Smart. Microsoft is going the way of a radicalized religion, ostracizing the churches that made and support them. When the Lenovos and Acers of the world are distancing themselves from Windows and spreading resources in other directions, you know Windows is 'doing it wrong'.
[PW] Acer Chairman: Expect Less Windows, More Android/Chromebooks
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Microsoft tried and failed with Windows RT, but Windows will continue to lead the PC market for a long time. I don't see PC's or Windows becoming much less relevant, it's merely Microsoft's attempt to break into an established tablet market that has failed, much like their phones. My Lumia 920 is useless when all my friends are using Snapchat on Android
![frown.gif]()
When I find an Android phone with a camera that matches the one in the Lumia 920, I'll probably get that instead. Admittedly I thought Windows Phone 8 would be better, but I got the Lumia 920 for the hardware and I'm quite satisfied overall. The lack of support turned out to be a bigger issue than I expected though.
Quote:
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.
![frown.gif]()
Quote:
The only real use of Windows PC has been the same since Win95. It runs everything and provides aOriginally Posted by Shrak
It's a new world out there, wonder if Windows will be able to evolve properly to stay relevant. Seems like the only real use for actual Windows PC's is professional work these days and even that is changing.
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.
Quote:
HTC OneOriginally Posted by B!0HaZard
Microsoft tried and failed with Windows RT, but Windows will continue to lead the PC market for a long time. I don't see PC's or Windows becoming much less relevant, it's merely Microsoft's attempt to break into an established tablet market that has failed, much like their phones. My Lumia 920 is useless when all my friends are using Snapchat on AndroidWhen I find an Android phone with a camera that matches the one in the Lumia 920, I'll probably get that instead. Admittedly I thought Windows Phone 8 would be better, but I got the Lumia 920 for the hardware and I'm quite satisfied overall. The lack of support turned out to be a bigger issue than I expected though.![frown.gif]()
Quote:
I don't think legacy software on RT would have gotten anywhere. ARM is too weak to run x86 code in emulation. What they should have done is just put WP8 on tablets and not bothered with developing RT at all. If Android and iOS can run on both phones and tablets, then why can't WP8? In fact, I think I read an article somewhere last winter that Nokia actually has a tablet running WP8 in its labs, but Microsoft doesn't want them releasing such a device.
They should have just released Windows 8 with the traditional desktop interface, with an option to use Metro if you want, and called WP8 "Windows Mobile 8", and used it for both phones and tablets, leveraging the growing number of apps that they're having developed for WP8. And the Surface RT never should have existed. That should have come out only with Intel CPU's and real Windows 8, maybe even with Alien Dalvik added to access the entire Android ecosystem.
OSX is fine from a productivity standpoint, although from the perspective of someone who uses both every day, I'd still rather use Windows 7.Originally Posted by Domino
The only real use of Windows PC has been the same since Win95. It runs everything and provides a
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.![frown.gif]()
I don't think legacy software on RT would have gotten anywhere. ARM is too weak to run x86 code in emulation. What they should have done is just put WP8 on tablets and not bothered with developing RT at all. If Android and iOS can run on both phones and tablets, then why can't WP8? In fact, I think I read an article somewhere last winter that Nokia actually has a tablet running WP8 in its labs, but Microsoft doesn't want them releasing such a device.
They should have just released Windows 8 with the traditional desktop interface, with an option to use Metro if you want, and called WP8 "Windows Mobile 8", and used it for both phones and tablets, leveraging the growing number of apps that they're having developed for WP8. And the Surface RT never should have existed. That should have come out only with Intel CPU's and real Windows 8, maybe even with Alien Dalvik added to access the entire Android ecosystem.
Quote:
Last I checked, it lacked significant amounts of motion stabilization when filming video. The S3 certainly does, that phone shoots horrible videos. Or maybe it's the other way around and the HTC One does the horrible videos. Anyway, not impressed by either.Originally Posted by Domino
HTC One
2
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.
Quote:
![rolleyes.gif]()
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
![mad.gif]()
), 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.
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.
Quote:
Saying OS X is a decade behind technology wise seems to me like a pretty provocative thing to say...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.![frown.gif]()
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
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.
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
