Exactly, it is quite funny the way these "Analyst" predict. So selling 60 million copies in 2 months, which is the same as Windows 7 did is bad? and Xbox is the top selling console after many years and they want to sell it to Sony and who? It is certainly is a good joke, the PC market is changing but don't see exodus of people demanding PC's without Windows. They may sell 11% less than last year, but probably recover more with their 30% application share.

iPad comparison is hilarious, the big issue is people comparing iOS to WinRT. Feature to feature RT has much more than iOS, a better comparison will be with Windows Phone 8 than RT. Incidentally iOS and Windows Phone have similar sizes. As an example, no file system access or network share, multi-user support, microSD, USB, 450 million device support, etc. etc. Plus desktop grade tools such as disk manager, task manager and not to forget Office. The size is justifiable

I been in industry for too long to take sides, have seen screw up from all players. So if something is on right path, I will say so. It doesn't matter what technology or platform. We have some smart people on this site, but blind extremists as well. In case of payment, not sure any company will pay to write on Slashdot. Folks here already seem to have made up their mind, and have strong opinions.

Exactly! If pure consumption is the focus then Android is way to go, if you need larger form, Office, side by side apps, keyboard, etc. then think of Surface.

How so? So with your logic, Apple should have sold Mac's lower than PC's to gain market share? How did it work for Linux desktop? The thing is, Ipad may have lead the consumer market but Enterprises have not "really" embraced it in their ecosystem. For any IT or managed service provider, mix of technology is no-no for support overheads and cost, they want the tablets to be managed the same way as their PC's. Microsoft has a real advantage in this areas. On the consumer side, there are enough Microsoft followers to make this one a success. All it needs is a tiny fraction of existing Windows desktop ecosystem and they will get success.

Not really, this time Microsoft has worked out more diligently than ever before and the product has all the elements to be successful. The reality is, this is the first Enterprise grade tablet with Office and other features and enterprises are looking forward to evaluate it. http://gizmodo.com/5952078/inside-surface-microsofts-insane-quest-for-gadget-perfection How it will perform in consumer space needs to be seen, and the wait should not be more than few months from now.

Meego has zero ecosystem support, unlike Android or iOS. Unproven, not ready for market. On Lumia 920, you better get the facts correct. It is based on Windows Phone 8 and display, camera, navigation are the best in all respects. E.g. Display is more sunlight readable than any other phone, you can operate it with keys or with gloves (no other phone can do that), best image stabilization in phone camera, navigation (they own Navteq, best maps period), first with build-in wireless charging, etc. etc. Search the net, you will find dozen links which actually show how Nokia 920 is better http://www.phonearena.com/news/Photo-contest-against-the-Nokia-Lumia-920-shows-how-the-Galaxy-S-III-and-iPhone-4S-shoot-in-the-dark_id34152

Well, you make it sound like Apple and Google never had their share of failures. This is business, things go wrong with timing, readiness and dozens of factors. With you logic, we should never buy Apple products because Newton failed or Nexus did not do good, so no point in buying Android. Zune - As a audio player, it has the best elements but the timing was heck wrong. It came when the market was already saturated, and ramping down. Kin - It seems to be a test pilot, trying a concept which was prices outrageously for the intended teenager market. MS Bob - Another Idea, with no substance and hence failed to pick up. Tons of these in the market, Bob was not the first or the last Anyone comparing Windows Phone 8 with above just ignorance, the UI is not only well designed but the philosophy of activity centric use is very productive and addictive. Android in a way is bad copy of iOS mixed up with remnants of Windows 6.5 (openness, custom skin, etc). Windows Phone seems to have the best of both sides, controlled experience like iOS with better integration and customization options.

Whatever hardware they can come up with (they make one of the best hardware, no doubt about it) the success was dependent on what ecosystem it brings together. The option was to go with Android or Microsoft, there is simply no third option to ready to compete. So with Android, they would have been me too player and not really any strong support from Google both on IP or monetary. In addition they may have to pay Microsoft and Apple if they went that route. Regarding Microsoft, strong financials with one of the largest developer community and ecosystem. Even with few % market share the applications have increased faster than Android, which is telling us something. Say what, but desktop, enterprise, cloud no one has the integration as good as Microsoft. The Windows phone, as a product in itself is actually better than iOS or Android. It is not as closed as Apple or open as Android, but the UI is fresh, new and very effective. Simply said, if this had happened 3-4 years back we would have a different market composition. Regarding future, the Lumia 920 is the top contender in terms of display, features, camera, navigation and the OS. Not even iPhone 5 or any of the current Android phone come close to it. The interest is picking up, but Microsoft has to fight against the bad image it created with its earlier Windows mobile 6.5. The providers are not helping in any way. Verizon is all behind Android, Sprint is confused so the only players are ATT and TMobile. If both Nokia and Microsoft are persistent for some more time the success is sure to follow. Expect better traction in the market, once the Windows 8 PC, tablets are released. Any one with objective mind will appreciate what Microsoft has done.

Here is the list - 1) The performance is snappier - boot, wakeup, application launch, task switching, almost everything is faster than Windows 7. My 5 year old laptop cold boots in 12 seconds, and wake-up is instantaneous 2) Start menu - It is a better replacement to original start menu, takes some time to get used to but not much. - Applications can be accessed quicker, all the common tools are just right click-lower left corner or just start typing when on start screen. Very convenient - WinRT applications are very snappy, even switching tasks with video (left click- upper left corner)have zero lag. - Side by side is useful, for consumption. Any more parallel tasks run just fine in the full desktop mode - Live tiles are better than static shortcuts, why? you don't need to open those to see any updates. Just a quick glance is enough to be catch-up things of interest. One click on Win key and you are then back to your work - Charms menu left click-upper right corner is also useful, all application specific context, settings and search is available. No need to navigate to folders and menus for that 3) Desktop Mode - This works exactly like Windows 7, and is required for any serious work. All said and done, touch has its limitation and real work gets done by keyboard and mouse. But having both options is better than having just one. 4) Built in antivirus - no nagware, updates or system slowing antivirus to worry about. It totally runs in background 5) Task Manager is much improved, keep it simply or get more details 6) Full backward compatibility, everything I had on Windows 7 works in Windows 8. All drivers, CAD, RC simulator, ESC programmer, everything In my view it is the best Windows version, and a must upgrade

The biggest advantage for Windows was becoming it biggest problem, no way to find out which application is safe and which is not. On OS front they made considerable progress after XP SP6, but the weak area was still applications the end user will download and screw up the machine. All blames came to OS. Now they have learnt, thanks to Apple, that a controlled experience is better especially for tablets and phones with limited resources. iOS, Android all started the same way and its still beneficial to non-technical user community. Everybody blamed the OS when performance was bad, not to all those gazillion applications consuming CPU, network, IO cycles. So restricting this for ARM based computers is the right way, on the traditional x86 you can still code and all applications work the same way.

Its definitely good for Linux, but may not be at the cost of Windows. The followers are in different silos, and this is not huge advantage to shift from one to other. Anyone ignoring Windows on desktop has a big challenge for sure, its like ignoring Android and iOS for phones. They still have over billion users, if not more.

Yes, completely agree. Lack of objectivity and strong opinions without even using it in the first place is common on this forum

Pretty sure these folks has not used it enough to realize the advantages. They probably picked more from all the anti writers about it. Nothing is lost from Windows 7, and lot to gain. Its a trash survey

Not sure what this is about, but after using Windows 8 for over 5 months now I don't see anything that is of concern. Everything that worked on Windows 7 work on Windows 8 without any issues. The new UI is good, and overall the OS is very snappy and quick performer. All that complains about learning curve are wrong, pick the basics in 5 minutes and you are done. All my machines run RTM now,It is a must upgrade for all Windows users for sure. Intel always had power issues to manage, which are more critical on tablets. That may be one of the areas of concern, but it has nothing to do with PC users.