Microsoft announced the end of Windows RT (almost). What next?

[esposito]

To me it has been crystal clear since Windows RT was first released: that OS for tablets did not make any sense because it violated the well-consolidated equation "Windows=Freedom" (freedom to install, buy and sell apps without any restrictions).

Now, the question is, what does MS intend to do with their Store? Isn't it time to close it down? If you ask me, they should have closed it down a long time ago or, better still, they should never have opened it. Let Apple go on with their revolting money-hungry policy (stealing from developers 30% out of each app they sell). Microsoft must be different, if they want to survive.

By the way, if you want to know more, read here:

http://www.extremetech.com/computing...one-windows-rt

P.S. Is mine an excessively optimistic vision? What if MS's intention were to allow users to install only the apps downloaded from their Store? That, of course, would mean their (and our) death.

[Shaggy Hiker]

I think you're getting Windows RT wrong. The article stated repeatedly that the phone and windows stores are merging, so the death of RT doesn't have anything to do with the App Store.

I share your dismay with the app store, though. If third party development isn't easy for Windows, I'll probably move to Linux...if I can (it's more up to my users than me).

[esposito]

Well, the following paragraph:

Microsoft’s head of devices, Julie Larson-Green, has foretold of a future where there are no longer three different versions of Windows. ”We have the Windows Phone OS. We have Windows RT and we have full Windows,” Larson-Green said at the UBS Global Technology Conference. “We’re not going to have three,” she mysteriously added. Most journalists are taking this to mean that Windows RT is at the end of its short and pitiful life. I think this is bigger than that, though: This is confirmation that all three of Microsoft’s operating systems are going to be killed off, replaced with a new, consolidated and unified OS that spans phones, tablets, laptops, and desktops.

makes me understand that Windows RT is probably "at the end of its short and pitiful life".

Does that mean that classic Windows apps will be sold through the MS Store? At the moment, they are not.

Obviously, from the technical point of view, the only OS that could unify phones, tablets, laptops and desktops is classic Windows, isn't it?

[esposito]

Here is how The Guardian talks about the same news:

http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...t-larson-green

[Shaggy Hiker]

That makes me even less optimistic. All they are killing off is Windows on the ARM architecture. That doesn't do a thing to the store. While your apps wouldn't run on Windows RT because they run on Intel not ARM, that doesn't mean that the store approach isn't still the direction that MS wants to go. If they abandon ARM, they will be Intel only, which means that our apps will theoretically run on the architecture...but whether they run on them in practice or get locked out...we shall see.

I feel that locking us out would be suicidal, so I don't think it will happen, but I do expect more noise in that direction, and this move does NOTHING to put an end to that threat.

[Nightwalker83]

Which one was Windows RT?

[dilettante]

There seems to be a lot of wild speculation based on what was actually said. The most common and most bizarre intepretation is that Windows RT and Windows on ARM are going away.

If anything, the One Windows is likely to be a version of Windows RT running on x86, x64, and ARM on servers, desktops, laptops, tablets, and phones.

Just as in Windows RT of the past, the desktop will be locked down and only whitelisted applications like those from Microsoft and partners will run on the desktop. There may well be a sideloading option for developers and a deployment story for large enterprises, but in general nobody will be writing and sharing Windows applications anymore unless they get put into the Microsoft App Store.

We could see this as early as Windows 9.

[techgnome]

"what next?" ... apparently the sky falls...

-tg

[esposito]

There seems to be a lot of wild speculation based on what was actually said. The most common and most bizarre intepretation is that Windows RT and Windows on ARM are going away.

If anything, the One Windows is likely to be a version of Windows RT running on x86, x64, and ARM on servers, desktops, laptops, tablets, and phones.

Just as in Windows RT of the past, the desktop will be locked down and only whitelisted applications like those from Microsoft and partners will run on the desktop. There may well be a sideloading option for developers and a deployment story for large enterprises, but in general nobody will be writing and sharing Windows applications anymore unless they get put into the Microsoft App Store.

We could see this as early as Windows 9.

Well, if you analyze what Julie Larson-Green said:

”We have the Windows Phone OS. We have Windows RT and we have full Windows. We’re not going to have three.”

it is quite unlikely that she meant, "We are going to terminate full Windows." On the contrary, it is logical to assume that the adjective "full" may imply that this version can include the others, not vice versa.

I completely agree with Shaggy Hiker when he says "I feel that locking us out would be suicidal, so I don't think it will happen." It is not in Microsoft's interest to lose millions of customers who have been using native Windows applications for decades. The commercial failure of Windows RT makes it clear that, if they have to terminate one of their OSs, they will choose the one that customers did not trust in.

So, techgnome may be exaggerating the problem when he says that "the sky may fall". Personally, I think that MS learnt their lesson well when they realized that millions of their WinRT Surface devices remained on their shelves collecting dust.

[dilettante]

... it is quite unlikely that she meant, "We are going to terminate full Windows." On the contrary, it is logical to assume that the adjective "full" may imply that this version can include the others, not vice versa.

Well guess what? Windows RT is "full" Windows NT. It just has the desktop locked down, omits a lot of services you wouldn't use on a tablet (IIS, etc.), and in most cases was compiled for 32-bit ARM.

Nothing prevented them from offering it compiled for x86 or x64 (and for all I know they did offer these to OEMs). It isn't "something else" like Windows CE is.

I completely agree with Shaggy Hiker when he says "I feel that locking us out would be suicidal, so I don't think it will happen." It is not in Microsoft's interest to lose millions of customers who have been using native Windows applications for decades.

Doesn't really matter how you feel about it. The question is what have you done to prepare for it?

The commercial failure of Windows RT makes it clear that, if they have to terminate one of their OSs, they will choose the one that customers did not trust in.

Windows RT was just Windows 8.0, with the desktop locked down, compiled for 32-bit ARM. Microsoft has invested far too much in WinRT (a Windows NT API layer and sandbox) to give up on it. Never going to happen now.

Personally, I think that MS learnt their lesson well when they realized that millions of their WinRT Surface devices remained on their shelves collecting dust.

Right. So that's why they came out with a second generation of these products just last month?

[esposito]

Well guess what? Windows RT is "full" Windows NT. It just has the desktop locked down, omits a lot of services you wouldn't use on a tablet (IIS, etc.), and in most cases was compiled for 32-bit ARM.

Nothing prevented them from offering it compiled for x86 or x64 (and for all I know they did offer these to OEMs). It isn't "something else" like Windows CE is.


Doesn't really matter how you feel about it. The question is what have you done to prepare for it?


Windows RT was just Windows 8.0, with the desktop locked down, compiled for 32-bit ARM. Microsoft has invested far too much in WinRT (a Windows NT API layer and sandbox) to give up on it. Never going to happen now.


Right. So that's why they came out with a second generation of these products just last month?

Let's wait and see, dilettante. I really hope you are wrong.

[Shaggy Hiker]

Doesn't really matter how you feel about it. The question is what have you done to prepare for it?

What have YOU done to prepare for it?

I don't have a choice, as much as I'd like one, because somebody else will dictate what I am targeting. That's the way it is unless I want to seek another job, but what substantive steps are you taking?

[esposito]

I don't think Microsoft will ever lock the classic desktop down as they did with Windows RT. At present, their Store only accepts apps for Windows Phone and Windows RT and this makes me understand that they are not interested in selling third-party Win32/Win64 software. Moreover, as you know, they have reintroduced the Start button (well, kind of) on Windows 8.1 and the option to boot your PC in the classic desktop mode.

Hence, they still take classic Windows into great consideration and there are no signs that they want to get rid of it in the foreseeable future. Terminating classic Windows was probably their original plan, but it looks like they are having second thoughts about it.

I believe that the second generation of WinRT Surface tablets that they introduced last month had been on their plans for a long time and they were obliged to put them on the market, although they knew it would be another flop. In other words, it was too late to scrap the project, so they had to try anyway.

Now, the question is, what is their next move?

[dilettante]

The widely quoted neo-classic blog post Does .NET Have A Future? already presumes a de-emphasized and locked down Windows desktop.

The most telling point of all is that the only refutation of either that blog post's premise or its conclusions about the future of software development have come from voices that carry little weight in the community. The complete silence on the matter from both Microsoft and their big name promoters in the media says a lot as well.

Microsoft could make all of this go away with a single statement, but no such statement has ever been made.


As for preparation for the future, that depends on your goals. If you are primarily a client-side PC programmer today who writes programs for personal use, small-community use within a company, freeware, or if you are a small ISV (e.g. shareware developer)... you need to move elsewhere. There are only two models of software distribution: Microsoft App Store or a "private app store" for large enterprises.

This is why I'm investing a lot of effort into Android development. It may be the only "open" alternative left once Windows 9 comes out, or at least the only one with a large user base. As pre-Win8 systems fade away into memory I hope to have moved on to a future. I don't plan to be like those guys who still try to make QBasic viable, running everything in a console winodw.

[Shaggy Hiker]

If MS locks down Windows, then Windows is dead.

I know that MS would like to. What a wonderful world that would be for them....assuming everybody was willing to play in that playground. They'd get a cut of EVERYTHING. They may well be thinking along these lines, but it's wishful thinking. Balmer won't be around shouting about Developers anymore, but the room will be pretty empty if anybody else tries it in a locked down Windows world.

At best, MS is being coy on the subject while trying to test the waters for such a move. It will fall flatter than Windows RT and everybody knows it. There wouldn't BE people forecasting doom if the future they are predicting wasn't doom. Nobodies going to be linking to blogs that say, "the future is going to be pretty much a continuation of the present. More of the same, folks, all is wonderful." This is like all the people figuring out when the world will end. Very few of them come back after that date and say, "I guess I had no idea what I was talking about." (though, to his credit, one guy did recently, though I'm not going to look up who it was). In other words, the only reason this gets any play is precisely because it would be a disaster for so many developers. The world doesn't work that way. If MS turns its back on the vast majority of its developers, who is going to write the software that MS writes? MS certainly isn't going to do it. You need vast numbers of developers writing for your platform or else you need a rabid following. Any other alternative results in your OS being a has-been, of which there are many excellent examples. MS doesn't have a rabid following, but even those OSes that do have never been more than marginal players. So, that means that MS needs vast numbers of developers writing for their platform to remain a going concern and any move that shuts the door on the majority of them would be the end of MS. It's not magic, it's just logic. They only exist as a massive corporation because so many people use their platform. So many people use their platform because so much software runs on it. So much software runs on it because so many people write software to run on it. Make it so that there are few developers and there will be little software developed. Make is so that there is little software developed and there will be few people using the platform.

[dilettante]

Well just to be clear:

I think this would be an insane move, and I sure don't want it to happen either.


Isn't Ballmer already out the door, or does he have a few more months to clean out his desk yet?

One more quibble: iOS is completely locked down and yet it is doing wildly well. I think that's where Microsoft wants to go and they see everything else as too small to matter to them.

[dilettante]

Another widely quoted item that you nonetheless may not have read:

The Death of the Windows Desktop

Lots of these guys were gushing about WinRT back in 2011, then merely enthusiastic by 2012, and now in 2013 they're all either fatalistic or grasping the nettle and making lemonade as reality has set in.

[esposito]

One more quibble: iOS is completely locked down and yet it is doing wildly well. I think that's where Microsoft wants to go and they see everything else as too small to matter to them.

Too late for Microsoft: iOS has been around for too long by now, so the tablet market now belongs to Apple. First come, first served. This is the same reason why Windows conquered the monopoly of operating systems many years ago. If Linux had been released before Windows, now the whole world would be using it.

Nevertheless, I think there is one last chance for Microsoft to conquer the tablet market, which is called Windows Surface Pro (with no locked down desktop). If they cut down its price considerably, people would immediately say goodbye to the iPad. That would be the best way for MS to unify the desktop world with the tablet world.

[Shaggy Hiker]

I wouldn't say first come first served. I started writing useful programs (I had written programs previously, but useful......well....no) in Lotus 1-2-3, which was locked in a death struggle with Quattro Pro at the time. Lotus sued Borland over the fact that the Quattro Pro interface so closely matched 1-2-3. By the time the suit was resolved, Excel had taken over and both Quattro Pro and Lotus were sliding rapidly towards oblivion. You can see a similar thing when IE showed up and Netscape....eventually became FireFox, which probably should have been called FireBird due to the fact that it largely resurected from the ashes. The race, in technology, is NEVER over until one side stops running. I don't think MS is there, yet, but their continued weakness in this area is one of the reasons I really don't think they will ever lock down the OS.

Apple has had a rabid fan base since the 80s. I used to follow them by reading MacUser and InCider, though I followed mostly out of curiosity, since those magazines were amazing. What constantly amazed me was the level of vitriol aimed at Windows/Intel (I would assume they've shut up about Intel these days), while at the same time they were in a state of frantic, almost desperate, denial about Apple during that time. Those were dark days of Apple. OS6 was horrible, OS7 was barely useable, and OS8 was a fiasco that ended in failure and never saw the light of day. The writers all seemed to follow one of two threads, whether in articles, editorials, or even letters to the editor (which were quite entertaining): The first thread was bashing windoze for being unstable, while the second thread was discussing ways to keep your Apple system from crashing. The latter was particularly difficult because those two OS releases were so bad. There was an article that talked about using an Apple for a presentation where the author stated something along the lines of, "of course you would never use any hardware other than your own for a presentation so that you knew the system would run." They were talking about how to pack and transport your whole system because plugging ANY other hardware into your system could easily result in hours, if not days, of time spent trying to get the system stable enough to use. This was while Apple was running an ad showing a Windows driven presentation having a problem and people in the audience were calling out really stupid suggestions. So, while the fan base was relentlessly bashing Windows, Apple was far worse in the very areas they were complaining about. Microsoft has NEVER had that kind of a fan base.

iOS was good tech. So good that it is losing out to Android. Of course, Blackberry was the BEST tech....until Apple came along (I prefer apples to blackberries myself, now that I think about it, but raspberries and blueberries are better still). Apple will always have a following because they've been able to sell cool and they have generally made good, if overpriced, products. They've also always fallen behind, and are in the process of doing so again. A closed ecosystem simply won't evolve as fast as an open one. Apple started the Mac with the best hardware available. They were using pricey SCSI drives while PCs used....whatever you wanted, really. If you wanted to buy a SCSI system for your PC, you could. Apple also had fairly good graphics. Meanwhile, PC was wide open on graphics, so graphics cards zoomed ahead to the point where even the Apple fan mags started muttering enviously about the graphics capabilities available at cheaper cost on the other side of the fence. Then SCSI was superseded by faster and cheaper drives....but only on PCs. Apple, as a single company, couldn't innovate as fast as the diversity building for the PC market. This was true in software as well as hardware. Apple was locked down and let few developers play. PCs let anybody who wanted to play, have full access. We've seen the drawback to this strategy, too, but the advantage was a richer space.

If Android becomes the next big thing, so be it. They are already an open environment, so they are a place where diverse innovation could happen. If MS locks down Windows, then Android might well become THE place for innovation, good as well as malicious. I don't believe it, though. Not yet, anyways.

[esposito]

You can see a similar thing when IE showed up and Netscape....eventually became FireFox, which probably should have been called FireBird due to the fact that it largely resurected from the ashes. The race, in technology, is NEVER over until one side stops running.

The reason why IE took over from Netscape is crystal clear to everybody: IE was free, Netscape was not. Nevertheless, here you are talking about single applications that can co-exist on the same machine, so the final user can use all of them at the same time and take all the time he likes to decide which one to use.

An operating system is a completely different beast. It is like an incurable epidemic: once it spreads, you can't stop it. And it will take a very long time before it is superseded by a new OS. Windows superseded MS DOS because Microsoft offered the two OSes together on the same machine. That's why Windows prevailed over the Mac: while experimenting with the new environment, the user could continue to use his old MS DOS applications. In simple terms, an OS has the power to capture the user and isolate him from the rest of the world. The user tends to accept an OS as his natural ecosystem and, at a certain point, all he cares about is not the OS (which is something he now takes for granted) but the applications running on that OS.

MS succeeded in convincing the user to switch from MS DOS to Windows because the new OS was much better than the previous one. On the contrary, when they tried to do the same with WinRT, they proposed a new OS which was very much worse than classic Windows, as it forced the user to run his apps in full-screen mode and install only those apps bought from their Store.

The OS war breaks out again whenever a new device is introduced onto the market. Apple understood that the tablet was a precious opportunity to seize, so they did what MS had done with the PC many years before. And now it will be very hard to oust them from that market.

If Android becomes the next big thing, so be it. They are already an open environment, so they are a place where diverse innovation could happen. If MS locks down Windows, then Android might well become THE place for innovation, good as well as malicious. I don't believe it, though. Not yet, anyways.

Agreed. Android and/or Linux may certainly supersede Windows if Microsoft's experts come out with another brilliant idea of theirs like WinRT. You are right when you say that, if they lock down the desktop, they will dig their own grave.

[dilettante]

Don't confuse Windows RT with WinRT, these are two entirely different things.

"Windows RT" is a version of Windows NT 6.2 and 6.3 ("Windows 8" and "Windows 8.1") that has the desktop locked down and is most often found compiled for 32-bit ARM and preinstalled on a tablet (or tabletoid device like Surface RT).

WinRT is a new shell (Metro) and a runtime environment and API riding on top of Win32. It is part of all editions of Windows NT after Windows 7. It is also now unlikely to go away anytime soon.

WinRT is here to stay. The question is whether other editions of Windows after Windows 8.1 will have the desktop locked down. The "desktop" is not about the Explorer shell desktop as much as it is about the straight Win32 environment programs were installed and run in prior to Metro-fication. Locking down the desktop means preventing you from installing desktop software that has not been whitelisted by Microsoft.

[esposito]

Don't confuse Windows RT with WinRT...

They both suck.

The question is whether other editions of Windows after Windows 8.1 will have the desktop locked down.

To me, this is unlikely to happen. Right now, classic Windows applications cannot be sold through the MS Store. So far Microsoft has never stated that it is their intention to open their Store to native Win32/Win64 applications. So, are you saying that customers will be allowed to use only those applications produced by Microsoft? That would be the most stupid and suicidal business strategy ever devised in history.

[Shaggy Hiker]

My point was that the dominant animal in technology has a pretty poor track record of longevity. If MS makes an attractive OS that runs all the apps that people want (like all the internal business apps written for various businesses), then they will be fine. Theoretically, Linux could knock them off, except that Linux is a hodge-podge of different distros and installation is too complicated for lots of people. So, I guess I would say that Linux could knock off MS if it stabilized on one distro and simplified installation down to "Click on RUN". That day may or may not come. Android is in the same boat for distros as far as I can see. Perhaps they are better, but it seems just flavors of diverse, to me, at this time.

[esposito]

Once again, I agree with you. Should Microsoft decide to lock down the classic desktop, someone will have to take care of creating a stable Linux distro meant to replace Windows. I am firmly convinced that most companies would never renounce the enormous flexibility that classic Windows has offered so far. So, if classic Windows got locked down, it would be as if MS killed it off and told their customers to look elsewhere.

[dilettante]

Negative comments about Android "fragmentation" can almost all be tracked to either iOS fans or dog-in-the-manger WinPhone fans.

While it is true that Android undergoes steady evolution adding new APIs over time as well as changing "look and feel" it isn't all that hard to write applications that run properly and look right on everything except "ancient" versions. When you create an Android program you target an API level that is just new enough to have the features you need, and in some cases you can even multitarget so that if a device has the feature you need you can use it optionally or else limit functionality.

So not all that different from traditional Windows programming really.

The 3rd party OEMs do indeed create their own layers of customization. Samsung routinely changes things at the shell ("home screen") layer to add some functionality there. Amazon has gone even further customizing their Kindle flavor of Android, and they are getting to a point where many consider it a separate but compatible OS.

But for the most part it is a rare "solidly written" Android application that won't install and run on nearly any Android device except those running ancient versions of Android. Many older applications were not updated to support tablet and desktop form-factors so these may force portrait orientation or otherwise look wrong - though they still run ok. This is fading away as the developer community matures along with the platform.

This is nothing like the mess you find among radically incompatible Linux "distros" (yecch, what a script kiddie term), making it worth bothering to write applications since pretty much anyone can run them on any Android device.


While it isn't "baked into" the base Android code yet, many vendors have demonstrated and/or shipped tiled/overlapped window support and even multimonitor support. One even offers multiuser support (more than one keyboard/mouse/monitor supporting more than one user at the same time on the same system).

[dilettante]

So, if classic Windows got locked down, it would be as if MS killed it off and told their customers to look elsewhere.

Actually when Windows is locked down in this manner their big corporate customers get a pass on using the Microsoft Store. Enterprise customers can build an in-house Store to deploy their own Metro/WinRT applications from.

Of course this pretty much eliminates the use of much 3rd party software as well as software written by the "rats in the woodwork" who write and pass around programs outside the annointed IT organization.

If I had to guess I'd think probably 99% of the members here who claim to be "paid to program" actually are not programmers but people hired to do general office work and program under the radar. This is the biggest population of losers if Windows starts to ship locked down, and Microsoft has never cared about these people.


Since Office, at least recent versions, is one of the blessed whitelisted application suites... assuming companies don't move to cloud-hosted Office then maybe these "rats" will all have to turn into VBA plinkers.

Hmm, maybe not: Office 2013 RT for Windows RT tablets will ship as Preview, lack macros and other features

The question becomes will the WinRT Office replace Office-as-we-knew-it down the road.

[esposito]

Actually when Windows is locked down in this manner their big corporate customers get a pass on using the Microsoft Store. Enterprise customers can build an in-house Store to deploy their own Metro/WinRT applications from.

If you think that Microsoft only cares about big corporate customers, then I'm afraid you are completely wrong. If Bill Gates became the richest person on earth, it was not thanks to the few thousand corporations that subscribed to MS. Those numbers are ridiculously low in comparison with the billions of private PC users who decided to buy a Windows-based computer. If those private users realize that Windows has lost its flexibility and decide to adopt a different operating system, then Microsoft is dead. Period.

[dilettante]

Crying and kicking isn't going to buy us anything, and projecting our wishes and desires won't either.

If we get very lucky none of this will come to pass, but it looks more likely every day. If you want to do something you ought to start preparing for the exodus from Windows or else start betting on Metro development and hope your user base doesn't move somewhere else more popular and successful.

[Shaggy Hiker]

Yeah, just as it was more likely that MS would put out an OS that had no start button, no desktop, and was the same across tablets, phone, and PCs. That turned out to generally be a black eye for the company and Balmer stepped aside as a result. The new direction....TBD, but Balmer didn't decide he wanted to spend more time with his money, he left because he realized that MS had to change course.

[esposito]

The attached image is a screenshot of the stats concerning the number of visitors who have had access to my Web site over the last 24 hours.

As you can see, those using classic Windows account for 85 percent of the total. These figures have remained almost identical for more than one year.

Please consider that when my visitors are using WinRT even on Windows 8/8.1, I get a new icon labelled "WinRT". This means that none of my visitors has been using a Surface tablet or the Metro inteface on Windows 8/8.1 over the last 24 hours.

I'm not sure WinRT is here to stay, as dilettante said, as it offers no improvement on classic Windows. Microsoft is trying to impose WinRT for purely commercial reasons but they did not consider that their customers are not stupid. The idea of having to trash all their Win32/Win64 native software prevents them from taking WinRT into any consideration. If they have to switch to a different OS, they want something better, not worse.

[esposito]

This article states that Microsoft has no intention to terminate Windows RT:

http://www.informationweek.com/softw...d/d-id/1112833

[dilettante]

Well they never did, I warned you about poor "journalism" earlier.

Most likely Windows Phone will be replaced by a version of Windows RT with some phone features added.

Then the question is what happens with Windows on non-mobile devices such as PCs. So far it looks like a split is planned, with a "consumer" version most people will have that is Windows RT and an "enterprise" version that is Windows RT without the desktop locked down.

Should Windows consumer and enterprise flavors remain in sync?

[techgnome]

To be honest, I think that could be the best thing that could happen... there should be a split... there should be a light-weight, but powerful mobile base, and a heavier, "industrialize" (wrong work but right idea) version for desktops AND business/devloper Enterprise class laptops... this one size fits all crap just doesn't cut it... I think that's one thing Apple got right... there's iOS and OS X... two different environments for two very different platforms.

-tg

[dilettante]

Microsoft Windows 7 support and sales cutoff dates worth knowing

As of October 30, 2013, Microsoft ceased selling boxed copies of Windows 7 at retail. (ZDNet's Ed Bott posted back in April of this year about the pending October 30 cut-off date, but a few stories have popped up this week about it, so this is just a reminder.)

Hopefully if you wanted Win7 you bought it it sat it on the shelf by now.

I bought a spare Ultimate retail box last year for $130 and now the price is back up to over $300 while they last.

[esposito]

An interesting article relating to this thread:

Although some third party hardware vendors are pushing RT tablets, the likely scenario is that this is a very short term business strategy that will end soon. Currently, one of the biggest limitations of RT is that software developers are not willing to invest in creating apps for this platform because of the perceived short term product lifecycle. If Microsoft announces anytime soon that they will discontinue RT, then that will be a knife in the heart of RT. Users will be left with an orphaned tablet. At any price, the RT tablet is not worth the risk.

One of the strongest features of RT tablets is the ability to run a version of Microsoft Office. While that is attractive to many students, it simply is not enough. The lack of apps, and the inability to obtain other compatible software for the RT operating systems renders this tablet a penny wise and pound foolish purchase. Microsoft is moving ahead with tablet strategy that far exceeds the RT experience. Windows 8.1 tablets are able to run any Windows software as one would on a PC/laptop. That is the sweet spot for many students. Having a tablet that is fully compatible with software packages removes many of the limitations that Android and Apple tablets pose. Microsoft is blurring the lines between the PC and tablet, offering the power of a laptop, and the convenience of a tablet. The Microsoft Surface Pro is the model of the future for Windows tablets.

There are many benefits of Windows 8.1 tablets. Microsoft has greatly improved battery life on the Surface Pro 2, which is a big concern for students. Another tremendous benefit of a Surface Pro that students may not be aware of is the inclusion of a digitizer to support a Wacom pen stylus. What this means in usability parlance is that the writing experience on the tablet is very natural and efficient. For note taking and textbook annotating, the second digitizer on the Microsoft Pro is perhaps the most significant advantage of the Surface Pro over any other tablet. A tablet that supports all software, has decent battery life, and offers a smooth and efficient writing experience is unique in the market. The Surface Pro is still the only Windows tablet on the market to offer Wacom support, although in 2014, copy cat products are likely to emerge. Importantly, competing products usually are accompanied by a lower price advantage.

Few technology features impact student purchasing decisions the way price does. The Surface Pro is still priced way out of reach for most students. At about $1000, it is just not on the radar. The cost likely has to be cut in half. Unless schools make institutional purchases the way they do for iPads, the Surface Pro will be used mostly by business users because of the high cost. That will be unfortunate, because the Surface Pro is perhaps the first tablet that is uniquely suited to address a myriad of student needs; good battery life, ability to load any software including Microsoft Office, a writing surface that supports notes and text annotation, support for peripheral devices, and a keyboard/cover that is highly useable. The melding of the best of laptops and tablets is essentially the story of the Surface Pro and Windows 8.1. However, until the Surface Pro or equivalent type of model becomes more economically feasible, avoiding RT is likely a good strategy.

^^^^^^
Original link:
http://www.examiner.com/article/micr...t-for-students

[dilettante]

The problem isn't Windows RT, but WinRT, which exists in all forms of Windows 8.x and is where Microsoft's emphasis is.

The Future Is Android

[esposito]

The problem isn't Windows RT, but WinRT, which exists in all forms of Windows 8.x and is where Microsoft's emphasis is.

The Future Is Android

The two articles seem to have a common denominator. The conclusion of the article you mentioned does not rule out that Windows may have a future in the tablet world:

YOUR ARTICLE:

It could even be that Microsoft manages to work out how to get Windows to work properly on tablets and phones and it could add to the Windows user base by taking share from Android and iOS - but this last one doesn't look likely at the moment.

MY ARTICLE:

Having a tablet that is fully compatible with software packages removes many of the limitations that Android and Apple tablets pose. Microsoft is blurring the lines between the PC and tablet, offering the power of a laptop, and the convenience of a tablet. The Microsoft Surface Pro is the model of the future for Windows tablets.

To become a leader in the tablet world, all that Microsoft has to do is cut the price of the Surface Pro in half and trash RT.

[dilettante]

Sadly they don't seem likely to do either.

On top of that, even at the current high prices they charge Microsoft can't get Surfaces of either kind to work properly.

Microsoft pulls faulty Surface Pro 2 firmware update lists one problem after another, and isn't even a comprehensive list.