The crux of Windows RT devises.
- Thread starter SEANT
- Start date
kristalsoldier
Well-Known Member
That, I'm afraid, would too small. I need something close to the iPad size and most importantly, I need at least one very high quality PDF App - in iOS, for me, that is PDF Expert. Nothing like that exists in the Windows eco-system, unfortunately.
By “desktop”, I assume you mean a UI designed for mouse. Certainly a UI can be retrofitted to be more touch friendly.
An open system does have more security vulnerabilities. We can definitely agree on that. The feature that makes them vulnerable, though, is also the one that makes them versatile. A small company will not be able to create and run their own macros in Excel, AutoLISP in AutoCAD, etc.. Is the computer power user to become a thing of the past? Perhaps it is.
Yes, the traditional UI, from my understanding to make it Touch Friendly would require a complete re-work from the Kernel through all the APIs because of the "calls" the HID needs to make. One would think if they could make the Desktop Touch Friendly, they would have during the Origami Wave (Vista UMPC).
The Computer Power User will live on, but must adapt to the new computing paradigm just as Batch Coders moved away from DOS. People bring up things like Visual Studio and CAD, etc.. But, (not to toot my own horn) As I predicted Microsoft is creating a version of Visual Studio that runs in Azure and only needs a modern browser (IE 11 on RT works) and it is IDE as a Service. Many of the Power Functions will move to Private or Public Cloud's allowing organizations to focus on the core industry rather than IT.
I've been in IT for a long time and I'm migrating or have already migrated my company to using Cloud Platforms. We use Office365 for CRM, Exchange, Lync and SharePoint, We use RingCentral for Phones and even moved our Learning Management System to a Hosted Solution.
We have around 5 LOB Applications that reside in Azure. My entire IT infrastructure has been turned off (because management wants a path back if necessary). But we've been using O365 and RingCentral for 3 years.
The big hurdle is pervasive always on fast and robust internet connectivity.
demandarin
Active Member
how is the phone? im thinking of getting it also. I already have a 5.5in. Full HD/1080p Lg Optimus G Pro. but the 1520 is even bigger and im ready to go back to windows again on my phone. haven't used it since window mobile days with Tilt and tilt 2 aka touch pro etc.. plus no one atm is touching windows phone on the camera department.
im ready to go full windows across mobile devices for a more seamless transfer of info and stuff. As for RT platform, I like it. I hope it does merge is windows phone OS. this will only mean more apps and developers for us Surface Owners.
I’m not implying full, five point multi-touch support when I said “more touch friendly”. Many of the legacy application UIs already support modification to make touch selection more manageable. The Ribbon Interface, as used in Office and numerous other application, can be customized for larger Icons and context sensitive Ribbon switching. I’ve got a Workspace set up in AutoCAD to make a RDP connected Surface RT easier to use. I’m willing to bet that these legacy application developers give even more touch centric, UI attention for their next few releases.
I think Microsoft should even do their part for legacy touch enhancement. I’ve already linked this to another Surfaceforums thread but will repeat it here:
Hover via Three Point Touch | seant61
Simplify everyone’s life that opted for a Windows devise with touch screen.
Again, I don’t doubt that every one of the application I use will be headed to the cloud. The purpose of this thread was never to argue that point. The purpose was to point out that a huge percentage of historic, Windows customers would resist the change. That the Windows devise lineup could prolong the status quo while still offering a taste of mobile (Intel), and that Microsoft could potentially manage (entice adoption of a lock down system) the transition with a modified RT focus. The RT needs to be even more of a ‘gateway’ devise.
The bottom line is I’m worried. I thought RT would take off faster. From what I can discern, I was overly optimistic in this thread:
http://www.surfaceforums.net/forum/...on/5888-latest-quarter-numbers.html#post36400
The next few years will be critical for the full Windows ecosystem.
kristalsoldier
Well-Known Member
On the question as to whether RT will 'take off' or not is dependent on many - potentially infinite - variables. But the thing that drew me to the RT platform was what I considered - and still do - its radical forward-thinking ness. Now, with the caveat that all this could just be a reflection of my own biases (and preferences), I will say this - while it may not be the case that the specific RT platform that we know today will survive, something like it is most likely to be the dominant OS (or, perhaps more appropriately, application underwater) within the next 5 years or so. Why? Because, as Jeff pointed out in a post above, the concept of the wholistic OS (like Windows, MacOS, Linux etc.) is dying a slow death and the reason for that is because the macro socio-technical culture is in a midst of a radical transformation.
What precisely does this mean? Mainly, this: Information Technology has now become an infrastructure - much more so than in the 1980s when the current dominant model of local installations of operating systems was conceived (at least in the consumer space). If you guys recall, there was a point in time when Thin Clients were a rage (this would have been around the late 1990s and early 2000s) and there was talk of screen scraping to reducing processing times and lightening the end-users headaches involved in maintaining operating systems that were and remain complex entities. Of course, that project died early probably because the technology was not mature. But today, it is. And there is emergence of cloud computing (arguably an old model, but now re-wrapped in a new garb and underwritten by an incrementally-becoming-ubiquitous wireless network architecture). Of course it could be argued that this is a First World perspective and yes it is. But a recent trip (within the last week) to Asia convinces me that what we in the West think in terms of WIFI networks is being leapfrogged by mobile data networks on which much of Asia works. Naturally, given the still-woeful nature of the infrastructure there, speeds and consequent capabilities are sub-optimal, but the numbers and momentum cannot be denied. And, what is the basic device that people there (as is the case in large parts of Africa) using? Mobile phones - the majority still use enhanced feature phones, but low-grade (by which I mean utilitarian and without the bells and whistles that we are normally used to in the West) smart phones are growing in numbers (unfortunately, Android has a very big slice of this market). Nevertheless, the point that I trying to make is that for these people (who constitute the largest and growing number of network exploiters - and I use this term advisedly), the fundamental computational device is the mobile phone. This does have an installed OS, but it is one that rarely, if ever, requires end-user intervention. So, what can be a viable upgrade model for these people?
My answer to this is Thin Clients where the OS (or at least the functionality of the OS) is provided as a service. And who are at the forefront of this emerging trend? Google (with their Chrome OS, which is made attractive by the likes of Acer who release USD 200-300 devices) and Microsoft (with the RT platform - notice how the desktop which is where the complexity of the Windows OS is most evident is at a discount in the RT scheme of things - and, of all things, Office 365).
So, at least in future-oriented terms, I think RT does have a future. But much depends on (1) how MS is able to play this - the preparatory phase will involved releasing Office Gemini and getting Windows Phones to use RT as an moderating system; (2) If the future is all about an OS being a service, then MS should seriously think about slashing the costs of the OS. They can do this in a number of ways. Arguably, the best would be make the OS and the application layer free (or available at a very minimal cost) while focusing their revenue streams on applications. For this they need to create a cult of MS developers who, if necessary, need to be bankrolled by MS. If MS could write off USD 900 Million on the first edition of the Surface, they can probably spend two to three times that amount to capture and retain developer loyalty; (3) MS needs to actively reimagine hope they engage with the enterprise sector. At the front-end, MS needs to hand-hold enterprises to develop LOB applications and to provide a cascading cadence of support to them. In other words, MS cannot involved another XP-like situation, which is arguably developing now Win 7. They need to avoid this like the plague.
What then does this mean for RT-centric application developers? Simply this: Engaging with the RT platform will mean betting on the future - not simply on the platform, but more importantly on the global socio-technical future. In the immediate term, I think developers will wait till Win RT and Win Phone 8 OS merge with Win Phones operating on the RT platform. Personally speaking based simply on anecdotal evidence (which really means nothing more than opinions), the inflection point will when that merger takes place. From that point on there will be only two dominant players - Google and Microsoft (aside from any new comers who may show up - particularly from the Eastern part of the world). The most frenetic activity will them shift to application developers who will fight to reimagine the informational needs of the future and the ways and means to service them.
What precisely does this mean? Mainly, this: Information Technology has now become an infrastructure - much more so than in the 1980s when the current dominant model of local installations of operating systems was conceived (at least in the consumer space). If you guys recall, there was a point in time when Thin Clients were a rage (this would have been around the late 1990s and early 2000s) and there was talk of screen scraping to reducing processing times and lightening the end-users headaches involved in maintaining operating systems that were and remain complex entities. Of course, that project died early probably because the technology was not mature. But today, it is. And there is emergence of cloud computing (arguably an old model, but now re-wrapped in a new garb and underwritten by an incrementally-becoming-ubiquitous wireless network architecture). Of course it could be argued that this is a First World perspective and yes it is. But a recent trip (within the last week) to Asia convinces me that what we in the West think in terms of WIFI networks is being leapfrogged by mobile data networks on which much of Asia works. Naturally, given the still-woeful nature of the infrastructure there, speeds and consequent capabilities are sub-optimal, but the numbers and momentum cannot be denied. And, what is the basic device that people there (as is the case in large parts of Africa) using? Mobile phones - the majority still use enhanced feature phones, but low-grade (by which I mean utilitarian and without the bells and whistles that we are normally used to in the West) smart phones are growing in numbers (unfortunately, Android has a very big slice of this market). Nevertheless, the point that I trying to make is that for these people (who constitute the largest and growing number of network exploiters - and I use this term advisedly), the fundamental computational device is the mobile phone. This does have an installed OS, but it is one that rarely, if ever, requires end-user intervention. So, what can be a viable upgrade model for these people?
My answer to this is Thin Clients where the OS (or at least the functionality of the OS) is provided as a service. And who are at the forefront of this emerging trend? Google (with their Chrome OS, which is made attractive by the likes of Acer who release USD 200-300 devices) and Microsoft (with the RT platform - notice how the desktop which is where the complexity of the Windows OS is most evident is at a discount in the RT scheme of things - and, of all things, Office 365).
So, at least in future-oriented terms, I think RT does have a future. But much depends on (1) how MS is able to play this - the preparatory phase will involved releasing Office Gemini and getting Windows Phones to use RT as an moderating system; (2) If the future is all about an OS being a service, then MS should seriously think about slashing the costs of the OS. They can do this in a number of ways. Arguably, the best would be make the OS and the application layer free (or available at a very minimal cost) while focusing their revenue streams on applications. For this they need to create a cult of MS developers who, if necessary, need to be bankrolled by MS. If MS could write off USD 900 Million on the first edition of the Surface, they can probably spend two to three times that amount to capture and retain developer loyalty; (3) MS needs to actively reimagine hope they engage with the enterprise sector. At the front-end, MS needs to hand-hold enterprises to develop LOB applications and to provide a cascading cadence of support to them. In other words, MS cannot involved another XP-like situation, which is arguably developing now Win 7. They need to avoid this like the plague.
What then does this mean for RT-centric application developers? Simply this: Engaging with the RT platform will mean betting on the future - not simply on the platform, but more importantly on the global socio-technical future. In the immediate term, I think developers will wait till Win RT and Win Phone 8 OS merge with Win Phones operating on the RT platform. Personally speaking based simply on anecdotal evidence (which really means nothing more than opinions), the inflection point will when that merger takes place. From that point on there will be only two dominant players - Google and Microsoft (aside from any new comers who may show up - particularly from the Eastern part of the world). The most frenetic activity will them shift to application developers who will fight to reimagine the informational needs of the future and the ways and means to service them.
Absolutely, Yes. It would be a disaster if a large population initiated plans to batten down the hatches and ride Windows 7 out to the bitter end. Microsoft will meet resistance from users who feel pressured in a direction they don't think they want to go. Much better to demonstrate the advantages in bite sized amounts.
With regard to paying for developers: In the near term that would certainly be helpful, hopefully even provide a reasonable return on investment. They would be mercenary developers, though. I imagine the truly inspired software come from the entrepreneur. Fortunately, I think Microsoft does a good job there, as long as the developer feels secure in the foundation.
Last edited:
I really like it..... it is big really big, I need to re-work my phone stowage strategy, as in the 1520 doesn't fit into the slots I used to put my 920 in
. But the screen is awesome and Apps look amazing and IE is great on it.
Remember there is no such thing as "RT" Development, Modern UI Apps for the most part will run on x86, x64 and ARM so the investment is getting the Modern UI Apps. One area that MS beats Apple and Google is the ability to Side Load Applications for Enterprise Customers. Modern UI Apps will continue to bolster RT.
I’ve got a bit of side-loading experience with some early testing of Visual Studio 2012. Getting the free developer license from Microsoft, debugging from Visual Studio on the laptop, and wirelessly side-loading to the Surface all went as prescribed. Generally, not too bad.
I just read up on the Enterprise side-load licensing: It looks to be a powerful/useful system, but ensuring that all the licensing and versioning details are in order looks pretty complex. It’s not something I would be dealing with anyway. That’s why the IT guys make the big bucks.
I just read up on the Enterprise side-load licensing: It looks to be a powerful/useful system, but ensuring that all the licensing and versioning details are in order looks pretty complex. It’s not something I would be dealing with anyway. That’s why the IT guys make the big bucks.
Telstar1948
Active Member
I really like it..... it is big really big, I need to re-work my phone stowage strategy, as in the 1520 doesn't fit into the slots I used to put my 920 in
Does the 1520 act as your phone as well? If so, where do you put that thing when walking around? Many men take the little belt holster for granted with more standard sized phones, but that thing would require a "purse" I think!
Similar threads
