Quote:
Originally Posted by eschwartz
I agree that I was agreeing with you. I was directing snark at the idea that the qualifications for Win8 Metro being a success are "it has apps". The "abstract concept of apps" vs "specific apps" meaning that if I want to do something and look for a app to do it, I will find one on Android and iOS, but not necessarily on Win8. If I look for apps and then figure out something to do with them, then sure, Win8 has apps. 
Win8 has apps. Android/iOS has the apps people want. |
I'm sorry. I've been pretty obtuse lately. I agree with the above. I'm not a big fan of Apple, mostly because of their suing campaign, but I think both Apple and Android "get it" when they design tablets. My younger brother is a Microsoft application programmer who once worked for Xircom. Back when Windows Mobile was still Windows Mobile or CE, or one of those names it had over the years, he was sent to Redmond to try to convince Microsoft that they didn't need to put everything (including the kitchen sink) in their mobile devices. He argued that this bulk hampered the OS. They politely told him that "thank you, but we know what we're doing." Problem is, they really didn't. You still have Windows 8 phones and tablets failing with the BSOD (blue screen of death) and, because the OS is bloated, it either bogs down (with comparable hardware specs to Android and iOS) or costs too much to make with because it requires higher cost technology to stay even. (To compete in low-cost, emerging markets, Nokia had to make an Android phone that looked like a Windows phone.) What Apple and Android have going is that they understand the benefits of simplicity. I don't think Microsoft is ever going to get that. So, Surface RTs are a mess (look like Windows 8, but won't run real Windows applications) and Surface Pro machines are really touchscreen laptops with detachable keyboards. Neither is really a viable tablet. At least that's the way I see it.