They're not betting on legacy app compatibility. That's what RT is all about.
Yes, but this is not Surface RT. This is about Surface Pro. And if legacy app compatibility isn’t one of its perceived advantages, what is? The bigger, faster, hotter CPU?
They're trying to hedge their bets. And there's nothing wrong with RT. The problem is that it's just too late to the game.
Well, there is the matter of the screen, too. Much crappier than the competition.
It's like the new Blackberry. Why would you get it over what's already dominant? Unless there is something so compelling that it's irresistable. And this is where product after product fails. Windows 8/RT, Blackberry 10, Barnes & Noble Nook, HP WebOS TouchPad, etc. They all have something to offer, but not enough to push the market into a new orbit.
Precisely. This is, incidentally, why Linux on the desktop is still a pipe dream. It’s good, in parts even really good, but just not good enough for people to switch (and lose the apps they’re used to, whether they’d paid money for them or not).
Microsoft could've done more to make Surface a success by actually listening to its focus groups and to the clamoring of the multitudes who have been saying for months that Windows 8's desktop experience is fatally flawed (I don't personally agree but the throngs have spoken).
I do agree. After using everything from DOS 3.30 and up, Windows 3.0 and up (except for Vista), Mac OS from System 7 up, CDE under Solaris and literally dozens of GUI’s under Linux, I have to say the Metro experience on the desktop is one of the most unintuitive interfaces I’d tried. Not built for keyboard and mouse. At all.
Still, I don’t understand why they even had focus groups if they’d decided not to listen to them.
They could've included $100 in Windows Store app allowance with every tablet purchase, which would both have fed developers and given people a reason to wade into this new paradigm. They could've offered a third "hard case" keyboard with a proper hinge and more battery that would turn the Surface Pro into a bona fide laptop similar to the Asus Transformer.
They could have. They didn’t. And I fear it’s a bit too late now.
I mean, the second Zune was said to have been really good. Didn’t matter one bit, did it now?
They could've done more to make the Windows Desktop experience more tablet friendly (you can't even adjust the scrollbar width to the extent that you used to.)
So you’re saying it’s not even very tablet-friendly? Because I’d only tried it as a desktop (on a 17" laptop) and it was rather dreadful. It looked rather tablet-oriented, and my colleagues who’d tried it out as a tablet were fairly content.
There were many things they could've done that they chose not to do because they're not used to competing on a level playing field.
Well, and because they didn’t want to enrage their hardware-building partners who might not have been able to compete with $100 vouchers and whatnot. They might have got the reply “Want to make devices that we can’t price match? Fine, have a nice life.” Gabe Newell, for whatever reasons, has started looking for greener pastures. How many allies can Microsoft afford to lose right now?
I was their target market. I'm interested in getting a laptop/tablet hybrid (I used to own an HP convertible laptop). I've been excited for the Surface Pro release. And even so, they did a lot right. It's a beautiful machine. Just not enough.
That’s the problem. Not good enough.