Microsoft: Will it be too late to tablet party? Not with Office optimized device

  • Posted: 31 May 2011 02:43 PM #16

    rattyuk - 31 May 2011 12:30 PM
    dduck - 31 May 2011 05:08 AM

    An example of differences is that iOS does not swap to “disk” on memory saturation, but there’s no technical reason for it not to.

    Are you sure about that? There are some very strange behaviors in iOS if you have too many open apps. The button fails to respond fast enough, for example, it sure “feels” like something is swapping in and out while it is waiting to go ahead.

    I am pretty sure.

    What happens instead is that the OS broadcasts an “I am almost out of memory” message to all programs. They can then get rid of cached items to lower the load. If they don’t, they risk being terminated and given a short while to get their state saved and any other business done.

    I suppose that’s what is causing the slowdown.

         
  • Posted: 31 May 2011 02:46 PM #17

    FalKirk - 31 May 2011 05:38 AM

    @DDuck, thank you for that.

    You’re welcome. Sorry for the geeking out there smile

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 01 June 2011 02:28 PM #18

    If this rumor is true, it could slow down widespread adoption of Windows Tablet (or whatever they decide to name it). WP7 does not have this limitation and it is still stuck on the ground.

    I find it amusing that Microsoft is considered late to a party they ostensibly started 10 yrs. ago.

    Microsoft to Limit Tablets Using Windows

    Microsoft Corp. plans to restrict the number of computer hardware makers that initially can make tablets using its Windows operating system, requiring five select chip makers to pair up with one development partner each, people familiar with the matter said.

    The software company selected Intel Corp., Advanced Micro Devices Inc., Nvidia Corp., Qualcomm Inc. and Texas Instruments Inc. to choose one hardware maker apiece to develop tablet and clamshell devices based on Microsoft’s mobile platform, the people said.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303657404576359361464040304.html

         
  • Posted: 01 June 2011 02:40 PM #19

    Drew Bear - 01 June 2011 05:28 PM

    Microsoft to Limit Tablets Using Windows

    Microsoft Corp. plans to restrict the number of computer hardware makers that initially can make tablets using its Windows operating system, requiring five select chip makers to pair up with one development partner each, people familiar with the matter said.

    The software company selected Intel Corp., Advanced Micro Devices Inc., Nvidia Corp., Qualcomm Inc. and Texas Instruments Inc. to choose one hardware maker apiece to develop tablet and clamshell devices based on Microsoft’s mobile platform, the people said.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303657404576359361464040304.html

    This is similar to the strategy that Microsoft is using for Windows Phone 7. Limit the number of hardware manufacturers and demand that those manufacturers meet minimum hardware specifications.

    This is one of the “lessons” that Microsoft thinks it has learned from the PC v. Mac wars. Crappy PC hardware was supposedly giving PCs - and therefor Windows - a bad name. Microsoft is enforcing tighter rules in order to differentiate itself from the cheaper products made by those who license Android.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 01 June 2011 02:57 PM #20

    FalKirk - 01 June 2011 05:40 PM

    This is similar to the strategy that Microsoft is using for Windows Phone 7. Limit the number of hardware manufacturers and demand that those manufacturers meet minimum hardware specifications.

    As you say, WP7 required “minimum hardware specifications”. With this tablet OS they are limiting the hardware partners. Still only a rumor at this point.

         
  • Posted: 02 June 2011 01:40 AM #21

    I think that John Gruber in Why Windows 8 Is Fundamentally Flawed as a Response to the iPad is touching on some of the same issues that I’ve been struggling with in this thread. Here are some excerpts:

    But I think it?s a fundamentally flawed idea for Microsoft to build their next-generation OS and interface on top of the existing Windows. The idea is that you get the new stuff right alongside Windows as we know it. Microsoft is obviously trying to learn from Apple, but they clearly don?t understand why the iPad runs iOS, and not Mac OS X.


    Microsoft?s demo video shows Excel ? the full version of Excel for Windows ? running alongside new touch-based apps. They can make buttons more ?touch friendly? all they want, but they?ll never make Excel for Windows feel right on a touchscreen UI. Consider the differences between the iWork apps for the Mac and iPad. The iPad versions aren?t ?touch friendly? versions of the Mac apps ? they?re entirely new beasts designed and programmed from the ground up for the touchscreen and for the different rules and tradeoffs of the iOS interface (no explicit saving, no file system, ready to quit at a moment?s notice, no processing in the background, etc.).


    The ability to run Mac OS X apps on the iPad, with full access to the file system, peripherals, etc., would make the iPad worse, not better. The iPad succeeds because it has eliminated complexity, not because it has covered up the complexity of the Mac with a touch-based ?shell?. iOS?s lack of backward compatibility with any existing software means that all apps for iOS are written specifically for iOS.


    There?s a cost for this elimination of complexity and compatibility, of course, which is that the iPad is also less capable than a Mac. That?s why Apple is developing iOS alongside Mac OS X.

    Apple?s radical notion is that touchscreen personal computers should make severely different tradeoffs than traditional computers ? and that you can?t design one system that does it all. Windows 8 is trying to have it all, and I don?t think that can be done. You can?t make something conceptually lightweight if it?s carrying 25 years of Windows baggage.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 02 June 2011 01:54 AM #22

    You could even argue that the iOS touchscreen UI is split into two groups: one for the iPhone/iPod touch and one for the iPad. They share many of the same features, but they are still distinct.

    Next week we are probably going to see more iOS UI elements introduced into OS X. That does not mean they will merge entirely. They will share a close family resemblance, but no one will mistake one UI for another.

         
  • Posted: 02 June 2011 02:57 AM #23

    Drew Bear - 02 June 2011 04:54 AM

    Next week we are probably going to see more iOS UI elements introduced into OS X. That does not mean they will merge entirely. They will share a close family resemblance, but no one will mistake one UI for another.

    I agree with the essence of your statement but I want to emphasize a different point. I think the underlying operating systems will continue to be very different, but that the interfaces that run on top of those operating systems will continue to grow closer and closer together.

    In other words, I think that iOS and OS X will start to look more and more alike to the end user but that they will, at their core, function very differently from one another.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 02 June 2011 09:33 AM #24

    FalKirk - 02 June 2011 05:57 AM
    Drew Bear - 02 June 2011 04:54 AM

    Next week we are probably going to see more iOS UI elements introduced into OS X. That does not mean they will merge entirely. They will share a close family resemblance, but no one will mistake one UI for another.

    I agree with the essence of your statement but I want to emphasize a different point. I think the underlying operating systems will continue to be very different, but that the interfaces that run on top of those operating systems will continue to grow closer and closer together.

    In other words, I think that iOS and OS X will start to look more and more alike to the end user but that they will, at their core, function very differently from one another.

    Why do you think the core is moving apart?  I feel like Apple is taking the clutter out of the closet, by reworking the core services of the OS.  As they are revised to support iOS they are moved from the old carbon Libraries to Cocoa to support both iOS & OS X.  The hardware layer is mostly abstracted using things like Open CL or Open GL so that Apple should be able to change courses down the road.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 02 June 2011 02:48 PM #25

    Note that all the discussion is about the UI. What about battery life and memory requirements on these future Win8 tablets?

    This Windows 8 pre-announcement really sets up the iOS 5 and Lion demos next week. Microsoft may have unintentionally done Apple a favor.

    Why Windows 8 fails to learn the iPad’s lessons

    ...Microsoft has failed to commit to the tablet as a unique type of device. The company that spent a decade trying to push Windows tablets on a market that just didn?t want them is still convinced that it?s a selling point that Windows 8 tablets will run Microsoft Excel for Windows and if you hook up a keyboard and mouse to them, you can get an arrow cursor and click to your heart?s content.

    Imagine if Apple had done that with the iPad. When Apple announced the iPad, the company showed off early versions of the iWork apps: Numbers, Pages, and Keynote. Those apps are utterly unlike their Mac equivalents, optimized for the tablet form factor and the size of your fingertips. Imagine if the iPad was, instead, just a tiny Mac that ran the regular version of Keynote…

    If Apple had done that, I think the iPad would?ve been a failure. The iPad, like the iPhone, was a success because it did not attempt in any way to replicate the desktop PC experience in the way that Windows tablets (and Windows Mobile) did. Apple used the underpinnings of OS X to form the basis of iOS, but at no point in iOS do you see anything that could be remotely mistaken for a Mac. On Windows 8, in contrast, Sinofsky says that there?s no way to kill the Windows desktop: ?It?s always there.?

    http://www.macworld.com/article/160248/2011/06/windows_8_tablet_fails_ipad.html#lsrc.rss_main

         
  • Posted: 02 June 2011 03:15 PM #26

    pats - 02 June 2011 12:33 PM
    FalKirk - 02 June 2011 05:57 AM
    Drew Bear - 02 June 2011 04:54 AM

    Next week we are probably going to see more iOS UI elements introduced into OS X. That does not mean they will merge entirely. They will share a close family resemblance, but no one will mistake one UI for another.

    I agree with the essence of your statement but I want to emphasize a different point. I think the underlying operating systems will continue to be very different, but that the interfaces that run on top of those operating systems will continue to grow closer and closer together.

    In other words, I think that iOS and OS X will start to look more and more alike to the end user but that they will, at their core, function very differently from one another.

    Why do you think the core is moving apart?  I feel like Apple is taking the clutter out of the closet, by reworking the core services of the OS.  As they are revised to support iOS they are moved from the old carbon Libraries to Cocoa to support both iOS & OS X.  The hardware layer is mostly abstracted using things like Open CL or Open GL so that Apple should be able to change courses down the road.

    I do not think that the core is moving apart. Not being a programmer (or terribly articulate) I am expressing myself badly. Let me try again.

    First, I think Apple is doing everything possible to share code between iOS and OSX.

    Second, I love the idea that eventually iOS and OS X would merge and become variants of the same operating system. However, it is my understanding that this can not really happen. I’ll allow others more knowledgeable than me to correct me if my impression is wrong.

    That’s why I think that most of the changes in Lion are cosmetic. Lion make OS X LOOK more like iOS but underneath, it’s still most the same OS X as before.

         
  • Posted: 02 June 2011 03:46 PM #27

    FalKirk - 02 June 2011 06:15 PM

    First, I think Apple is doing everything possible to share code between iOS and OSX.

    Second, I love the idea that eventually iOS and OS X would merge and become variants of the same operating system. However, it is my understanding that this can not really happen. I’ll allow others more knowledgeable than me to correct me if my impression is wrong.

    That’s why I think that most of the changes in Lion are cosmetic. Lion make OS X LOOK more like iOS but underneath, it’s still most the same OS X as before.

    I’m sorry to beat on this again but feel that it’s important as far as understanding how almost limitless are the possibilities for Apple and it’s OS.  They aren’t doing everything to"share” code because it’s the same code.  Back to dduck’s explanation.

    The basic services - kernel etc, what used to be called the OS - is largely the same on all three systems. Almost no Mac or iOS programs call this directly. An example of differences is that iOS does not swap to ?disk? on memory saturation, but there?s no technical reason for it not to. It?s a design choice.

    The basic programming API - the bits used for the logic and intelligence of the programs - is almost identical. A text string is typed as an NSString on both platforms, and has the same capabilities.

    Some high-level services such as text-to-speech are missing in iOS, or have been streamlined.

    Many UI items have slightly different names on iOS but otherwise act the same from a programmers point of view as they do on the Mac.

    They can’t “become” variants of the same system because that’s exactly what they are today.  If you recall the introduction of the iPhone when Steve stood in front of a very large screen and said “it runs OSX”.  As I recall there was a bit of a gasp from the audience and deservedly so because at that point in time no one seemed to think you could get a full blown operating system in something the size of a cell phone.  By full blown I’m not saying it’s complete and as you’ve been so good in pointing out, it’s about how intuitive the use of fingers can be made to be.  I’m still just railing at the press and those here who contend that iOS is a SEPARATE OS when clearly it’s not.

    Signature

    I don’t mind being wrong…,I just hate being wrong so FAST!

         
  • Posted: 02 June 2011 06:04 PM #28

    Jared Newman argues that Apple Enthusiasts Are Wrong About Windows 8.

    On Wednesday evening, Microsoft showed the first public glimpses of Windows 8, including a touch screen interface that’s unlike any version of Windows we’ve ever seen. And already, Apple enthusiasts are chiming in with disdain.

    Microsoft just doesn’t get it, they say. Windows 8 drops the ball by supporting both tablet and legacy Windows applications, instead of throwing everything out and starting a new tablet OS from scratch. The iPad is so perfect because it doesn’t try to be a Mac, they argue. Letting people run Excel on a tablet just isn’t “elegant.” No, it’s a fundamentally flawed understanding of what makes Apple’s tablet so magical and revolutionary, they protest.

    That pretty much summarizes what I’ve been trying to say. So let’s see why Jared thinks I’m wrong.

    Baloney. Microsoft doesn’t have to copy Apple’s strategy for Windows 8 to succeed. In fact, copying Apple would be a fatal mistake. Instead, Microsoft should be charting new territory with Windows 8, and that’s exactly what’s happening.

    I agree so far. i think Microsoft has been following Apple with “me too” products for far too long. My problem with Microsoft’s “charting new territory” is that they do it on a tactical, rather than on a strategic level. They don’t try to leapfrog Apple and take the industry in a new direction, the merely try to outdo what Apple is already doing.

    In supporting the old, familiar Windows interface and the new tablet experience on a single device, Microsoft has laid the groundwork for modular computing—that is, a single device that transforms to suit the user’s needs. Want to lounge around with some e-books or videos? The tablet interface makes it possible. Want to get some work done? Plug in a mouse and keyboard and go crazy with the desktop version of Excel. It’s the best of both worlds in one piece of hardware.

    Eh, not so sure about that. How does this strategy differer from what Microsoft has been trying to do with tablets for the past ten years?

    At Macworld, Jason Snell argues that this is a risky approach. If the iPad ran Mac apps, he says, developers probably wouldn’t have bothered creating all-new apps for the touch screen. I’m not convinced that the same will be true for Windows 8, with its huge potential customer base. There will be demand for touch-based apps simply because of how many people are already using Windows.

    OK, stop right there. I’m not at all convinced that Microsoft has this huge fan base of which you speak. Maybe. We’ll see. Didn’t pan out for the Zune. Hasn’t panned out for Windows Phone 7. You see, Windows is ubiquitous. But I don’t think it’s popular. There’s a big difference between the two. There’s no great reservoir of good feelings for Microsoft products. So I don’t see people rushing to use a Windows tablet just because it’s made by Microsoft.

    What Microsoft demonstrated on Wednesday is exactly what I want in a computer—a lightweight tablet UI that’s meant for casual computing and a powerful, classic Windows that allows me to work. I’m tired of carrying around my iPad and laptop together. I want one device that does everything.

    Well, this is the nub of the issue. I think that Microsoft’s attempt to turn their tablet into a desktop equivalent is exactly why their efforts have failed for the past ten years and will fail again now. A tablet is its own device. It does some things well and some things poorly. When you try to make the tablet be more than what it is, you destroy that which makes it good at what it does best.

         
  • Posted: 02 June 2011 06:19 PM #29

    And now Jason Snel’s counter-argument.

    Why Windows 8 fails to learn the iPad’s lessons

    What Sinofsky showed Wednesday was a sneak peek at Windows 8 (code-name: Windows 8), a forthcoming version of Windows that will work on traditional desktop and laptop PCs as well as touchscreen tablets. Rather than creating a new operating system for tablets, or use the existing (and intriguing) Windows Phone 7 as the basis for a Microsoft-powered tablet, the company will instead use an update to the traditional Windows PC operating system.

    In the past, Microsoft has pushed Windows-based tablets and they?ve been an utter failure in the market. What makes Windows 8 potentially different is that it?s got a new skin running on top of traditional Windows, one that?s based on the same ?Metro? design ethic as Windows Phone 7 and is intended to be run on touch-based interfaces.

    The problem with the announcement is that Microsoft has failed to commit to the tablet as a unique type of device. The company that spent a decade trying to push Windows tablets on a market that just didn?t want them is still convinced that it?s a selling point that Windows 8 tablets will run Microsoft Excel for Windows and if you hook up a keyboard and mouse to them, you can get an arrow cursor and click to your heart?s content.

    The iPad, like the iPhone, was a success because it did not attempt in any way to replicate the desktop PC experience in the way that Windows tablets (and Windows Mobile) did. Apple used the underpinnings of OS X to form the basis of iOS, but at no point in iOS do you see anything that could be remotely mistaken for a Mac. On Windows 8, in contrast, Sinofsky says that there?s no way to kill the Windows desktop: ?It?s always there.?

    ... it?s just too easy to insult Windows 8 as being a snazzy touchscreen skin on top of the same old Windows.

    Now, there?s a flip side to this story: Windows 8 also runs on PCs! This means that PC users will also be able to have access to the friendly, Windows Phone-inspired touchscreen stuff.

    I?m skeptical if this will work. Apple certainly is betting that users don?t want to reach out and touch their monitors, a concept Steve Jobs has bashed repeatedly. Instead, the company is integrating multitouch into pointing devices that sit on the same plane as your hands and the keyboard.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 02 June 2011 06:46 PM #30

    FalKirk - 02 June 2011 06:15 PM
    pats - 02 June 2011 12:33 PM
    FalKirk - 02 June 2011 05:57 AM
    Drew Bear - 02 June 2011 04:54 AM

    Next week we are probably going to see more iOS UI elements introduced into OS X. That does not mean they will merge entirely. They will share a close family resemblance, but no one will mistake one UI for another.

    I agree with the essence of your statement but I want to emphasize a different point. I think the underlying operating systems will continue to be very different, but that the interfaces that run on top of those operating systems will continue to grow closer and closer together.

    In other words, I think that iOS and OS X will start to look more and more alike to the end user but that they will, at their core, function very differently from one another.

    Why do you think the core is moving apart?  I feel like Apple is taking the clutter out of the closet, by reworking the core services of the OS.  As they are revised to support iOS they are moved from the old carbon Libraries to Cocoa to support both iOS & OS X.  The hardware layer is mostly abstracted using things like Open CL or Open GL so that Apple should be able to change courses down the road.

    I do not think that the core is moving apart. Not being a programmer (or terribly articulate) I am expressing myself badly. Let me try again.

    First, I think Apple is doing everything possible to share code between iOS and OSX.

    Second, I love the idea that eventually iOS and OS X would merge and become variants of the same operating system. However, it is my understanding that this can not really happen. I’ll allow others more knowledgeable than me to correct me if my impression is wrong.

    That’s why I think that most of the changes in Lion are cosmetic. Lion make OS X LOOK more like iOS but underneath, it’s still most the same OS X as before.

    Sorry that I’ve not responded back but been off line.  As far as the UI and interaction paradigm, iOS and OS X are most definitely different and this IMO is where Apple’s & Microsoft’s vision deviate the most.  Microsoft says come as you are, we will make it work, but in reality if the developer has not remodeled for the form factor and touch UI the result will be disappointment.  Apple said if you want to play on our devices with iOS you will use cocoa and rewrite you applications so the UI and interaction is natural for a touch interface and oh by the way we provide a lot of stuff to make the UI transition easier.  In the marketplace I think Apple knows how to win the consumer, but their is much ass pain to rewrite programs so Microsoft’s and Adobe’s methods appeal to many with small budgets or limited resources who can’t yet make the economic case.  Apple has a ton of momentum so they are no longer starved for good developers IMO, and developers will put up with ass pain if they see the pot of gold at the end of the tunnel.  that obviously doesn’t mean everything is great with Apple and bad with Mr softie, if Mr Softie would ever let their engineers out innovate Windows, I think they would look more like Google, but then Windows would be roadkill.