That's what people said about the Galaxy Note. Somehow though last August they hit 10 million sales after less than a year. Many billions of dollars in revenue will help soothe the pain of being made fun of.
Actually when Android first came out phone makers didn't want to make a high-end "candybar" phone because it would be ridiculously expensive, so Google paid to have one made and the demand proved itself enough that phone makers came onboard and Google could retire their own-brand phone. Now Android is the number one smartphone OS, nearly 3x ahead of its nearest competitor and by itself over two thirds of global unit sales. This is probably that evolution again.
OEMs ought to buy a hint one day and when Google says "we're thinking of making an X..." leap into that briar patch. God knows OEMs have made enough failed Wintel and Windows Phone products to hit their career fail quota, and on the winners they make bupkiss, nada, zilch. Google doesn't want to own-brand their products and they're not great at it, but if OEMs will stand in the the way of progress Google needs must march around them and move on. Waiting and begging for people to let go of their Windows obsession was for the old way when Google was not a more influential, successful and bigger company than Microsoft is. Google are becoming less patient with impediments to their vision of the future. Once it was "we think this might be neat." Now it's "help or get out of the way."
Driving Google to get good at product manufacturing, sales and delivery is not a good incumbent device OEM survival strategy. If OEMs make them do that, Google will be as good at it as everything else they set their minds to. I.E. Google will eat the entire client device OEM ecosystem if they must to drive progress. They'd rather not - the progress is what they want and if the OEMs will deliver it they can put their effort in other places. But if they must, they will.
It's a notebook smaller in every dimension than the Macbook Air with higher resolution, the same processor and RAM. Storage is lighter, but that's OK because ChromeOS / Linux doesn't require as much storage. This is not like the Surface Pro that requires 35GB of storage for the OS, Office crudware and recovery partition - the OS probably takes 3GB altogether and wouldn't even install on this little space. It's about the same weight, slightly less battery life, comes in a 3G wireless version that Macbook Air doesn't. Mini Displayport can drive a nice 30" high-def monitor, or your bigscreen with an adapter, just like the Macbook Air.
Not quite sure what you're on about with Outlook and Exchange. Both of those are going to cripple themselves to not play well with anything that isn't Wintel until their dying day - which will because of this be sooner rather than later. It turns out that "Outlook and Exchange" are not quite the definition of "email" except to the history impaired. The sort of machine that used to serve as an email client wouldn't even make a decent watch now, and it used to be the size of a refrigerator.
The small local space is perhaps the point. You can install a real Linux on it if you want to and run ChromeOS in a virtual machine. The processor even supports VT-x. That would be real nice. Since it's already Linux you can count on the drivers. You can remote then to any sort of machine you want to interact with. But any sort of Windows on the local client device is just not going to work for lack of drivers and as you note, storage space. This is not a box to put your pirated Windows 7 on, let alone Windows 8.
If you want to complain about something on this device the I/O features don't include USB 3.0 or Thunderbolt, so it lacks even a full gigabit of connectivity to data in the outside world. There are a couple dozen people in the world who are going to be disappointed by that.
They broke compatibility with every update. But only for the programs they wanted to compete with. That is how they won with office. Now they are breaking compatibility with everybody all at once.
Intel has it. They're just not selling it to you. They have to figure out how to prevent us from running webserver VMs on this hardware before they release it. Unfortunately for them it's a lost cause. The people making these decisions really don't understand the mechanics of the situation, or how clever software can extract the utility of a GPU and deliver it to a cpu. Intel is now run by business geeks who really don't understand the tech. From here the end is clear.
Intel sells server chips into the HPC market. These guys can run LINPACK on a TI99, and would if it gave good metrics per watt and dollar. Intel has a corporate culture to protect their server CPU margins by not "cannibalizing" it with alternatives that cost less and do more. Same on desktop.
Their problem is that if they won't eat the slow-moving members of their tribe, there's another tribe who will.
Intel has a cabinet where a whole bunch of innovation is stored up against a firm competitor. Now might be a good time to pry it open.
The solution to what problem? The problem as Microsoft sees it is that they're not selling mobile licenses and as we embrace the mobile future without them people - including important decision makers - are demanding cross-platform server side solutions and app interoperability to deliver business-critical line of business apps. That is a problem for Microsoft and nobody else. For the rest of us, the iPhone and Android and non-Microsoft solutions on the server side are solving this problem quite fine.
Windows Phone might be a solution to this problem but it's a problem those of us who don't have a blue Microsoft badge don't have.
BTW: they threw billions at XBox, not millions. They never did break even and now that it's time for another platform refresh they never will. All they did is cause stress for console vendors including Sony - who is also a Windows PC client partner.
8-12% of the market is both unachievable and not worth trying for. It's niche. It has no leverage to control server side solutions, retailer shelf space, app developers, toolkit developers, carriers. 30% might give Microsoft the sway they need to succeed at acting how they're acting now: as the king of all they survey, shouting orders at a mass that is ignoring them - much like that dishevelled guy at the Greyhound station. It's telling that you think this is a height they might aspire to.
In Android you can get a barcode scanner software keyboard. It uses the camera. With this I scan barcodes into anything that takes text input including data capture websites and spreadsheets.
I don't think barcode scanning is the WinMo killer app. Can it even do QR codes?
The purpose of Microsoft Research is to patent every possible thing so nobody else can use it. Not to come up with some new compelling thing. It's about controlling innovation, not creating it.
So you think that what he's saying here is that they WERE lagging, but now that they have a commanding 3% global mobile share he's happy they're taking their market leadership to the next level? How... interesting.
If only there were some part of the spectrum we could use to look against the cold background of space for an object that absorbs all the visible light that hits it in a region of space where the sunlight pours down more than at noon in the Sahara, 24 hours a day. If only we could invent 'heat vision' something like that should stand out like a neon sign. Too bad that is impossible.
Developers use "game engines" and add their own features, maps, rules and art to make their games quite often. A very popular one is "Source," which is made by Valve - who is putting together this Linux game sales platform. By porting their own games to Linux they are proving the Source engine's flexibility and capability and beating down an easy path for their Source Engine licensees to capture a new market early in its upswing. Quite often a game developer would not have that much extra work to do to put their game in Linux because 99% of the development isn't in the programming but in the collateral: the art, story, characters, rules, balance tuning and such that transform the game engine into the specific game. These non-programmatic portions of the game that constitute 99% of the game's development effort are by design of the game engine platform independent. Budding game developers really need that because the option to put their game on a console, iPhone or Android tablet has to stay open so that if they find the winning "fun" formula they can rake in the big bucks by selling it in every market without laying out the funds to build it again from scratch for each new platform. This is also developing good data for what hardware a Steambox console needs to have to be successful, as client hardware metrics are measured and reported in actual game play along with things like time of play, duration of engagement with the game and so on.
There are many engines that started on desktop Linux for ease and speed of development and migrated elsewhere for mass-marketability. The Doom engine is a classic example. Before there was Doom iD as a budding company had a Linux only game called "Smashing Pumpkins Into Small Piles Of Putrid Debris" that was a popular Linux network game to prove the engine. This is why while you're playing Doom3 if you type SPISPOPD you can pass through walls. It's also the origin of the name of the band "Smashing Pumpkins". In SPISPOPD most of the monsters were pumpkins.
The trail of breadcrumbs: Game engine developers include game editors in their games to encourage fan spinoffs and identify promising young developers of the art for recruiting and also improve the value of the game engine with fan spinoff maps, arts, and other such things as well as to prove their game engine as a platform easily built upon - all the while adding value for the people who bought the game without spending extra money on development. Darwinian development rocks!
You're just demonstrating your ignorance again. SUSE is the Linux backed by Novell which was acquired in bankruptcy by Attachmate: the company that's legendary for sucking the last bit of marrow from the bones of the fallen. They make VT-100 terminal applications with Microsoft Office plugins for goodness sake. And nobody really knows who owns and controls them. Any real FOSS geek is going to look at that provenance and migrate.
Novell was the hero when they were battling the hated SCOG to death but in the meantime they forgot to manage the rest of their business properly and got flanked.
Slashdot Mirror
Modern Windows will run as well on this hardware as Google Chrome would on a TRS-80. The efficiency of the software counts too.
That's what people said about the Galaxy Note. Somehow though last August they hit 10 million sales after less than a year. Many billions of dollars in revenue will help soothe the pain of being made fun of.
Actually when Android first came out phone makers didn't want to make a high-end "candybar" phone because it would be ridiculously expensive, so Google paid to have one made and the demand proved itself enough that phone makers came onboard and Google could retire their own-brand phone. Now Android is the number one smartphone OS, nearly 3x ahead of its nearest competitor and by itself over two thirds of global unit sales. This is probably that evolution again.
OEMs ought to buy a hint one day and when Google says "we're thinking of making an X..." leap into that briar patch. God knows OEMs have made enough failed Wintel and Windows Phone products to hit their career fail quota, and on the winners they make bupkiss, nada, zilch. Google doesn't want to own-brand their products and they're not great at it, but if OEMs will stand in the the way of progress Google needs must march around them and move on. Waiting and begging for people to let go of their Windows obsession was for the old way when Google was not a more influential, successful and bigger company than Microsoft is. Google are becoming less patient with impediments to their vision of the future. Once it was "we think this might be neat." Now it's "help or get out of the way."
Driving Google to get good at product manufacturing, sales and delivery is not a good incumbent device OEM survival strategy. If OEMs make them do that, Google will be as good at it as everything else they set their minds to. I.E. Google will eat the entire client device OEM ecosystem if they must to drive progress. They'd rather not - the progress is what they want and if the OEMs will deliver it they can put their effort in other places. But if they must, they will.
It's a notebook smaller in every dimension than the Macbook Air with higher resolution, the same processor and RAM. Storage is lighter, but that's OK because ChromeOS / Linux doesn't require as much storage. This is not like the Surface Pro that requires 35GB of storage for the OS, Office crudware and recovery partition - the OS probably takes 3GB altogether and wouldn't even install on this little space. It's about the same weight, slightly less battery life, comes in a 3G wireless version that Macbook Air doesn't. Mini Displayport can drive a nice 30" high-def monitor, or your bigscreen with an adapter, just like the Macbook Air.
Not quite sure what you're on about with Outlook and Exchange. Both of those are going to cripple themselves to not play well with anything that isn't Wintel until their dying day - which will because of this be sooner rather than later. It turns out that "Outlook and Exchange" are not quite the definition of "email" except to the history impaired. The sort of machine that used to serve as an email client wouldn't even make a decent watch now, and it used to be the size of a refrigerator.
The small local space is perhaps the point. You can install a real Linux on it if you want to and run ChromeOS in a virtual machine. The processor even supports VT-x. That would be real nice. Since it's already Linux you can count on the drivers. You can remote then to any sort of machine you want to interact with. But any sort of Windows on the local client device is just not going to work for lack of drivers and as you note, storage space. This is not a box to put your pirated Windows 7 on, let alone Windows 8.
If you want to complain about something on this device the I/O features don't include USB 3.0 or Thunderbolt, so it lacks even a full gigabit of connectivity to data in the outside world. There are a couple dozen people in the world who are going to be disappointed by that.
They broke compatibility with every update. But only for the programs they wanted to compete with. That is how they won with office. Now they are breaking compatibility with everybody all at once.
If Nokia still sold Symbian, it would still take 20% of the smartphone market. Even if they didn't change it. People really liked it for some reason.
If Microsoft's billions could make a compelling mobile product, it would have done so already.
Thank you. You have encapsulated in a single post why Microsoft is failing - while trying to defend their choices. That is a meta fail.
Intel has it. They're just not selling it to you. They have to figure out how to prevent us from running webserver VMs on this hardware before they release it. Unfortunately for them it's a lost cause. The people making these decisions really don't understand the mechanics of the situation, or how clever software can extract the utility of a GPU and deliver it to a cpu. Intel is now run by business geeks who really don't understand the tech. From here the end is clear.
I think ISVs are on to their "culling" scheme, and eager for a level field.
Intel sells server chips into the HPC market. These guys can run LINPACK on a TI99, and would if it gave good metrics per watt and dollar. Intel has a corporate culture to protect their server CPU margins by not "cannibalizing" it with alternatives that cost less and do more. Same on desktop.
Their problem is that if they won't eat the slow-moving members of their tribe, there's another tribe who will.
Intel has a cabinet where a whole bunch of innovation is stored up against a firm competitor. Now might be a good time to pry it open.
Windows Phone is the solution.
The solution to what problem? The problem as Microsoft sees it is that they're not selling mobile licenses and as we embrace the mobile future without them people - including important decision makers - are demanding cross-platform server side solutions and app interoperability to deliver business-critical line of business apps. That is a problem for Microsoft and nobody else. For the rest of us, the iPhone and Android and non-Microsoft solutions on the server side are solving this problem quite fine.
Windows Phone might be a solution to this problem but it's a problem those of us who don't have a blue Microsoft badge don't have.
BTW: they threw billions at XBox, not millions. They never did break even and now that it's time for another platform refresh they never will. All they did is cause stress for console vendors including Sony - who is also a Windows PC client partner.
8-12% of the market is both unachievable and not worth trying for. It's niche. It has no leverage to control server side solutions, retailer shelf space, app developers, toolkit developers, carriers. 30% might give Microsoft the sway they need to succeed at acting how they're acting now: as the king of all they survey, shouting orders at a mass that is ignoring them - much like that dishevelled guy at the Greyhound station. It's telling that you think this is a height they might aspire to.
No.
In Android you can get a barcode scanner software keyboard. It uses the camera. With this I scan barcodes into anything that takes text input including data capture websites and spreadsheets.
I don't think barcode scanning is the WinMo killer app. Can it even do QR codes?
Were? They're still selling them. We could ask today's buyer about their experience.
The purpose of Microsoft Research is to patent every possible thing so nobody else can use it. Not to come up with some new compelling thing. It's about controlling innovation, not creating it.
So you think that what he's saying here is that they WERE lagging, but now that they have a commanding 3% global mobile share he's happy they're taking their market leadership to the next level? How... interesting.
Radar doesn't work at these ranges.
There is no profit in PCs anyway.
It would probably be helpful to google "global warming asteroid"
I'm saddened that it actually is insightful.
If only there were some part of the spectrum we could use to look against the cold background of space for an object that absorbs all the visible light that hits it in a region of space where the sunlight pours down more than at noon in the Sahara, 24 hours a day. If only we could invent 'heat vision' something like that should stand out like a neon sign. Too bad that is impossible.
Developers use "game engines" and add their own features, maps, rules and art to make their games quite often. A very popular one is "Source," which is made by Valve - who is putting together this Linux game sales platform. By porting their own games to Linux they are proving the Source engine's flexibility and capability and beating down an easy path for their Source Engine licensees to capture a new market early in its upswing. Quite often a game developer would not have that much extra work to do to put their game in Linux because 99% of the development isn't in the programming but in the collateral: the art, story, characters, rules, balance tuning and such that transform the game engine into the specific game. These non-programmatic portions of the game that constitute 99% of the game's development effort are by design of the game engine platform independent. Budding game developers really need that because the option to put their game on a console, iPhone or Android tablet has to stay open so that if they find the winning "fun" formula they can rake in the big bucks by selling it in every market without laying out the funds to build it again from scratch for each new platform. This is also developing good data for what hardware a Steambox console needs to have to be successful, as client hardware metrics are measured and reported in actual game play along with things like time of play, duration of engagement with the game and so on.
There are many engines that started on desktop Linux for ease and speed of development and migrated elsewhere for mass-marketability. The Doom engine is a classic example. Before there was Doom iD as a budding company had a Linux only game called "Smashing Pumpkins Into Small Piles Of Putrid Debris" that was a popular Linux network game to prove the engine. This is why while you're playing Doom3 if you type SPISPOPD you can pass through walls. It's also the origin of the name of the band "Smashing Pumpkins". In SPISPOPD most of the monsters were pumpkins.
The trail of breadcrumbs: Game engine developers include game editors in their games to encourage fan spinoffs and identify promising young developers of the art for recruiting and also improve the value of the game engine with fan spinoff maps, arts, and other such things as well as to prove their game engine as a platform easily built upon - all the while adding value for the people who bought the game without spending extra money on development. Darwinian development rocks!
Damned with faint praise.
You're just demonstrating your ignorance again. SUSE is the Linux backed by Novell which was acquired in bankruptcy by Attachmate: the company that's legendary for sucking the last bit of marrow from the bones of the fallen. They make VT-100 terminal applications with Microsoft Office plugins for goodness sake. And nobody really knows who owns and controls them. Any real FOSS geek is going to look at that provenance and migrate.
Novell was the hero when they were battling the hated SCOG to death but in the meantime they forgot to manage the rest of their business properly and got flanked.
Guess who is panel-stuffing the W3C.