Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA • Hacker News Board

Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA

#31

Post by zanny » Sat, Jan 19, 2013, 5:47 PM UTC

btipling wrote: post #22

mittermayr wrote: post #9

to be honest, what fascinates me is that microsoft seems to have invested a lot of work the past few years to bring forward a pretty decent line up of integrated products. if you want windows and office like you had, that's fine. and much of the windows 8 UI disaster was actually made up by the press to have a great story, even that one video with the guy's dad. i was shocked when i saw that. then i installed windows…

I imagine, since you say you love C# are you a .Net programmer? Others have pointed out that .Net programmers are Microsoft's biggest cheerleaders these days and have a conflict of interest in speaking about Microsoft's future since maybe they have staked their career on .NET.

Personally, if I wanted an interpreted language with bytecode, I much prefer C#. Much nicer language than Java. But the windows tools suck in my book (VS is slow as hell, their compilers are arcane, etc) and I much prefer Mono. The nice thing about Mono is that you can target every platform ever with it, including mobile.

So if I were contracted to write something business class in something interpreted, I'd definitely put C# with Mono at the top of the list. It is much nicer than Java to develop in, and has platform parity.

Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA

#32

Post by rednukleus » Sat, Jan 19, 2013, 5:51 PM UTC

hippee-lee wrote: post #23

rednukleus wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At the end of 2013, they should be a even less relevant than today. At the moment, Microsoft own slightly less than 100% of the enterprise desktop market. At the end of 2013 they will almost certainly own slightly less than 100% of the enterprise desktop market. You live in a bubble.

True. But also at the end of 2013 even more employees will be bringing their own devices - phones and tablets to work so they don't have the enterprise lap top. These devices will run Android and iOS in a roughly 50/50 share of OS distribution. The enterprise supports the work their employees need to do by giving them the traditional desktop tools - this is Microsofts market and always has been. But more and more tho…

Very few people in the enterprise are going to stop using their Windows desktop/laptop, they are just going to supplement it with their phone/tablet - at least in 2013 anyway. People have been doing that for over a decade with Blackberrys.

Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA

#33

Post by Amanda_Panda » Sat, Jan 19, 2013, 5:58 PM UTC

Yeah, even as a .Net developer who generally has high praise for C# and VS, I agree that the WinRT Surface was DOA. Its exactly like those Android tablets that came out in 2011 with Android 3.x-really nice devices, definitely not garbage, but aren't worth the price they are being sold at. The difference is that was two years ago and Android tablets are finally moving ahead, after dropping in price (Fire, Nook, N7) and improving massively in terms of the OS on parity with iOS (JB and up). MSFT can't afford to enter the market like this two years late.

I'd say that the tablet should'e been priced at 299, with the keyboard cover thrown in. Maybe that'd have increased its popularity. On the plus side it also has file system access, command line, and powershell (for the 1% of the market who are geeky Windows sysadmin types). It also should've been sold at a lot of different stores right out of the gate.

Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA

#34

Post by relaxatorium » Sat, Jan 19, 2013, 5:59 PM UTC

What's up with the repeated use of the term "fondleslab" here? Is that actual UK slang, or is the author just a weirdo?

I could not concentrate on any points made in this article because the repeated use of that term was wildly offputting.

Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA

#35

Post by macspoofing » Sat, Jan 19, 2013, 6:01 PM UTC

brudgers wrote: post #2

If Microsoft was a B2C company, the article would be spot on. They are not, however, Apple. They are primarily B2B. Windows didn't come to dominate the desktop because consumers loved it. It dominates because it provides a value proposition to businesses. Success with consumers is part of that value proposition, and one of the things which gives it an advantage over Linux. RT is a long term strategy. It's not a table…

Microsoft is and wants to be a B2C company. Half their initiatives, from Xbox, WinPhone, to Zune to Media Centers, and yes even Windows OS is squarely directed at consumers.

Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA

#36

Post by SoftwareMaven » Sat, Jan 19, 2013, 6:07 PM UTC

brudgers wrote: post #12

kabdib wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Xbox is "B2C", in a very big way. The impression I got was that it was intended for consumers. Why else would you only sell it in a Microsoft store? (I did see one in a Best Buy. It was buried in with the other tablets, while there was a shining white table with iPads a few feet away, with actual people around it fondling the merchandise). It's true that MS did give most of their full-time employees free Surfaces. I…

Microsoft have always eaten their own dogfood. That's where Server and Office and Project came from...and obviously, Visual Studio. Giving RT devices to employees continues this tradition. It's also evidence that this is an enterprise strategy, not B2C. I used Windows 2.0. I was using WordPerfect when the first versions of Word were being developed. Surface is an MVP. [edit] A Note about Xbox. The way Microsoft handl…

If its an enterprise play, how come its software doesn't tie into the enterprise? No outlook, no power in Office, no AD integration: these are all things critical in the enterprise.

MS is certainly going to take the intel-based Surface into the enterprise. This one seems like a weird chimaera, sitting between the enterprise world and the consumer world. And that won't capture the average tablet buyer's imagination.

Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA

#37

Post by btbuilder » Sat, Jan 19, 2013, 6:14 PM UTC

relaxatorium wrote: post #34

What's up with the repeated use of the term "fondleslab" here? Is that actual UK slang, or is the author just a weirdo? I could not concentrate on any points made in this article because the repeated use of that term was wildly offputting.

It is in regular use by all authors on The Register.

Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA

#38

Post by SoftwareMaven » Sat, Jan 19, 2013, 6:15 PM UTC

rbanffy wrote: post #29

I'm old enough to remember Apple II's (and personal computers in general) were the BYOD of the late 70's and early 80's.

That's an interesting point, as it shows that today's BYOD could crystallize into another homogenous world. I kind of thing it won't, though, just because, in the late 70s and early 80s, personal computers were rare and relatively expensive things. In today's BYOD, we are talking much greater proliferation at much lower cost.

Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA

#39

Post by brudgers » Sat, Jan 19, 2013, 6:18 PM UTC

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #36

brudgers wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft have always eaten their own dogfood. That's where Server and Office and Project came from...and obviously, Visual Studio. Giving RT devices to employees continues this tradition. It's also evidence that this is an enterprise strategy, not B2C. I used Windows 2.0. I was using WordPerfect when the first versions of Word were being developed. Surface is an MVP. [edit] A Note about Xbox. The way Microsoft handl…

If its an enterprise play, how come its software doesn't tie into the enterprise? No outlook, no power in Office, no AD integration: these are all things critical in the enterprise. MS is certainly going to take the intel-based Surface into the enterprise. This one seems like a weird chimaera, sitting between the enterprise world and the consumer world. And that won't capture the average tablet buyer's imagination.

That's a good question. The answer I think is that Microsoft's ARM strategy is long term.

Instead of kludging around in the OS, you refactor Outlook, Office, Active Directory, etc. to better address the new reality of less powerful devices becoming prevalent. Clearly that's already happening as Microsoft pursues improvements in the cloud. It is also the same direction the companies the techpress love to compare them against - Apple and Google - are pursuing.

Microsoft's bet is that they will be better at delivering cloud services to enterprise (and thereby to consumers). I think the evidence makes this a pretty safe bet.

Re: Microsoft's ARM blunder: Why Windows RT was DOA

#40

Post by pinaceae » Sat, Jan 19, 2013, 6:18 PM UTC

brudgers wrote: post #2

If Microsoft was a B2C company, the article would be spot on. They are not, however, Apple. They are primarily B2B. Windows didn't come to dominate the desktop because consumers loved it. It dominates because it provides a value proposition to businesses. Success with consumers is part of that value proposition, and one of the things which gives it an advantage over Linux. RT is a long term strategy. It's not a table…

you should tell that to Microsoft then, because they themselves position RT for consumers.

source: we are working with MS on building a Win8 app. i am quoting MS themselves here.

RT does not connect to AD. it is not enterprise ready in any form.