or desktop, not a tablet.
But what's the difference between a surface pro and a laptop? It is a laptop, it runs the same operating system, has a keyboard/mouse but also has a touchscreen and stylus.
Wasn't expecting them to be designed for touch. But using non-touch apps on a Windows tablet is the major selling point of a Windows tablet.
And you can do that, the best way is to use the keyboard & mouse which is supported on Windows tablets and is what they were designed for.
This is why it is a flop, thus far.
You consider it a "flop" because it serves a niche market rather than the broad audience that the iPad does, it's very similar to the Nokia N900 - a lot of hardware and a lot of freedom to do a lot of things but ultimately most people don't need all that stuff and will be satisfied with the limitations of iDevices.
And I can certainly relate to that, on the smartphone side I had an N900 and you could do just about anything on it but 90% of the things I wanted a smartphone for were very clumsy to do on the N900 so I replaced it with an iPhone and accepted the limitations it came with in favor of the subset of things it does really well.
After all, not that long ago, they introduced RMAH to D3 despite objections from their playerbase.
Not that long ago they removed the RMAH from D3 due to objections from their playerbase.
Ultimately they will do whatever is necessary to preserve their customers' enjoyment of the playing the game together which is most likely why they - and many others - are moving to keeping so much of the game server-side in more recent titles. There's no law to protect legitimate players from cheaters so they are obviously going after whatever they can and restricting availability of game content in the future. If they go to more of a game content streaming model you can have all the freedom you want, you just won't have anything to exercise that freedom on.
Not in the short term no. But it theoretically makes the linux based steambox a viable gaming platform, since windows gamers can add one next to the TV and play windows games on it.
I wouldn't agree with that, if you're going to stream games from your gaming PC then the client doesn't have to be powerful enough to run those games so you spend your money on one decent game server and cheap low-end client(s). If your living room PC is powerful enough to play those games then most people would probably just run Windows (or even dual boot) and do away with a multi-system streaming solution in the first place.
It's pretty neat feature but ultimately it isn't going to help the grow the Linux and OS X game library, if anything it will be detrimental to it as people will build a decent Windows-based games server and then just stream Windows games (since that's what the vast majority of the library supports) to low-end Linux, OS X or Windows clients.
Don't forget this thing is all locked down at the BIOS (UEFI) level preventing bootloaders that microsoft does not like from working. So it is pretty hard to make it a linux tablet.
No it isn't, just switch off secure boot and you're good to go.
Wait, you actually believe you'll be able to see the resolution difference when you're sitting normally?
It isn't a matter of believing it, I know I can and if you can't tell the difference between 216PPI and 128PPI displays at normal viewing distance then go and see an optometrist, your vision is severely impaired.
Also, you take your touch screen & digitizer. Which doesn't work for Office or the classic desktop. They're REALLY not part of a value proposition if they're useless.
Actually it does work for the classic desktop, pretty damn good in applications like Photoshop, Illustrator, Painter, etc... But if you don't want that they why would you even be considering a product that includes it which you are obviously going to be paying for?
And obviously you left out the valid point about the touch screen, or is that something else you don't want but also feel it shouldn't increase the price of the device?
All of the windows apps I want Windows for are win32
Then they clearly aren't going to be designed for touch. The Leap Motion doesn't work particularly well with Cygwin either but that's the user's problem, not the product.
You can't "consume" content any more than you can "steal" content, funny how usage of one term in this context gets so heavily berated while the other doesn't.
About half the Android tablets I've seen are used for dual purposes - making phone calls, as well as viewing mails, videos, Whatsapp and what not.
Who is making calls on an Android tablet? But really that's neither here or there, the keys points here are that you are talking about Android which lacks proper content creation applications (like Photoshop, Premier, AutoCAD, 3ds MAX, Maya, Blender, Solidworks, Office, iWork, iMovie, Garageband, etc) that are available on Windows, OSX, iOS and even some on desktop Linux. So it is no wonder you dont see content creation there.
Content creation is best done on a laptop or ideally, on a desktop.
The Surface Pro is a laptop and all you need to do is plug it into a larger monitor to make it essentially a desktop. When using the active digitizer I certainly prefer a tablet (and the Surface Pro works in that form factor too) than a laptop or desktop.
So a 12" portable device is neither good for consuming content, making phone calls or creating content. So who is the target user for the Surface Pro 3?
Why isn't it good for "consuming content" or creating content? Remembering that it is not just a tablet but also a laptop, do people not use 12 and 13" laptops for those things? If not what do they use them for?
Basically all the things you listed "making phone calls, as well as viewing mails, videos, Whatsapp and what not" are things people do on phones so if that were all they did then nobody would have tablets anyway.
Or I can go buy a notebook for $300, keep my Nexus 7, and not shell out huge amounts of money for one big fucking tablet.
Yes, yes you could do that if you prefer a cumbersome alternative - that also lacks key features like an active digitizer - just because it's cheaper.
You could cobble together a cheap, clumsy alternative to just about any integrated solution, that isn't news, it also isn't desirable outside of those who's number one priority is cheapness.
Come on, surely on "News for Nerds" it's not going to be that hard to reach the conclusion that the subtitles are there so there's probably some way to extract them and lo, somebody (well actually there are various ones) has already created a tool to do just that.
And just to be clear none of that actually explains how iMessage works specifically. I mean aside from actually testing it you there is no way to find out that "delivered" means delivered to the server rather than delivered to a device.
I won't. And neither do you, so why do you insist I'm taking away choice, when really, no matter what happens, someone is taking away some choice from someone? I just don't understand the point.
You want them to remove the option for a user to choose DRM or not, you want to take away people's freedom of choice and thankfully they will not allow that sort of bigotry. I have the right to not exercise a particular, specific freedom (one that I did not previously have) in a specific context for a specific time and you can not deny me that freedom - as much as you want to.
You're also eliminating my choice by implementing DRM in Firefox, because I refuse to use anything that supports 'features' like this that are specifically implemented for the purposes of DRM.
Then don't support it. You don't have any right to dictate their decisions.
If you really wanted "choice," just use a different browser.
Slashdot Mirror
Now all of these things also predated Android. And yet I repeat, they chose to copy Blackberry's design until the iPhone came out at which point they changed to copying the iPhone. So even if those things you mentioned were pre-cursors, the Android team either didn't recognise them, or didn't want them.
Does that matter? At the time the popular smartphone approach was what RIM was doing with the Blackberry so that's the way Android went, to try and get into that market. Apple changed the game by taking pre-existing ideas, concepts and demos and built their product around those, it was successful, they profited massively from it and owned the market for quite some time. So what's the problem?
The problem with that meme is that in the Apple vs Samsung case, designs for the iPhone were presented in evidence dating back to August 2005. More than a year before LG announced the LG Prada.
Which shows that nobody had to copy anybody to come up with a form factor like that, it was obvious as is proven by the fact that Apple and LG both ended up developing the same form factor device in parallel without influence from eachother.
I take your point but I still think the biggest problem in getting them into homes is going to be price.
As you say the value proposition is being able to stream your existing library to your loungeroom which may be enticing for the average gamer who isn't too interested in anything requiring a keyboard & mouse (a control system that isn't really suited to couch play) but at the cost of a few hundred dollars that may not be particularly attractive or justifiable.
Then there is the hardcore gamer market but realistically they're more likely to dump that extra few hundred into new hardware than a streaming device.
Lastly you have the casual game market - the one Ouya went after - but with a relatively high price and a small library that isn't going to go well either.
Maybe you're right and this will push Linux gaming system adoption past the tipping point, but I wouldn't hold my breath on that.
The laptop is cheaper, or has better specs at the same price.
What laptop can you get that has a touchscreen, high-resolution display and active digitizer with stylus for cheaper? And if you don't need those things then why would you be considering the Surface Pro?
It runs a version of Windows, but not necessarily the one the IT department supports or mission critical software is qualified to run on. That in itself generates extra expense which has to be factored into the TCO.
Well that's a "maybe", but there's no reason you can't install Windows 7 or even Linux on it, what kind of idiot sys admins do we have here?
You have to move your hand all of three inches to use a typical laptop’s trackpad, you don’t have to stop to pick up anything or lift and extend your arm awkwardly. So unless there’s actually a dire need to use the computer while walking around those features are an utterly redundant ergonomic disaster, and a cheaper laptop is the better choice.
So why are you even considering it then? You're just complaining that an apple isn't an orange, well it isn't supposed to be and if it's an orange you want then buy an orange.
As far as my question But what's the difference between a surface pro and a laptop? is concerned you've pretty much answered it - and hopefully answered a question for yourself - the Surface Pro is a laptop but with additional features on top, if you don't need those then paying for them seems kind of redundant don't you think?
Missing the point. Nobody wants 2 devices to do the job of one.
Which is why they can just use 1 Windows PC.
Meanwhile, the fact that they ship with linux and will have valves marketing/sales muscle behind them mean that there will likely be a huge pile of installed Linux boxes in the nearish future.
You really think people are going to pay hundreds of dollars for a steambox just to stream content from their PC to their TV? This concept is just a value-add, Valve needs to make the steambox a compelling standalone product for people to buy it.
Its silly to pretend that won't entice some development for the platofrm.
That's what people said about Ouya too. Just because it exists doesn't mean people are going to use it.
Even though it has the capability, it's not really the same in practice, because they don't allow non-metro apps to be developed for it. You can't just recompile desktop Firefox for ARM, because it won't be signed, and therefore won't run.
That's been their biggest mistake in the whole "Windows RT" fiasco. What made Windows so successful was a decoupling of the hardware and software - so no need to buy hardware from a specific vendor just to run a specific operating system so you could run a particular program - but also the ability to run whatever you wanted on it without restriction.
If Windows RT did not restrict what you could run then I probably would have bought a Surface.
But why would you want a Windows tablet if you're not running Windows on anything else?
Why would you want an iOS tablet if you're not running iOS on anything else? How many systems do I really need that run the same operating system?
Most people who actually have to do work want a laptop or desktop, not a tablet.
But what's the difference between a surface pro and a laptop? It is a laptop, it runs the same operating system, has a keyboard/mouse but also has a touchscreen and stylus.
Except nobody really WANTS to use a 'game server'; its merely a means to an end. That being able to play windows games on linux/steamboxes.
By the same token nobody WANTS to run Windows or Linux or OS X, they are merely a means to an end which - in this case - is to play games.
The target market will definitely prefer direct support for linux/steamboxes over having to use a gaming server.
So just install Windows on your steambox and you have can eliminate the game server completely AND get the full game library.
Meanwhile we don't really know where microsoft is heading.
You don't know where Valve is heading with their proprietary Steam platform either.
Wasn't expecting them to be designed for touch. But using non-touch apps on a Windows tablet is the major selling point of a Windows tablet.
And you can do that, the best way is to use the keyboard & mouse which is supported on Windows tablets and is what they were designed for.
This is why it is a flop, thus far.
You consider it a "flop" because it serves a niche market rather than the broad audience that the iPad does, it's very similar to the Nokia N900 - a lot of hardware and a lot of freedom to do a lot of things but ultimately most people don't need all that stuff and will be satisfied with the limitations of iDevices.
And I can certainly relate to that, on the smartphone side I had an N900 and you could do just about anything on it but 90% of the things I wanted a smartphone for were very clumsy to do on the N900 so I replaced it with an iPhone and accepted the limitations it came with in favor of the subset of things it does really well.
After all, not that long ago, they introduced RMAH to D3 despite objections from their playerbase.
Not that long ago they removed the RMAH from D3 due to objections from their playerbase.
Ultimately they will do whatever is necessary to preserve their customers' enjoyment of the playing the game together which is most likely why they - and many others - are moving to keeping so much of the game server-side in more recent titles. There's no law to protect legitimate players from cheaters so they are obviously going after whatever they can and restricting availability of game content in the future. If they go to more of a game content streaming model you can have all the freedom you want, you just won't have anything to exercise that freedom on.
Not in the short term no. But it theoretically makes the linux based steambox a viable gaming platform, since windows gamers can add one next to the TV and play windows games on it.
I wouldn't agree with that, if you're going to stream games from your gaming PC then the client doesn't have to be powerful enough to run those games so you spend your money on one decent game server and cheap low-end client(s). If your living room PC is powerful enough to play those games then most people would probably just run Windows (or even dual boot) and do away with a multi-system streaming solution in the first place.
It's pretty neat feature but ultimately it isn't going to help the grow the Linux and OS X game library, if anything it will be detrimental to it as people will build a decent Windows-based games server and then just stream Windows games (since that's what the vast majority of the library supports) to low-end Linux, OS X or Windows clients.
Yes you can, you have always been able to with the Surface Pro line, it's a PC.
Don't forget this thing is all locked down at the BIOS (UEFI) level preventing bootloaders that microsoft does not like from working. So it is pretty hard to make it a linux tablet.
No it isn't, just switch off secure boot and you're good to go.
Wait, you actually believe you'll be able to see the resolution difference when you're sitting normally?
It isn't a matter of believing it, I know I can and if you can't tell the difference between 216PPI and 128PPI displays at normal viewing distance then go and see an optometrist, your vision is severely impaired.
Also, you take your touch screen & digitizer. Which doesn't work for Office or the classic desktop. They're REALLY not part of a value proposition if they're useless.
Actually it does work for the classic desktop, pretty damn good in applications like Photoshop, Illustrator, Painter, etc... But if you don't want that they why would you even be considering a product that includes it which you are obviously going to be paying for?
And obviously you left out the valid point about the touch screen, or is that something else you don't want but also feel it shouldn't increase the price of the device?
It should have been out 2-5 years ago (Windows 7 was originally touted as being touch friendly also, prior to release).
If it was that big a deal why didn't OpenOffice or somebody else produce such a version?
All of the windows apps I want Windows for are win32
Then they clearly aren't going to be designed for touch. The Leap Motion doesn't work particularly well with Cygwin either but that's the user's problem, not the product.
it runs some microsoft operating system
And replacing the operating system on a computer is just not possible is it?
In my view tablets are best for consuming content
You can't "consume" content any more than you can "steal" content, funny how usage of one term in this context gets so heavily berated while the other doesn't.
About half the Android tablets I've seen are used for dual purposes - making phone calls, as well as viewing mails, videos, Whatsapp and what not.
Who is making calls on an Android tablet? But really that's neither here or there, the keys points here are that you are talking about Android which lacks proper content creation applications (like Photoshop, Premier, AutoCAD, 3ds MAX, Maya, Blender, Solidworks, Office, iWork, iMovie, Garageband, etc) that are available on Windows, OSX, iOS and even some on desktop Linux. So it is no wonder you dont see content creation there.
Content creation is best done on a laptop or ideally, on a desktop.
The Surface Pro is a laptop and all you need to do is plug it into a larger monitor to make it essentially a desktop. When using the active digitizer I certainly prefer a tablet (and the Surface Pro works in that form factor too) than a laptop or desktop.
So a 12" portable device is neither good for consuming content, making phone calls or creating content. So who is the target user for the Surface Pro 3?
Why isn't it good for "consuming content" or creating content? Remembering that it is not just a tablet but also a laptop, do people not use 12 and 13" laptops for those things? If not what do they use them for?
Basically all the things you listed "making phone calls, as well as viewing mails, videos, Whatsapp and what not" are things people do on phones so if that were all they did then nobody would have tablets anyway.
Or I can go buy a notebook for $300, keep my Nexus 7, and not shell out huge amounts of money for one big fucking tablet.
Yes, yes you could do that if you prefer a cumbersome alternative - that also lacks key features like an active digitizer - just because it's cheaper.
You could cobble together a cheap, clumsy alternative to just about any integrated solution, that isn't news, it also isn't desirable outside of those who's number one priority is cheapness.
Come on, surely on "News for Nerds" it's not going to be that hard to reach the conclusion that the subtitles are there so there's probably some way to extract them and lo, somebody (well actually there are various ones) has already created a tool to do just that.
And just to be clear none of that actually explains how iMessage works specifically. I mean aside from actually testing it you there is no way to find out that "delivered" means delivered to the server rather than delivered to a device.
I won't. And neither do you, so why do you insist I'm taking away choice, when really, no matter what happens, someone is taking away some choice from someone? I just don't understand the point.
You want them to remove the option for a user to choose DRM or not, you want to take away people's freedom of choice and thankfully they will not allow that sort of bigotry. I have the right to not exercise a particular, specific freedom (one that I did not previously have) in a specific context for a specific time and you can not deny me that freedom - as much as you want to.
You're also eliminating my choice by implementing DRM in Firefox, because I refuse to use anything that supports 'features' like this that are specifically implemented for the purposes of DRM.
Then don't support it. You don't have any right to dictate their decisions.
If you really wanted "choice," just use a different browser.
I don't need to, I can use Firefox :P