









Source: All Things D

Comments     Threshold


RE: sigh, brokers and analysts
By TakinYourPoints on 12/8/2012 4:53:36 PM , Rating: 3
Microsoft has been playing "me too" to Apple for about thirty years, this is nothing new. The main difference here is that they're finally playing catch-up to new markets (portable integrated devices and high end laptops) that are far more profitable than the old desktop model that has sustained them for so long.

The execution with Windows 8 may be flawed but their thinking is sound, given the explosion in portable devices.

RE: sigh, brokers and analysts



RE: sigh, brokers and analysts


RE: sigh, brokers and analysts
By wordsworm on 12/8/2012 11:52:25 PM , Rating: 2
I don't agree. Microsoft has been about giving power to the consumer. The consumer has always had the choice of buying software from anyone who wants to make it. Apple has a process. Microsoft made, and still makes, an OS that runs on any adequate machine. Apple does not.

I do not like Windows mobile. I am sure the next phone I have will have an Intel/W8 (desktop version) combination. I can run BlueStacks if I want to run Android apps, while having a real operating system at my disposal. I'd like to see one of those on the menu of a major telecom in Canada.

I haven't tried a W8 phone yet, so maybe it's better than W7? I do believe W8 is hands down their best desktop OS. It is simply the best OS I have ever had. It's fast, all the things that bugged me early on I've adapted to. I don't know if the naysayers to W8 have really given it a fair shake.

my 2c.

Just to add: I do see MS emulating Apple. They are going from the open garden that has served them well to the closed garden. I hope they will take a cue from Google and realize that it's the open garden concept which is the most popular now, not Apple's closed garden.

RE: sigh, brokers and analysts
By MadMan007 on 12/9/2012 1:11:43 AM , Rating: 2
Windows 8 will never get a fair shot from the enthusiast community, but its slightly tweaked successor will be the 'best OS ever!' I think it's funny that enthusiasts are always happy to be bleeding edge in adopting new hardware, but then have a stroke and are unable to adapt when something changes with their Windows software.

RE: sigh, brokers and analysts
By inighthawki on 12/9/2012 4:15:02 AM , Rating: 2
Probably because bleeding edge hardware is typically just faster. It would probably be a more accurate to compare a change in software to being like a change in hardware architecture. It's not just a faster version of the old one, it actually has differences.

A lot of people were (and some still are) hesitant to actually make use of their 64-bit processor by installing a 64-bit build of windows due to various reasons (Higher memory requirement, and there still exist a couple compatibility issues), despite it being an identical OS, just on a different architecture.

RE: sigh, brokers and analysts
By JKflipflop98 on 12/9/2012 4:24:53 AM , Rating: 2
. . . but that's exactly his point. Those people that are still holding out on 64 bit O/S are doing so because they heard from their friend the imbecile that "64 bits have all kinds of issues running 32 bit software!" and now they have their mind made up.

They're the same idiots that never try anything for themselves, but are content to look at a screenshot and take someone else's word for it. "Bill says there's no start menu. Bill hates those big blocks." Bill the imbecile is failing to see those big blocks are the Start menu. You still get there the say way. It still works exactly like windows.

RE: sigh, brokers and analysts
By inighthawki on 12/9/2012 2:41:50 PM , Rating: 2
I guess that's true, but maybe not the perfect anology to back up my point. Hardware enthusiasts don't always upgrade to bleeding edge technology.

It's common to do so with something like a CPU or GPU, because this years model is just the same thing with a 5% speed bump over last years model across the board. As soon as hardware changes, that's not always the case.

Look at the switch from HDD to SSD. SSDs at the time only provided a few benefits, but often had horrible random reads/writes, could be unstable, and would cost a fortune.

If suddenly hardware had a bunch of changes that changed the way we used it, it would have the same impact. Imagine everyone switched from x86 to a new proprietary architecture. Maybe it's faster clock for clock and more efficient or something - objective better than x86 in every way, but it can't run the software you want, it might be harder to develop for, etc. Not even the biggest enthusiasts are going to buy it because it's "new and better" if it requires such a large change.

RE: sigh, brokers and analysts
By Cheesew1z69 on 12/9/2012 3:52:27 PM , Rating: 2
64 bit does not have a "higher memory requirement"...

RE: sigh, brokers and analysts
By inighthawki on 12/9/2012 4:43:38 PM , Rating: 2
64-bit windows uses more memory than 32-bit due to larger binaries and extra binaries loaded for things like WOW64. Also 99.99% of the time a 64-bit application will yield a larger binary size, often due to the larger pointer size and additional opcode support.

RE: sigh, brokers and analysts
By Tony Swash on 12/9/2012 10:30:09 AM , Rating: 1

Apparently the captain of the Titanic thought it's second voyage would be the best ever.

RE: sigh, brokers and analysts
And apparently some people have extremely short memories.

RE: sigh, brokers and analysts






Related Articles
