Jump to content

45 posts in this topic

Posted

One of the many reasons why people don't particularly like Windows RT as much as Windows 8 is the inability to use X86 apps. The solution is very simple, x86 cloud emulation. Microsoft could use the cloud for Windows RT users to install and run their x86 desktop apps. There would be no malware or virus problems with doing this also.  This could help Windows RT in the long run too.

 

What do you think?

 

11_surface_rt-100014945-large.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

MS should stop producing this grabage and separate the tablet and desktop altogether.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Agreed 100%.  An azure-based "cloud apps" store would be amazing.  Azure has the backbone to do it, and MS could charge an annual subscription (or not, it's free with Surface) to run those apps in the cloud. So you could have the same apps on your Surface, phone, desktop, anything with RDP.  Install once, run everywhere (with internet access of course) 

I hope this happens someday. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

MS should stop producing this grabage and separate the tablet and desktop altogether.

You're so helpful. :clap:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

You're so helpful. :clap:

OP asked what do you think? and I told him what I think. I did not see his asking for help. Consulatants would charge multi million dollars for the same advice which I just gave MS free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

One of the many reasons why people don't particularly like Windows RT as much as Windows 8 is the inability to use X86 apps. The solution is very simple, x86 cloud emulation. 

 

I'm not sure they have the ability to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

no,

emulator is a bad idea.

remember OS/2 , it advertised can run Windows Apps, and what happen next was devs don't bother produce OS/2 apps at all.

 

What Windows RT need is Metro Version of MS Office.

MS need to show complex apps like Office is feasible on metro environment,

if they can and other Devs will follow.

and MS can finally kill the desktop .

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

MS should stop producing this grabage and separate the tablet and desktop altogether.

 

I actually think the opposite, unless RT is kept around for some kind of budget market.

 

The only reason not to get a full Windows 8 device is the price, and possibly battery life, compared to an RT device. As prices inevitably come down, and battery life is extended, there won't really be a need for a separate RT at all, (except if they were to merge it and WP as has been rumored).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

if they cared about enabling x86 desktop apps on a consumption device such as surface rt/2, then they could have just used a clovertrail/baytrail chip. they didn't, because the focus is on building the winrt ecosystem.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That wouldn't be useful for a lot of programs.

 

Games - Too much latency

 

Media Players, VLC, iTunes etc - If you want to play a file you would essentially need to upload the entire file to the cloud computer so it can do the decoding. If you're playing big files that's a huge waste of bandwidth.

 

Anything that interacts with hardware, CPU-z for example wouldn't work since it's essentially running on remote hardware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

if they cared about enabling x86 desktop apps on a consumption device such as surface rt/2, then they could have just used a clovertrail/baytrail chip. they didn't, because the focus is on building the winrt ecosystem.

 

I agree but it's not just building the ecosystem, if they used a baytrail chip then what would be the point of the Surface Pro/Pro 2?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I agree but it's not just building the ecosystem, if they used a baytrail chip then what would be the point of the Surface Pro/Pro 2?


speed,and power. bay trail doesn't hold a candle to a core i5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

speed,and power. bay trail doesn't hold a candle to a core i5

 

My point was that if both are x86 based then why would you buy Surface Pro, sure a Core i5 is faster but that would be the only advantage as battery life would be about the same anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That wouldn't be useful for a lot of programs.

 

Games - Too much latency

 

Media Players, VLC, iTunes etc - If you want to play a file you would essentially need to upload the entire file to the cloud computer so it can do the decoding. If you're playing big files that's a huge waste of bandwidth.

 

Anything that interacts with hardware, CPU-z for example wouldn't work since it's essentially running on remote hardware.

Streaming apps is very effective actually, provided you have relatively decent internet (doesn't need to be that good)

 

Think doing AutoCAD in remote desktop.  It's not an uncommon use case scenario with Citrix or other virtualization technologies.  I would love it if MS jumped on this bandwagon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What does Windows RT/Modern UI need?

 

Well, what I'd like from it would be:

-Modern UI version of Office.

-A Wacom digitizer for Surface 3. OneNote is awesome, but I'd love to be able to draw/hand write notes.

-Smartglass to have immersive mini games for Xbox one games. Like a way to mod/set up your car in Forza, have an AI driver compete in some of your career races for you. In Madden or FIFA, have a manager/coach mode where you can make trades, set training routines, simulate games that you don't want to play, but make coaching decisions.

-Improve the photo app. I want to see better photo management, think tagging/face recognition, keywords, ratings. I love how SkyDrive uploads my camera roll, I just would love something like this added in.

-Just treat the modern ui apps more maturely. Give developers what they need to desert the desktop.

 

Seriously, if they improve the photo app alone, I doubt that I'd need to have my pc anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Streaming apps is very effective actually, provided you have relatively decent internet (doesn't need to be that good)

 

Think doing AutoCAD in remote desktop.  It's not an uncommon use case scenario with Citrix or other virtualization technologies.  I would love it if MS jumped on this bandwagon. 

 

That's exactly what I do with Surface, use Remote Desktop to access applications on my PC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I agree but it's not just building the ecosystem, if they used a baytrail chip then what would be the point of the Surface Pro/Pro 2?

 
Exactly... There isn't a point, over the long run, for RT. Don't get me wrong, the Modern UI and it's ecosystem are essential, but not a separate RT.
 

The futility of Surface and Windows RT: If only Microsoft had stuck with Intel

If it wasn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

 
Exactly... There isn't a point, over the long run, for RT. Don't get me wrong, the Modern UI and it's ecosystem are essential, but not a separate RT.

 

 

You're missing the point, Surface and Surface Pro are for two different purposes. Surface is a media consumption device which needs better battery life than an x86 based tablet will provide and ARM is perfect for that. Surface Pro is designed as a laptop replacement, that's why it's x86 based so it can run all the software that a regular laptop would run. Why do you think that ARM processors are used in smartphones and why do you think there is only one Intel based smartphone on the market?

 

The iPad must be intentionally crippled according to that article then seeing as it has an ARM processor in it, ah I forget, Microsoft should be treated differently because it's Microsoft. Do you think that the iPad should have a Core i5 processor in it, run MacOS and ALL the software that runs on it?

 

Intel will never be able to rival ARM processors for battery life and they know it. Why do you think Intel are going to be manufacturing ARM processors for other companies if their baytrail processors are supposedly superior to ARM based ones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Windows RT works great, its snappier, its great on battery life and acts like the regular x86/64 windows with the exception of the desktop apps. Windows RT is new and needs time like anything else that is new.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Agreed 100%.  An azure-based "cloud apps" store would be amazing.  Azure has the backbone to do it, and MS could charge an annual subscription

 

stopped reading right there, I'm not paying EXTRA to run my apps on the cloud - what a ridiculous idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I actually think the opposite, unless RT is kept around for some kind of budget market.

 

Who aren't going to pay an extra annual subscription to run their x86 apps.

 

They may as well just buy the pro in the first place (if they even wanted a Metro tablet in the first place), rather than a cheap and nasty RT version that has limited function.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Who aren't going to pay an extra annual subscription to run their x86 apps.

 

They may as well just buy the pro in the first place (if they even wanted a Metro tablet in the first place), rather than a cheap and nasty RT version that has limited function.

 

I suppose you've used a Windows RT based tablet extensively then?

 

Surface is far more versatile than it's rival ARM based tablets!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The arm version has a few advantages over the Pro until they can take out the cooling fan and get the tablet to lose the vent and thickness.

 

I'd rather see them find a way to get Thunderbolt onto the arm version and then have a crazy dock that you connect into with a great graphics card, more storage and a big monitor attached to it than have the bulkier Pro.

 

I also prefer the build quality and materials used in the Surface to some of MS' competitors. The Surface feels like a worthy competitor to the iPad.

 

The recent Ars Technica reviews of the Surface 2 and 2 Pro perfectly sum up why I'm sticking with the RT for a bit longer at least.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

You're missing the point, Surface and Surface Pro are for two different purposes. Surface is a media consumption device which needs better battery life than an x86 based tablet will provide and ARM is perfect for that. Surface Pro is designed as a laptop replacement, that's why it's x86 based so it can run all the software that a regular laptop would run. Why do you think that ARM processors are used in smartphones and why do you think there is only one Intel based smartphone on the market?
 
Do you think that the iPad should have a Core i5 processor in it, run MacOS and ALL the software that runs on it?


I think you missed the quote. You should read the article. Times are a changin' my friend :)
 

The T100 gets the same or better battery life than the Surface 2, performance is about equal (better CPU performance; worse GPU), and you get the same amount of storage and micro SD card expansion. The kicker, though, is that the 32GB Asus T100 with keyboard dock is just $350

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think you missed the quote. You should read the article. Times are a changin' my friend :)
 

 
ARM is used because it historically has been cheaper and had better power efficiency than Intel x86, sure.
 
That is no longer the case...

 

Apple can only wish...
 

 

I think you need to reread my post again because you completely ignored it, didn't even bother to give any meaningful answer and continue to post that same biased article, Intel and battery life cannot and should not be used in the same sentence.

 

Then tell me, why is it that no smartphone manufacturer bothers to use Intel processors in their devices if Intel supposedly have chips that give superior battery life than ARM?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.