Intel Core i5 11400F processor review
Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro SL 3600 MHz 32GB review
ASRock Z590 Extreme review
Gigabyte Radeon RX 6700 XT Gaming OC review
Corsair K70 RGB TKL keyboard review
Corsair RM650x (2021) power supply review
be quiet! Silent Loop 2 280mm review
Corsair K55 RGB PRO XT keyboard review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - March 2021
Intel Core i9-11900K processor review
ASUS disappointed with Windows RT
Asus’s Jonney Shih has made some crazy bets over the years — teeny-tiny laptops, phones that turn into tablets, and even a seven-inch tablet that can be held to the ear to make phone calls. shih1 But, so far, the only bet that Shih said hasn’t panned out was the company’s move to build products based on Windows RT, the slimmed-down version of Windows 8 that runs on ARM-based processors. Asus is pulling back on Windows RT, Chairman Says.
“The result is not very promising,” the Asus chairman told AllThingsD, noting both Microsoft’s well-publicized issues with the Surface RT as well as Asus’s own VivoTab RT.
While not completely ruling out future Windows RT products, Shih said that, when it comes to Windows, he is putting all of his time and energy into devices that use Intel chips.
People still use a lot of classic Windows apps, Shih said.
Microsoft made other mistakes too, he said, noting that one of the most popular apps for Windows 8 is a program to bring back the classic Start menu. (With Windows 8.1, Microsoft is itself bringing back the Start button to the Windows desktop.)
But Shih isn’t giving up on Windows products. The company recently introduced the Transformer Book Trio, which runs both Windows and Android, and the company is evaluating building smaller 10-inch and eight-inch Windows tablets.
“My personal opinion is the 10-inch may make more sense,” Shih said.
Chillin
Senior Member
Posts: 6814
Joined: 2006-01-18
Senior Member
Posts: 6814
Joined: 2006-01-18
#4629560 Posted on: 08/01/2013 04:53 AM
The company I worked for was trying to do Windows 8 tablets, so I would say a small amount of companies are trying but don't think they'll stick by it. They would likely go to iPad as the execs have been pushing for it. As for 64-bit, there are companies who still use outdated devices but may have been able to transition to Windows 7. 32-bit support may still be required due to legacy hardware.
As for the Windows RT itself, Microsoft wanted to sell it for low power tablets, even if Intel had stuff in the pipeline, it might not have aligned with Microsoft's release window. Microsoft was porting NT over to ARM anyways, so it made sense to put those efforts over to the tablet scene. Unfortunately, they introduced a restricted desktop mode that made no sense for most people because people saw it as a Windows 8 tablet but for some reason it can't run their desktop apps except Microsoft Office.
deltatux
Which is my point exactly. They have Windows 7 32-bit to hold them off for several years till their next upgrade, at which point if their software doesn't update to take advantage of 64-bit standards, then they should switch to one that does. Microsoft can always offer a stripped down 32-bit Windows 8 Enterprise edition for such companies that want to try tablets, but the rest of us consumers need to move on.
In any case, what Microsoft tried to do with RT was a bunch of conflicting goals. It should have never carried the Windows moniker in the first place, being unable to actually run Windows programs. In addition, they wanted it to play in the price ballbark of the other ARM tablets, but then they priced their flagship above all the competition (and way above once you include the damn keyboard). It was dead on arrival and everyone saw that. Including a weak Tegra 3 that hurt the user experience didn't help.
The company I worked for was trying to do Windows 8 tablets, so I would say a small amount of companies are trying but don't think they'll stick by it. They would likely go to iPad as the execs have been pushing for it. As for 64-bit, there are companies who still use outdated devices but may have been able to transition to Windows 7. 32-bit support may still be required due to legacy hardware.
As for the Windows RT itself, Microsoft wanted to sell it for low power tablets, even if Intel had stuff in the pipeline, it might not have aligned with Microsoft's release window. Microsoft was porting NT over to ARM anyways, so it made sense to put those efforts over to the tablet scene. Unfortunately, they introduced a restricted desktop mode that made no sense for most people because people saw it as a Windows 8 tablet but for some reason it can't run their desktop apps except Microsoft Office.
deltatux
Which is my point exactly. They have Windows 7 32-bit to hold them off for several years till their next upgrade, at which point if their software doesn't update to take advantage of 64-bit standards, then they should switch to one that does. Microsoft can always offer a stripped down 32-bit Windows 8 Enterprise edition for such companies that want to try tablets, but the rest of us consumers need to move on.
In any case, what Microsoft tried to do with RT was a bunch of conflicting goals. It should have never carried the Windows moniker in the first place, being unable to actually run Windows programs. In addition, they wanted it to play in the price ballbark of the other ARM tablets, but then they priced their flagship above all the competition (and way above once you include the damn keyboard). It was dead on arrival and everyone saw that. Including a weak Tegra 3 that hurt the user experience didn't help.
ManofGod
Senior Member
Posts: 1478
Joined: 2004-12-10
Senior Member
Posts: 1478
Joined: 2004-12-10
#4629815 Posted on: 08/01/2013 03:57 PM
Lets see, they create a 7 inch Android tablet with super hi res screen and fast processor for less than $300. Then the create a Windows RT tablet 10.1 inch screen with low resolution and just ok processor for about $500. Yeah, lets blame RT.
Lets see, they create a 7 inch Android tablet with super hi res screen and fast processor for less than $300. Then the create a Windows RT tablet 10.1 inch screen with low resolution and just ok processor for about $500. Yeah, lets blame RT.
deltatux
Senior Member
Posts: 19051
Joined: 2009-01-25
Senior Member
Posts: 19051
Joined: 2009-01-25
#4629922 Posted on: 08/01/2013 05:59 PM
Which is my point exactly. They have Windows 7 32-bit to hold them off for several years till their next upgrade, at which point if their software doesn't update to take advantage of 64-bit standards, then they should switch to one that does. Microsoft can always offer a stripped down 32-bit Windows 8 Enterprise edition for such companies that want to try tablets, but the rest of us consumers need to move on.
In any case, what Microsoft tried to do with RT was a bunch of conflicting goals. It should have never carried the Windows moniker in the first place, being unable to actually run Windows programs. In addition, they wanted it to play in the price ballbark of the other ARM tablets, but then they priced their flagship above all the competition (and way above once you include the damn keyboard). It was dead on arrival and everyone saw that. Including a weak Tegra 3 that hurt the user experience didn't help.
The Surface RT costed about the same as my ASUS Transformer Pad Prime when they came out. They both were Tegra 3 powered devices. The main difference was that the sleeve keyboard wasn't an actual keyboard and didn't serve as a second battery. I agree that Microsoft executed it poorly, but I understood their original intention.
As for the 32-bit/64-bit thing, I haven't seen a 32-bit pre-built PC that's still being sold these days unless they are ULV systems that makes more sense on 32-bit Windows than 64-bit Windows. Almost every consumer PC sold these days are 64-bit. 32-bit releases are really for enterprise these days. In the server world, Microsoft has dropped 32-bit support completely.
deltatux
Which is my point exactly. They have Windows 7 32-bit to hold them off for several years till their next upgrade, at which point if their software doesn't update to take advantage of 64-bit standards, then they should switch to one that does. Microsoft can always offer a stripped down 32-bit Windows 8 Enterprise edition for such companies that want to try tablets, but the rest of us consumers need to move on.
In any case, what Microsoft tried to do with RT was a bunch of conflicting goals. It should have never carried the Windows moniker in the first place, being unable to actually run Windows programs. In addition, they wanted it to play in the price ballbark of the other ARM tablets, but then they priced their flagship above all the competition (and way above once you include the damn keyboard). It was dead on arrival and everyone saw that. Including a weak Tegra 3 that hurt the user experience didn't help.
The Surface RT costed about the same as my ASUS Transformer Pad Prime when they came out. They both were Tegra 3 powered devices. The main difference was that the sleeve keyboard wasn't an actual keyboard and didn't serve as a second battery. I agree that Microsoft executed it poorly, but I understood their original intention.
As for the 32-bit/64-bit thing, I haven't seen a 32-bit pre-built PC that's still being sold these days unless they are ULV systems that makes more sense on 32-bit Windows than 64-bit Windows. Almost every consumer PC sold these days are 64-bit. 32-bit releases are really for enterprise these days. In the server world, Microsoft has dropped 32-bit support completely.
deltatux
Fender178
Senior Member
Posts: 4184
Joined: 2004-09-28
Senior Member
Posts: 4184
Joined: 2004-09-28
#4629936 Posted on: 08/01/2013 06:12 PM
The Surface RT costed about the same as my ASUS Transformer Pad Prime when they came out. They both were Tegra 3 powered devices. The main difference was that the sleeve keyboard wasn't an actual keyboard and didn't serve as a second battery. I agree that Microsoft executed it poorly, but I understood their original intention.
As for the 32-bit/64-bit thing, I haven't seen a 32-bit pre-built PC that's still being sold these days unless they are ULV systems that makes more sense on 32-bit Windows than 64-bit Windows. Almost every consumer PC sold these days are 64-bit. 32-bit releases are really for enterprise these days. In the server world, Microsoft has dropped 32-bit support completely.
deltatux
Same here I never seen a 32bit pre-built PC for sale in years. But I have seen 32bit versions of Windows on low end 64bit computers such as Pentium dual cores with like 2gb of ram.
The Surface RT costed about the same as my ASUS Transformer Pad Prime when they came out. They both were Tegra 3 powered devices. The main difference was that the sleeve keyboard wasn't an actual keyboard and didn't serve as a second battery. I agree that Microsoft executed it poorly, but I understood their original intention.
As for the 32-bit/64-bit thing, I haven't seen a 32-bit pre-built PC that's still being sold these days unless they are ULV systems that makes more sense on 32-bit Windows than 64-bit Windows. Almost every consumer PC sold these days are 64-bit. 32-bit releases are really for enterprise these days. In the server world, Microsoft has dropped 32-bit support completely.
deltatux
Same here I never seen a 32bit pre-built PC for sale in years. But I have seen 32bit versions of Windows on low end 64bit computers such as Pentium dual cores with like 2gb of ram.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 19051
Joined: 2009-01-25
Microsoft knows full well what Intel has in the pipeline, they work quite closely together (hell, their offices here in Haifa are actually touching...). Intel had plenty of Atom's even before the Tegra 3 era that would have fit the bill quite nicely. Microsoft wanted to try to get in the ARM space but instead of pricing the product normally, it tried to go the premium route and even priced it above the iPad, a major no-no. Everyone in the industry saw the death of the Surface RT the moment it was released as it was.
Which companies do you know that upgraded to Windows 8? Like you said, almost everyone is still stuck on XP and are just starting to migrate to Windows 7. The 64-bit in that case, is a non-issue. By the time most companies decide to upgrade again, Windows 11 will probably be here.
The company I worked for was trying to do Windows 8 tablets, so I would say a small amount of companies are trying but don't think they'll stick by it. They would likely go to iPad as the execs have been pushing for it. As for 64-bit, there are companies who still use outdated devices but may have been able to transition to Windows 7. 32-bit support may still be required due to legacy hardware.
As for the Windows RT itself, Microsoft wanted to sell it for low power tablets, even if Intel had stuff in the pipeline, it might not have aligned with Microsoft's release window. Microsoft was porting NT over to ARM anyways, so it made sense to put those efforts over to the tablet scene. Unfortunately, they introduced a restricted desktop mode that made no sense for most people because people saw it as a Windows 8 tablet but for some reason it can't run their desktop apps except Microsoft Office.
deltatux