Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th Feb 2013 21:18 UTC
Microsoft "Although Bill Gates stepped away from his day-to-day role at Microsoft nearly five years ago, he still keeps a close eye on the company he co-founded - and he isn't always happy with what he sees. During a recent interview broadcast this morning on CBS This Morning, the Microsoft chairman was asked by Charlie Rose whether he was happy with Steve Ballmer's performance as chief executive. Noting that there have been 'many amazing things' accomplished under Ballmer's leadership in the past couple of years, Gates said he was not satisfied with the company's innovations." It's impossible to deny by this point that Microsoft hasn't done well in mobile. It would be more surprising if Gates had denied it.
Thread beginning with comment 553049
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Comment by Nelson
by Laurence on Wed 20th Feb 2013 00:34 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Nelson"
Laurence
Member since:
2007-03-26

But under today's constraints? Consumers expect fast+fluid OSes with great battery life in thin, light, and cool (as in temperature) form factors.

The tablet idea as Microsoft saw it in the early 2000s was a failed idea. Apple really brought and defined this new market segment, and it is the game Microsoft is playing now.

No it's not. Microsoft are doing the same thing they were doing a decade ago: they're still trying to release a desktop OS for the tablet. Except this time they've bolted on a jarring shell that is so inconsistent and counter-intuitive that even IT professionals are struggling to use it.


I think that running full Windows on a device designed to compete with the iPad wasn't really seen as logical by many prior to Windows 8. Including myself. I was one of the people who argued for scaling Windows Phone up to tablet sizes.

That would have made sense.


However after using Windows 8, after seeing its battery life, and its new APIs, I see that the point is to unify the codebases.

You don't need to unify code bases. I repeat, no other OS vendor does this. Google aren't releasing Android on laptops; they have ChromeOS for that. OS X and iOS are hugely different as well.


Windows devices run Windows at heart. Real Windows, not WinCE with a limited kernel.

You mean that "limited" kernel that's been powering far more varied hardware and range of embedded systems than NT ever had?

Though let's be honest, the kernel is pretty much besides the point. Android and Ubuntu Desktop run the same kernel (more or less), but very different user lands. I very much doubt that NT itself needs 16GB of user land.

Or let's put it another way, what's NT's footprint on the Xbox360? It's only a few hundred megs on the original but I've never owned a 360. If MS can pull it off for a games console then they have no excuses for the fail on the tablets.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: Comment by Nelson
by Nelson on Wed 20th Feb 2013 00:56 in reply to "RE[7]: Comment by Nelson"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Well NT is an easier way of saying the kernel, the driver model, the userland components that make up the OS.

Its not just the kernel itself that gets ported, there's a lot of infrastructure that even makes something line WinRT possible.

WinCE had limitations with regards to multiprocessing and things, it was for very very embedded devices with severe resource constraints. Phones of today are more aligned with traditional PCs. Gigs of ram instead of megs, super fast GPUs and processors.

WinCE was clearly a limiting factor in Windows Phone, and would've been one for Windows on Tablets without significant re-engineering. Resources better spent on scaling NT down and reducing duplication.

Its clear your argument against "Desktop OS on a Tablet" will fade away once Windows Store apps make Win32 apps irrelevant, or mostly irrelevant.

Windows RT can't run Win32 apps and it is still full Windows. Full Windows userland, full Windows kernel, but very iPad like both in performance and experience.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[9]: Comment by Nelson
by Laurence on Wed 20th Feb 2013 09:43 in reply to "RE[8]: Comment by Nelson"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Well NT is an easier way of saying the kernel, the driver model, the userland components that make up the OS.

Its not just the kernel itself that gets ported, there's a lot of infrastructure that even makes something line WinRT possible.

I'm aware of that but -and I repeat- a tablet edition of Windows shouldn't have 16GB of userland! Period.


WinCE had limitations with regards to multiprocessing and things, it was for very very embedded devices with severe resource constraints. Phones of today are more aligned with traditional PCs. Gigs of ram instead of megs, super fast GPUs and processors.

In my experience it's easier to scale up than scale down. But I'll take your word for it that CE would have been less practical ;)

Its clear your argument against "Desktop OS on a Tablet" will fade away once Windows Store apps make Win32 apps irrelevant, or mostly irrelevant.

Windows RT can't run Win32 apps and it is still full Windows. Full Windows userland, full Windows kernel, but very iPad like both in performance and experience.

But not in the disk footprint. Which was the crux of my point.

I could live with a "desktop OS on a tablet" if it was only ~2GB in size (I don't think the paradigm would be right, but I don't think Metro is either - so that's just a matter of personal tastes). However 16GB is just inexcusable.

But the beauty of IT (and Microsoft's dwindling relevance) is that I have a choice of tablets. I can run Android or iOS (or even webOS; as I did for a while) and avoid WinRT entirely. Just as how you can choose to run Win8 if you really think a 16GB footprint is a non-issue.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[8]: Comment by Nelson
by zima on Sat 23rd Feb 2013 13:33 in reply to "RE[7]: Comment by Nelson"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Or let's put it another way, what's NT's footprint on the Xbox360? It's only a few hundred megs on the original but I've never owned a 360. If MS can pull it off for a games console then they have no excuses for the fail on the tablets.

Xboxes don't use the Windows kernel

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/xboxteam/archive/2006/02/17/534421.aspx

Reply Parent Score: 2