I think this is a good move on their part, Microsoft seems content with not doing anything right with Windows. As web apps become more and more prominent, the OS is starting to matter less and less and Microsoft hasn't come up with a good solution to deal with that. In fact, they've just made it tougher to deal with the OS, driving more people away from it.
Whether it's Windows RT not being able to run Windows applications, or Windows 8 not having a start button, Microsoft is not doing a good job of convincing people to stick with Windows. Microsoft's biggest strength right now is that there isn't a good enough alternative for a lot of their customers, which is going to change a lot in the next few years. People don't want Windows, they just need it.
Originally Posted by Domino I sure in heck don't want to go back a decade in technology and switch to a less secure, poorer performance, more restrictive, OSX
. Windows just made a bad marketing move on WinRT and forcing a tablet environment on desktop Win8 platforms. If they made Win8 have a default tablet view for tablets and a default desktop view for desktop it would have been a completely different story. If they allowed RT to use legacy software, then it might have been fine. Windows is still technical more advanced then it's competition; Windows is just making poor marketing choices.
OSX and Android don't serve the level of productivity, nor efficiency as any Win8 device. You are left with devices that cater to specifics.
But then again, you are posting just to stir a community wide argument. Man, provocative posters these days.
Saying OS X is a decade behind technology wise seems to me like a pretty provocative thing to say...
Anyways, you say OS X and Android aren't as good productivity and efficiency wise compared to Windows. That seems pretty ridiculous to me as productivity and efficiency are decided by the end user. If users are doing more work in Android, or they're buying Macbooks, it's because they feel that those OS's will make them more productive and will be more efficient to use. You could say the most productive OS is Linux since you can customize everything about the UI to optimize it for your needs, but it might not be (ignore the fact I'm calling Linux an OS you know what I'm saying).
Personally, despite all my little personal issues I have with it (like the slow spaces switching animation grrrr), I find I'm much more productive in OS X, since I'm much more familiar with UNIX than Windows. Windows gives me a lot of headache (and Ubuntu gave me too many troubles on Apple hardware, thanks Apple
), and honestly it's not worth it. I'd rather play games in OS X with a lower framerate (not only from it being an OS X game but also because I OC my GPU by a considerable amount in Windows, a functionality sadly not available yet in OS X) than reboot to play them in Windows. The OS as a whole is a much smoother and polished experience.
Different people use different OS's. Overclocking enthusiast? You'd be crazy to use anything but Windows. Professional singer? iPad, iPhone, good to go. Web Developer? Linux, OS X, or Windows. Outfitting a small clothing shop's staff? Chromebooks, Android tablets.
OS X and Android don't serve the same level of productivity as Windows for you specifically.
You have to think about the millions of users whose needs differ from yours. The other OS's are more efficient and productive than Windows for a lot of users, which is why Microsoft isn't doing so hot as of late. Alternatives are popping up, and Windows isn't offering any new advantages in regards to efficiency and productivity compared to what their competitors are doing.