Surface to arrive with Windows 8 on 10/26, says Microsoft | Hacker News Reader

Surface to arrive with Windows 8 on 10/26, says Microsoft

news.cnet.com

34 pointssosuke20 comments

Its interesting to see the "will it" / "won't it" compete questions but frankly I'm impressed it is such a dramatic move. I think that speaks to a pretty motivated Microsoft.

I had the sad experience of loading up Atmel Studio 6 on my laptop, which uses Visual Studio 2010 as its foundation (Microsoft convinced them to abandon Eclipse somehow) and it really put the hurt on my core-duo laptop. So a challenge of a company newly embracing the world of ARM will be to insure its tools don't drag it into unusability.

Is anyone else totally uninterested in Windows RT? I'm much more interested to see how Win 8 and existing Windows applications run. That is, to have a tablet-cum-laptop with a full touch UI plus keyboard and trackpad.

I think Microsoft has a little bit of a marketing problem in that I don't completely understand the difference between Windows RT and Windows 8. I don't understand. And this is a big deal.

If you read some of my past comments, you'll know I don't hate Microsoft. If anything I actually like them. I play Xbox, I own a Windows Phone, I run Windows 8 on my desktop at home, I own a Zune and subscribe to the Zune Pass. But I wouldn't feel comfortable buying a Windows RT tablet without knowing exactly what I'm getting. I'm sure that information is out there, but none of the tech blogs seem to be talking about it.

In Ars Technica's recent review of Windows 8, the author himself seemed confused. It read like he thought he was reviewing the RT version, but then complained that the desktop buttons were too small for a touchscreen. But if it's the desktop version, why is he not using a mouse and keyboard? There are two very different tablets in the Surface lineup, and I don't think Microsoft has done a good enough job making sure the press and reviewers understand the difference.

It's not that I'm uninterested. I'm very interested. I've been liking Windows 8 so far, buggy though the Release Preview is. But all I'm seeing in the press is confusion, which leads to frustration, which leads to bad reviews. It's Windows ME all over again, in that people thought their Windows 98 drivers would work, and when they didn't everyone blamed the OS. The reality is, Microsoft seems to think they can release this and people will automatically catch on. That has never been the case.

To make matters worse there is WinRT, the runtime. So although you want to abbreviate Windows RT to WinRT, you can't do that without confusing the conversation. "Windows Metro" and "Windows Pro" sounds less confusing to me. Microsoft has been reluctant to call anything Metro (instead wanting to say Metro-like) which makes me think someone else owns the copyright to the Metro name.

Isn't Windows RT just Windows 8 without the desktop?

This is what I've heard. But I do know that battery life is shown on the desktop. Changing networks is done on the desktop. A lot of settings are changed from the desktop. Will these options disappear? Will there be Metro dialogs for them? The Windows 8 I have installed on my PC right now could never function in Metro-only. How is Windows RT different? I'm not getting that answer from any tech blog, and that's the problem.

Windows RT is Windows 8 with the desktop, but without the ability to install new desktop software. The built-in desktop utilities such as Explorer, Control Panel, etc. are still there and work the same.

WinRT is technically a wrapper around Win32 that makes it easy for other languages (C#, javascript, etc) to gain access to a low level windows API.

Pretty confusing really, since it stands for "Windows Runtime", and with all the baggage the surrounds the "Runtime" term, you'd think it was a full blown runtime environment and competitor to their own CLR (it's not).

In addition to that, they're also using WinRT as a marketing term to segment their Surface product line (dividing it into a "Metro Only" configuration, or WinRT, and the version that can run regular windows apps). Very strange overall strategy on multiple levels. I'm a lifelong Microsoft developer and am having trouble wrapping my mind around it: I can only imagine the general public's reaction.

Windows RT = Windows for the ARM processor, i.e. for the non-Pro version of the Surface tablet. All apps must be compiled specifically for Windows RT, and so legacy x86 software will not run. There is a desktop in Windows RT, just like regular Windows, though there likely won't ever be much non-Metro desktop software for the platform, besides Office, since the platform is geared towards tablets with touch as the primary input.

Re, grandparent post: Windows RT looked very rough in the last public demo, with units crashing on stage. I'd consider it a developer preview platform at this point. The only people to whom I would recommend purchasing a Windows RT device are software developers who want to get their apps ready. For everyone else, I'd wait for the Intel-based Surface Pro three months later, or wait a year for the bugs to be ironed out and software to be available for the platform.

My point wasn't that I want more info on Windows RT, my point was that I want the tech blogs to show they understand the difference. Read over Ars' recent review/preview and tell me if he was reviewing from the mindset of Windows 8 or Windows RT. He himself seemed confused.

Peter Bright certainly does know what Windows RT is; the guy is known for in-depth technical reviews of all things Microsoft and Windows. The last page of this particular review includes the following:

"the ARM version of Windows, Windows RT, will bundle Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and OneNote, all of which are desktop applications"

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/07/does-w...

The review was done with the x86 version of Windows 8. I assume a separate Windows RT review will be available once the Surface ships in October.

I usually love Peter's articles, but the thing that stood out to me in this review is his instance on spending a whole page complaining that the desktop buttons were too hard to hit with a touchscreen. This is why I say he doesn't seem to know the difference. Windows 8, especially the desktop, begs for a mouse and keyboard. Windows 8 desktop is essentially Windows 7, which wasn't good with touch either.

By complaining that it's bad for touch, he's asking Microsoft to make it better for touch. They did! It's called Windows RT. Windows RT is the Windows desktop but designed for touch. It's like complaining that Apple doesn't make a phone based off Mac software but designed for a small form factor and with a touch screen. They do! You're just looking for it in the wrong place.

Windows RT is no better or worse for touch than Windows 8, they are identical interface-wise. The only differences are that you can't install new desktop software on Windows RT (but you can use the preinstalled desktop software) and it comes with (desktop) Office bundled/preinstalled.

In the meantime, the Apple rumormill has the 7.8 inch iPad dropping in late September.

If that's true it will completely eclipse this launch, much like the Zune all but disappeared when Apple announced the iPod nano (when the Zune was hard drive based) and iPod touch (just as the Zune came out with a nano competitor).

I really don't think so. Surface isn't a half baked product like the Zune was.

Actually, the Zune was pretty damn cool, but it had serious trouble with people telling their friends that it was half baked.

While it looks like a slightly promising competitor to iOS and Android, if they don't lock down good pricing, it will fail. $1000 is just not a good price point when it comes to a tablet. I understand that this thing will support a full Windows environment, but honestly, I use my tablets to surf and play. If I want to run Photoshop or an IDE, it's going to be on my workhorse laptop.

The $1,000 price-point is for pc tablet, which sounds more useful for the enterprise market. The ARM tablet, which is more in-line to what you describe, is supposedly going to be $500-600.

Surface RT won't cost $1000. As for the $1000 model, I suppose it depends on whether someone considers the Surface Pro a desktop-capable tablet or a MacBook Air with touch screen.

I don't think the target market is looking to play starcraft on these things, but rather just be able to run the full version of applications.

I know having a nice thin device that can run OneNote is what I look for more than anything.

There's nothing better than being able to take endless amounts of handwritten notes, and have them all indexed and searchable without any extra effort.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com