Microsoft blasts PC makers: It's YOUR fault Windows 8 crash landed


Recommended Posts

Microsoft blasts PC makers: It's YOUR fault Windows 8 crash landed

Windows-8-Logo_myversion.jpg

Exclusive Microsoft blames PC makers for underwhelming Windows 8 sales over Christmas, The Register has learned. The software giant accused manufacturers of not building enough attractive Win 8-powered touchscreen tablets.

But the computer makers are fighting back: they claimed that if they?d followed Microsoft?s hardware requirements and ramped up production, they'd have ended up building a lot of high-end expensive slabs that consumers didn?t understand nor want.

The Reg has learned Microsoft provided clear and specific guidance on the hardware it wanted inside any machine running Windows 8 so as to show off and utilise the operating system's new capabilities, such as the touch-driven interface. Microsoft also gave its advice on the mix of high and low-end form-factors manufacturers should build, namely Ultrabooks, hybrids and simple laptops.

The Redmond giant had held a competition between competing computer makers, and the PCs it deemed the best were to be promoted under two labels: Hero PCs and Featured PCs. Microsoft wanted 10 Hero PCs to advertise globally and promised to pay retailers to display and promote 20 PCs on the Featured list.

However, the wheels came off that plan: Gartner said last week that during Q4 2012 Windows 8 didn?t make a ?significant impact? on PC shipments and other analysts said sales of Windows 8 are lagging Windows 7.

Now Microsoft is planning to reboot its launch of Windows 8 next month. On Tuesday the company gave 9 February as the date for the US and Canada unveiling of the Intel-powered Surface Pro tablets. But sources tell us Microsoft is actually preparing for a February ?relaunch? of Windows 8.

The Windows Pro Surface was planned to emerge in January, 90 days after Windows 8 and ARM-powered Windows RT Surface devices went on sale. That has clearly slipped.

Our well-placed source said that bad sales combined with PC makers ?ignoring? Microsoft's advice has left Redmond executives fuming.

?Microsoft is very frustrated with major OEMs who didn't build nearly enough touch systems and are now struggling to find parts and ramp up. Microsoft says they provided very specific guidance on what to build,? our insider said.

Source and more

Edited by Calum
Added a 'rumour' tag to remove the possibility of misguidance and the possibility of false accusations being made. What The Register's article says has not been confirmed at all by anyone.

Riiiiight!

And had nothing to do with the fact that not everyone wanted or liked (NOTE: I said not everyone) it?

Or the fact that touch screens (over 22 inch) are still a little on the pricey side?

edit.. I just read my post... Crisp, that was not an attack directed towards you

Haha, wtf...

I'll take what they've had please.

Glassed Silver:ios

  • Like 3

Not taking either side on this one however, it really drives me insane to see the front page of <insert any electronics store here>'s flyer with a ridiculous number of non-touch devices with Windows 8 on them. I don't believe any Windows 8 device should be touchless.

I don't believe any Windows 8 device should be touchless.

I'm assuming Microsoft would then have had trouble to sell any Windows 8 devices at all, going by what the article says:

Those who did buy Windows 8 PCs ultimately bought the cheap laptops not high-end Ultrabooks or hybrids.

So wait, Microsoft was expecting that Windows 8 would only be a success if they could get the manufacturers on their side? Ok, that in itself can make sense, but if your whole plan relies on that then why not discuss the hardware guidelines with them so that an agreement can be reached? From the sounds of it such a discussion wasn't had and instead Microsoft thought the manufacturers would just roll with it.

  • Like 2

I'm assuming Microsoft would then have had trouble to sell any Windows 8 devices at all, going by what the article says:

Except that there are plenty of "cheap" devices that have touch. It's not impossible. Besides that, most of the high end devices don't even have touch. The entire thing is a mess as far as I'm concerned.

  • Like 3

And the geniuses at Microsoft are jacking up the price in February too.

I wonder when they will kill it and release Windows 9 with start button & desktop and dump the failed metro experiment on desktops/laptops

And the geniuses at Microsoft are jacking up the price in February too.

I wonder when they will kill it and release Windows 9 with start button & desktop and dump the failed metro experiment on desktops/laptops

To each, their own bud, I mentioned in another thread that there should have been 2 versions of 8. 1 for touch, 1 for old 'desktop' users

And the geniuses at Microsoft are jacking up the price in February too.

I wonder when they will kill it and release Windows 9 with start button & desktop and dump the failed metro experiment on desktops/laptops

I would rather them release Windows 8.5 - which dumps metro and has the desktop and is for desktop machines only.

Any windows device with touch can stick with Windows 8. That would be more... intelligent, something that Microsoft doesn't seem to have much of lately.

I would rather them release Windows 8.5 - which dumps metro and has the desktop and is for desktop machines only.

Any windows device with touch can stick with Windows 8. That would be more... intelligent, something that Microsoft doesn't seem to have much of lately.

I'd rather see them play to the strengths of the desktop form factor by allowing Metro apps to be run in a window and to behave similar to any conventional desktop application. The desktop should be the primary user experience for desktop users, with the Start Screen only appearing when the user launches it (? la Start Menu). The Control Panel and PC Settings interfaces should be merged or duplicated in their entirety, as having to switch between the two is simply bad UX design. The Start Screen should have more customisation options, like the ability to freely scale the size (fully independent of resolution, which is important in the high-DPI era) and more flexibility with tile placement (like allowing columns that are three-small tiles wide).

I'd rather see Windows move forward than for Microsoft to just run back to what worked with Windows 7. Oh, and Microsoft should open up the Metro platform so that it's not a walled-garden, as requiring all Metro apps to go through the Windows Store is overly restrictive - Microsoft seems to be trying to copy iOS, as Android doesn't do that. Most of the negative press from developers stemmed from the Windows Store and it didn't take a genius to see the hostility coming. Windows 8 had some very good ideas but the ham-fisted implementation and greed with the Windows Store significantly soured the experience.

I'd rather see them play to the strengths of the desktop form factor by allowing Metro apps to be run in a window and to behave similar to any conventional desktop application. The desktop should be the primary user experience for desktop users, with the Start Screen only appearing when the user launches it (? la Start Menu).

That's highly impractical. The desktop - the entire desktop - would have to be redesigned for use with touch.

_Snip_

I'd rather see Windows move forward than for Microsoft to just run back to what worked with Windows 7.

~Snip~

I agree with you, although sometimes in order to move forward, you have to take a step back, (Not saying this is the right course here tho)

That's highly impractical. The desktop - the entire desktop - would have to be redesigned for use with touch.

Microsoft could let developers include additional (non-touchable) views in their applications that are hooked up to the existing application model to be utilized when the app is put into windowed mode for use on the Desktop.

That's highly impractical. The desktop - the entire desktop - would have to be redesigned for use with touch.

Either that or you could have two separate interfaces. That's up to Microsoft to decide, but the implementation in Windows 8 is a mess (even though I still prefer it as an operating system to Windows 7).

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
    • Cheers everyone for the replies. It's been very useful. 👍
    • Compared to the 7735HS it is around 25-30% slower in multi-threaded tasks (according to Google search) I did a review of the 7735HS Beelink SER6 Max in 2023, but thinking about it, it's not comparable to the 7730U. For the example you gave about how it will be used, the 7730U is actually an excellent choice for its power and battery efficiency.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      194
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!