Anyone watching the MS-BN announcement?

[stonetools]

Time to go way back.....
Remember 1998? When Apple came out with the iMac?

Techies all over the world were foaming at the mouth about how monumentally stupid Apple was about introducing a computer without a floppy disk drive. Many pronounced the iMac DOA. How would people install software? What about all that precious data saved on floppy disks? Why the arrogance and impudence of LORD Jobs knew no bounds! Every one waited for the iMac to implode...... Still waiting.

The Macbook Air (no optical drive) , the Mac App Store, and the last two versions of Mac OS X make it clear that you can go without an optical drive and still have an advanced computer experience-including installing and using powerful software tools.

[hrosvit]

Originally Posted by stonetools

including installing and using powerful software tools.

Just not all the powerful software tools. As long as there are pieces of software being written only for Windows machines, an Android or iOS tablet will not suffice.

Or, for that matter, Mac and Windows machines. Because there is software which can be installed on either of those, but not iOS or Android.

[petermillard]

Originally Posted by hrosvit

And you'll notice it's not a full version of Office.

No, it's 'Home & Student' - but then what else would you expect on the 'consumer' version of Win8?

Originally Posted by teh603

MS Office and Photoshop are nice (at least Office before '07 was nice) but who has $500 per piece of software?

Fewer and fewer people; from Horace Dediu over at Asymco:-

"So Microsoft faces a dilemma. Their business model of expensive software on cheap hardware is not sustainable. The future is nearly free software integrated into moderately priced hardware...

For Microsoft to maintain their profitability, they have to find a way of obtaining $80 of profit per device. Under the current structure, device makers will not pay $55 per Windows license per device and users will not spend $68 per Office bundle per tablet. Price competition with Android tablets which have no software licensing costs and with iPad which has very cheap software means that a $300 tablet with a $68 software bill will not be competitive or profitable.

However, if Microsoft can sell a $400 (on average) device bundled with its software, and is able to get 20% margins then Microsoft is back to its $80 profit per device sold. This, I believe, is a large part of the practical motivation behind the Surface product."

What Horace says is supposition, but let's assume that the above is accurate and the cash cows of Windows and Office are on the wane; how much do you think, in that context, MicroSoft are fretting about whether or not users can easily download a 2.3Gb software update?

Being charitable, I'd say not a lot. Realistically? Not at all.

Pete

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by hrosvit

Just not all the powerful software tools. As long as there are pieces of software being written only for Windows machines, an Android or iOS tablet will not suffice.

Or, for that matter, Mac and Windows machines. Because there is software which can be installed on either of those, but not iOS or Android.

As a famous computer expert once put it:

"You can't always get what you want,
But if you try to sometimes,
You can get what you need."

There is some pretty good software out there on all these platforms. And there was never a time where you could always get exactly the software you wanted, regardless of platform.

[ScotiaBurrell]

Fascinating:

Microsoft learned through industry sources that Apple had bought large quantities of high-quality aluminum from a mine in Australia to create the distinctive cases for the iPad, according to a former Microsoft employee involved in the discussions, who did not wish to be named talking about internal matters.

The executives were stunned by how deeply Apple was willing to reach into the global supply chain to secure innovative materials for the iPad and, once it did, to corner the market on those supplies. Microsoft’s executives worried that Windows PC makers were not making the same kinds of bets

In a nod to Apple’s work with aluminum, Microsoft began to closely study materials that could be used to create a distinctive case for a tablet. Members of the Windows team gravitated toward magnesium, a lightweight metal that felt good to testers when held in their hands, according to the former Microsoft executive.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/25/te...pagewanted=all

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by petermillard

No, it's 'Home & Student' - but then what else would you expect on the 'consumer' version of Win8?


Fewer and fewer people; from Horace Dediu over at Asymco:-

[I]"So Microsoft faces a dilemma. Their business model of expensive software on cheap hardware is not sustainable. The future is nearly free software integrated into moderately priced hardware...

Being charitable, I'd say not a lot. Realistically? Not at all.

Pete

Folks like John Gruber (warning:Apple fanboy) says bluntlly that Microsoft's model of making money off licensing software is doomed.

. The math no longer works out for the Windows you-sell-the-hardware-we-sell-the-software model. It works for unit share (cf. Android), but it doesn’t for profit share. Nothing works sustainably in business without profit — profit is the oxygen companies breathe.

Even if Apple’s growth soon slows, Apple already reaps a massive share of the industry’s profits. And if Apple’s growth doesn’t slow in the next year or two, look out. All of Apple’s competitors in the phone industry, save Samsung, are now starving for profit. They’re dying, all of them — HTC is breaking even and the rest are deep in the red.

The iPad is growing faster than the iPhone. The Mac already owns the $999-and-over market (where the margins are), and the iPad owns the tablet market (where the growth is). The PC market is quickly heading to where the phone market already is.

Microsoft Surface is not fundamentally about Microsoft needing to control the entire integrated product in order to compete with the iPad on design. It’s about Microsoft needing to sell the whole thing to sustain its current profitability.

LINK

[teh603]

Originally Posted by ScotiaBurrell

Google has your answer:

http://androidcommunity.com/libreoff...type-20120206/

http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop-touch.html

I was talking about the Surface, not Android. Although its nice to hear that LO is coming to Android. Not so sure about Photoshop, though.

Far as I can tell, GIMP can't because some fool already took the name for an alternate dashboard. Way to go, doofus.

[Ankh]

Originally Posted by hrosvit

Just not all the powerful software tools. As long as there are pieces of software being written only for Windows machines, an Android or iOS tablet will not suffice.

Or, for that matter, Mac and Windows machines. Because there is software which can be installed on either of those, but not iOS or Android.

Panta rhei. There was a time when a wintel machine was almost exclusive platform for any software, but those days are (almost) gone. The major attack on (any exclusive) platform came from web-delivered services and the cloud, what followed were scripting solutions (see Calibre or Eclipse).

The basic (semiconductor) technology shows no signs of hitting any limits, and what is considered slow or inefficient today might easily be acceptable solution in the future.

The downfall of "expensive software" strategy is NOT the better product offered by the competition, it is the product that is "good enough" offered at a (considerably) lower price.

Originally Posted by stonetools

There is some pretty good software out there on all these platforms. And there was never a time where you could always get exactly the software you wanted, regardless of platform.

It depends upon what you're looking for. There are huge, huge gaps in productivity software for tablets. When software does exist, it is often extraordinarily primitive compared to the desktop equivalents. If you're okay with software that harks back to the early 1980s (which the majority of tablet apps do in every respect other than visual appeal and connectivity), then you're going to love Android and iOS offerings. But some of us want to live in the 21st century.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

It depends upon what you're looking for. There are huge, huge gaps in productivity software for tablets. When software does exist, it is often extraordinarily primitive compared to the desktop equivalents. If you're okay with software that harks back to the early 1980s (which the majority of tablet apps do in every respect other than visual appeal and connectivity), then you're going to love Android and iOS offerings. But some of us want to live in the 21st century.

The iPad came out two years ago, mate. Better stuff is on the way.

That said, if powerful productivity software is your number one goal, go PC. Like I said, tablets are aimed at the crowd that doesn't want PC levels of power and complexity. Power users just don't seem to grasp that for the target tablet owner, simplicity in software is a feature, not a bug.

Originally Posted by stonetools

That said, if powerful productivity software is your number one goal, go PC. Like I said, tablets are aimed at the crowd that doesn't want PC levels of power and complexity. Power users just don't seem to grasp that for the target tablet owner, simplicity in software is a feature, not a bug.

I think that "power users" grasp the target audience bit perfectly well, and are okay with simplified tablets. What they would like to see are tablets that reflect their interests in computers. Tablets fill the computational and memory requirements of much more advanced applications. Vendors can produce tablets both with and without external expansion. In other words, both markets can be served.

And please stop talking about iPad as the pinnacle of tablets. It isn't. Just as Android isn't and Windows 8 isn't. Each of these products address different markets. You have an iPad for reasons of your own. I have an Android for reasons of my own. Microsoft has introduced the Surface to address the needs of markets that aren't being served by the iPad and Android tablets. In a marketplace that will ultimately reach the billions, there is plenty of room for competition.

[Ankh]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

Tablets fill the computational and memory requirements of much more advanced applications. Vendors can produce tablets both with and without external expansion. In other words, both markets can be served.

Canonical has already delivered full blown Ubuntu (albeit Unity ) environment for Android, and although I am not following Apple as close as I should, I somehow have no doubt that Apple ecosystem is strong enough to match that need.

As for the Microsoft and Windows, the strength in x86 world does not automatically translate to strength on other platforms (and it was tried before). The major problem for upcoming Windows ARM-based tablet is that one can not run existing x86 apps on it.

The price of a powerful productivity app (say, Photoshop?) is not negligible. Those who already made the investment on PC, might easily decide to keep their boxes around for a while, and convert completely to "tablet-only" environment when the time comes for next software upgrade.

I doubt that transition to tablets will happen overnight. Cheap PC's, abundance of computing resources in existence, and availability of the existing software, all points to a gradual, rather than rapid transition to tablets as a principal personal computing platform.

[ScotiaBurrell]

Microsoft has introduced the Surface to address the needs of markets that aren't being served by the iPad and Android tablets.

No. It is to compete for same users buying ipad and to (much much) lesser extent Android tablets.

It is so interesting the time and expense into materials and 'feel'. These devices are now like those really expensive leather purses that some women simply must have and that others tsk tsk them for.

That expensive magnesium and aluminum is passed onto consumer. And consumer likes it!

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by hrosvit

That may be your experience; again, I disagree. How are people going to be installing software? Or are we all only going to have apps to choose from?

Take a look at the small netbooks that are being sold to people who need a little bit more that a tablet provides. Many of them don't include DVD drives either.
Physical distribution of software is on the way out.

Originally Posted by ScotiaBurrell

No. It is to compete for same users buying ipad and to (much much) lesser extent Android tablets.

Microsoft is rather intelligent, and knows that they're best chances for success lay in growing the market. If they didn't know that, they would focus upon the ARM port rather than developing for ARM and x86 based tablets.