OP
kristalsoldier
Well-Known Member
How true! Well said!!!!
Heavy-Handed Critique of Surface RT
- Thread starter kristalsoldier
- Start date
How true! Well said!!!!
Not sure why, as a newbie to the forum, that I am jumping here, but I am so...
Don't know the PT guy, and as far as I know never read one of his reviews, so I can't really judge his worth as a journalist tech reviewer.
However, using statements such as "20 years experience" cause me to turn off any active "listening" I may have been giving.
I started in computers in 1969 (programming COBOL on a Burroughs B3000 mainframe), evolved to being a Sys Admin type (used to hold an active account on Seismo back when it was ARPAnet -- had one of the Sun Micro 68030 UNIX-based machines running the MIT X-11 widows system as the server in my house), and my last tech purchase was a Surface Pro (I'm typing this out on the SP while on a business trip).
If my math is correct, that gives me ~45 years of tech experience...and I'm willing to admit I would suck as a tech reviewer on current stuff. PT, if what the folks here are saying is anywhere near true - it's time to move onto a new job.
Don't know the PT guy, and as far as I know never read one of his reviews, so I can't really judge his worth as a journalist tech reviewer.
However, using statements such as "20 years experience" cause me to turn off any active "listening" I may have been giving.
I started in computers in 1969 (programming COBOL on a Burroughs B3000 mainframe), evolved to being a Sys Admin type (used to hold an active account on Seismo back when it was ARPAnet -- had one of the Sun Micro 68030 UNIX-based machines running the MIT X-11 widows system as the server in my house), and my last tech purchase was a Surface Pro (I'm typing this out on the SP while on a business trip).
If my math is correct, that gives me ~45 years of tech experience...and I'm willing to admit I would suck as a tech reviewer on current stuff. PT, if what the folks here are saying is anywhere near true - it's time to move onto a new job.
EMINENT
Active Member
I own a SP and it's great seeing RT owners happy with theirs. I really don't understand why anyone would purchase an ipad other than for image/popularity, they have Macs already, or they need a certain specific app/game.
I've used ipads/iphones, jailbroken them for some interesting uses, used Android, messed with roms, but i've learned that most apps people use are readily available in the Windows store.
I've actually debated selling the pro for an rt since I can always remote to my PC, but I am having too much fun with other uses right now like using Miracast.
I've used ipads/iphones, jailbroken them for some interesting uses, used Android, messed with roms, but i've learned that most apps people use are readily available in the Windows store.
I've actually debated selling the pro for an rt since I can always remote to my PC, but I am having too much fun with other uses right now like using Miracast.
Jglnaz372
New Member
I heard the same thing.The Nexus 7 is due next week and it looks to be really improved in both power and hardware. IPad 5 due in a few months and looks to be getting lighter, more power, thinner form factor. iPad mini gets a retina screen. Tegra4/Snapdragon would definitely not hurt the Surface RT. Hopefully we might hear some positive news about the Surface changes in the near future, especially after the past weeks earnings and stock drop of 21 billion dollars, all blamed on the Surface RT and possible 6 million unsold units?
hogwldfltr
Member
Those that can't paint, critique painting.
Modrid81
New Member
This couldn't describe me more! I've had my RT for about a week now, and am liking it more than I thought I would. I traded in my iPad 3 last weekend during Best Buy's promotion, set on waiting until the new model came out. Then I saw about the price cut on the RT and started researching it. My buddy who works for MS gave me some added insight on it, and I decided to pull the trigger. I've got a gaming rig I built for any heavy lifting I need to do, and this RT fills in the rest, way more than the iPad every could. Having done quite a bit of reading on the device, it's super obvious to me that people were wanting way more from it than it ever was going to get. They essentially wanted the Pro, in the size and price range of the RT. But anyways, enough with rehashing what everyone already knows. All I know is that this is my new favorite device.
Matt
Member
There are some issues with the RT but it certainly isn't a dog. Its not the fastest granted and it is limited. However as others has said it can do 90% of my required tasks. For a first gen device it is far more useable out of the box than the iPad was when it was released with no tablet optimized apps and only stretched iPhone apps....
MS just made a mistake calling the OS Windows at all. I love having the desktop and understand its limitations but it is confusing for end users so an obvious area for "journalists" to attack.
MS just made a mistake calling the OS Windows at all. I love having the desktop and understand its limitations but it is confusing for end users so an obvious area for "journalists" to attack.
I think it made perfect sense to call it windows. If I gave you a Surface RT and a Surface Pro, besides the physical thickness difference and maybe screen resolution, you would use them both exactly the same way. (Until you try to install a legacy app on RT) The have the exact same UI. It makes sense to call both of them "Windows". Windows Modern and Windows Pro or some other convention would have made more sense, but whatever. If the entire focus of your company is to unify your products as one platform, why would you name the two very similar OSes differently?
TeknoBlast
Active Member
It's because it's Microsoft and Windows. These days it's all about hating MS and the Windows brand, which I still don't understand why and what people have to gain from it.
Matt
Member
The issue is all about the "legacy" apps. As many currently used x86 programs we take for granted haven't yet been ported to ARM (RT). WINDOWS has aways been able to run windows programs even if the manufacturer had to patch or update it. Now they need t re-write it to support new architecture.
Look at apples example OS X programs can't run on iOS they didn't confuse people by calling it os x iPad. Windows means windows programs not al windows apart from this variant. They can't even use RT as an example for differentiation as they used a 2 letter model with XP. Windows Phone is a good example they should have followed as its clear from the name that it runs software for a phone not a PC. Windows Tablet would have been a clearer descriptive name....
Although through all this the actual "windows" have Al but disappeared as all apps don't run in a window (except explorer and the office suite).
Having the Pro and the RT look the same doesn't make it any easier for the non techie community either..... especially now there are more affordable win 8 atom based tablets coming out.
Sent from the SurfaceForums.net app for Windows 8
OP
kristalsoldier
Well-Known Member
I would agree with this, which brings me another of my pet peeves about MS. It is quite obvious that they are good at what they do. What amazes me though is their sheer ham-handedness in how they present themselves. Now, it may have been the case that given MS's exposure to the enterprise market they may not have the experience in consumer-centric marketing, but gosh, this is 2013 and they need to get on with the program. Plus, they have the money to hire the very best in the world to design a marketing and advertising strategy for themselves. I mean, we have - or at least the most of us - have seen their initial Surface ads. They were terrible. We have also seen some their subsequent ads and have noted how much better they were. So, why in the devil's name did they not put their best foot forward in the first place. Then there was the distribution strategy. Some have opinied that MS's restricted launch was, in part, because they (MS) did not want to turn-off their OEMs. But that, in my opinion, is a specious argument. As soon as MS had internally decided to design, produce and market the Surface, they would/ should have known that they would be rubbing their OEMs the wrong way. Does this mean MS could not have launched their own line of hardware? I think they could have had - just like how Google did with their Nexus (phone and tablet) line up. Just imagine - MS could have co-produced the Surface with one (or two) of their OEMs with strict MS control over design and engineering. Similarly, they could have partnered with one of their phone OEMs (the obvious choice would have been Nokia) to produce a Surface (or at least MS-branded) phone. The MS strategy would/ could have been to use the Surface line-up as a "reference device", which would have served a dual purpose - first to show case the different flavours of the OS and second to build up their own brand of hardware. Additionally, they would have also made their OEMs complicit in the future of the devices AND the OS. MS could have worked this out as a revolving strategy, that is, to have switched OEM partners as co-producers of different (and evolving) versions of the devices.
All this being said, the caveat remains that I am only a user (and an appreciative one) of MS devices and services and am not a specialist about such matters in any sense of the word!
Last edited:
Similar threads
