It's official: Asus will no longer make Windows RT products

While Asus has hinted recently that they were scaling back their plans to make tablets that use Microsoft's Windows RT, today the PC hardware company made it official, revealing that they will stop making products that use the ARM operating system.

The Wall Street Journal reports that Asus cited the lack of compatibility with older Windows applications as one of the reasons for poor sales of its Windows RT units. The company released only one Windows RT device, the VivoTab RT, which was first launched in October 2012 alongside the Windows 8 launch and Microsoft's own Windows RT tablet, the Surface RT.

Asus CEO Jerry Shen is quoted as saying, "It's not only our opinion, the industry sentiment is also that Windows RT has not been successful." Asus took a write down charge on sales of the VivoTab RT in its second quarter, but the company did not disclose a specific number.

Microsoft tried to put a spotlight on the Asus VivoTab RT in May when it featured the tablet in one of its recent TV commercials that compared Windows 8 and RT products to Apple's iPad.

With Asus officially out of the Windows RT business, it's more than possible that other PC makers that have already made Windows RT tablets will follow suit. Lenovo recently stopped selling its only Windows RT notebook, the Yoga 11, on its website. Samsung's only Windows RT product, the Samsung Ativ Tab, was never officially sold in the US. 

However, Microsoft is still committed to Windows RT and is still selling its Surface RT tablet. On Thursday, NVIDIA's CEO confirmed it was working with Microsoft on a second generation Surface RT tablet. Dell, which launched the Windows RT XPS 10 tablet, has said it has plans for future Windows RT devices. Finally, there's lots of rumors and evidence that Nokia could be developing its own Windows RT tablet for a launch later this year.

Source: Wall Street Journal | Image via Asus

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Windows 8.1 build 9477 reportedly in the hand of OEMs ahead of RTM

Next Story

Microsoft shuts down rumors it will boost Xbox One's RAM to 12 GB

123 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

What? really? no it can't be! Windows 8 was selling well, a 100 million licenses, Metro was the future, people like me are idiots because they don't like metro, and they are minority, wow

last year Microsoft ignored everyone, this year everyone is ignoring them

john.smith_2084 said,
What? really? no it can't be! Windows 8 was selling well, a 100 million licenses, Metro was the future, people like me are idiots because they don't like metro, and they are minority, wow

last year Microsoft ignored everyone, this year everyone is ignoring them

However, Windows 8 is selling well, it will surpass OS X this month in users. (Should Apple dump OS X too, as it must be a failure based on your logic, as they have had 30 years to get more than 10% marketshare?)

OEMs have failed with their own hardware and margins and designs, that has nothing to do with Windows 8, except where OEMs failed to offer solid Windows 8 features like more touch screens.

Windows RT is still a growing area, and isn't going anywhere. Microsoft will keep it around no matter what as, Windows (ARM) is going to still be used on phones, and as ARM 64bit emerges, look for Windows Server for ARM.

Right now it is probably the 'smart' thing for ASUS and other to focus on the traditional x86 AMD/Intel based systems, until they can build cheaper and better Windows RT ARM devices.

Intel is pushing these companies hard against Windows RT, and even offering incentives to stop offering ARM. As the Windows 8 App ecosystem grows, then Windows RT will have the relevance that can sustain more models.

(This can be a few months or a year down the road, and they don't have to be limited to ARM, as Microsoft is giving Intel and AMD the opportunity to abandon x86/x64 if they want to offer a new performance CPU that is a stronger competitor in the mobile marketspace.)

Mobius Enigma said,

However, Windows 8 is selling well, it will surpass OS X this month in users. ...

I am not sure why Windows 8 is compared to MacOS, as I know the Mac is a very selected computer for a very selected market share, if it took Windows 8 to a year to reach that, it is another problem.

I am not sure what can the OEMs do more? Microsoft asked them to build a machine and they built one, Microsoft selected the Slow Tegra 3 and the OEM implemented it, the entire process costed money, and Microsoft did not do much on that front.

The result is a tablet named Windows that cannot run old Windows apps, it should have been called Windows Tablet, but no, RT, good, more confusion right there, nice.

Stupidity over stupidity, well, if the current Windows team is so stupid to messup Windows this bad, then it is not surprising that companies are abandoning Windows Tablet (so called RT)

I actually can't use a phone or a tablet that are not Android 4.2 or 4.3, everything else just looks stupid and limited, no proper YouTube, or a Google Plus app, or Gallery , or Google Chrome, or Maps, etc

Edited by john.smith_2084, Aug 10 2013, 2:46am :

john.smith_2084 said,

I am not sure why Windows 8 is compared to MacOS, as I know the Mac is a very selected computer for a very selected market share, if it took Windows 8 to a year to reach that, it is another problem.

I am not sure what can the OEMs do more? Microsoft asked them to build a machine and they built one, Microsoft selected the Slow Tegra 3 and the OEM implemented it, the entire process costed money, and Microsoft did not do much on that front.

The result is a tablet named Windows that cannot run old Windows apps, it should have been called Windows Tablet, but no, RT, good, more confusion right there, nice.

Stupidity over stupidity, well, if the current Windows team is so stupid to messup Windows this bad, then it is not surprising that companies are abandoning Windows Tablet (so called RT)

I actually can't use a phone or a tablet that are not Android 4.2 or 4.3, everything else just looks stupid and limited, no proper YouTube, or a Google Plus app, or Gallery , or Google Chrome, or Maps, etc

I actually agree with most of what you are saying; however, I do unilaterally assign the problem back to Microsoft with regard to OEM RT tablet sales.

Acer and others blasted Windows 8 for their own interests, mainly because they did not have the newer touch screen based on Windows 8 specifications ready to go.

As for the devotion to Google, I bet that someday you will look back and cringe.

As for the Apps you mention you seem to overlook that Flash runs well on Surface RT as well as HTML5, there is less need for dedicated Apps when you have the full functionality of the web.

PS WP8 has a better 'Gallery' App (faster, never crashes, has access to every photo on SkyDrive, Facebook, etc in one interface.) WP8 also does have a great YouTube App, although IE10 works just fine on the YouTube website as well. As for Google+, enjoy it while it lasts, a lot of companies are pushing ahead with stronger security policies that are blocking GMail and Google+ due to the secrecy of communications act that is violated when a user even corresponds to a customer with a Gmail address.

Surprised at the comments that want to conflate the success of Windows RT with the Modern UI.

Let me add an impassioned argument, as an OS engineer. The modern UI and Apps have changed my level of interaction and productivity. I simply would not go back to a pre-Windows 8, desktop only UI model.

This is the year 2013, and it is time for people to take a minute and adjust or relegate themselves to a historic UI model and stay there. There are new ways of interacting, new software opportunities and letting go of outdated concepts that the user should no longer have to manually manage.

I have watched many friends over the years stay locked on their CLI or various WM favorites and never regain their edge in adapting or utilizing new and significant paradigms in computer interfaces.

Even with Windows 95 and the docucentric model confused a lot of people that didn't give it a chance. I still see these people today fumbling along with a Windows Explorer folder open and digging through the folder tree on the left like a caveman digging for termites. It is sad.

I don't blame Asus. Consumers aren't buying it, why should they waste money developing products for it?

It's first and foremost a branding error - RT means nothing to anyone and competes against the Windows 8 moniker causing confusion. Shows how important it can be to get basic things like product names right IMHO. Add to that fragmentation with tablets running W8 and you have the mess detailed in the article above.

W0w I can't believe I read through that many comments without any real thought or insight as to why Asus are dropping RT.

I'll give it to you folks now, the reasons.

It's too damned expensive and OEMs cannot offset the OS/Office (bundled) license with crap bloatware and trialware.

This means OEMs are passing the cost DIRECTLY on to the consumer.

Why do you think Windows 8.1 for x86 small form factor has Office Home and Student bundled with it.......


......................................

I believe Surface RT have to cost more to let OEM produce affordable or better RT's. OEM shouldn't have to compete with Surface. Microsoft done right, however, as ASUS, ACER, Dell, HP hands off RT, you can see Surface start dropping prices.

deadonthefloor said,
It's too damned expensive and OEMs cannot offset the OS/Office (bundled) license with crap bloatware and trialware.

This means OEMs are passing the cost DIRECTLY on to the consumer.

Smart move Asus. RT is dead and has no future, it's won't be useful for future tablets because tablets themselves will be capable of running the full OS with decent battery time very soon killing the only advantage RT might of had. Defending this thing only weakens your credibility as none of the arguments hold water.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, it has always been about the price. Windows RT is a slimmed down version of Windows 8, therefore, Windows RT tablets should have come with a slimmed down price. Asking people to pay for $500-$600 dollars for RT tablets when customers can get a full fledged Windows 8 laptop/desktop for cheaper WAS NEVER GOING TO WORK. Microsoft and OEMs flat out overreached.

Realistically, if the Windows Store had a bigger app selection, no one would even question the benefits of RT tablets. Cheap, no malware, long battery life and a ton of apps is an easy sell. But expensive with almost no apps is an impossible sell. It's all about costs. RT tablets needed to hit that $200 dollar price range last year.

I have a feeling Nokia will be making a WinRT Tablet and will be doing the same thing what it did with Windows Phone i.e. steal away market from competitors.

Wise move. Asus can focus on laptops, and let other OEMs fight it in the limited tablet market. It is way too crowded, with too many companies fighting for the same part of the market.

everyone should stop producing Windows RT, Windows 8 products!!!!! Microsoft latest operating system (8.1 too) is simply hideous and sucks as desktop enviroment.

Window 64 bit was release a long time ago and so far some developers and Microsoft was the only one step up to the plate. MS can make window 64 last as long as window RT can, pretty soon RT will become a household word

ASUS puts out overpriced substandard hardware and it is no big loss.. And yes I speak from experience.. Most of their products barely make it past warranty. There support sucks and once a product is "replaced" with a newer version they stop all work on anything related to the product.
My vk266h died a month after the warranty and the built in cam only has drivers for xp even though the monitor was released less than a year before 7..
They are on my do not buy list along with every other company that will not update drivers just to force you to buy the same exact product to get a driver update...

While it would be great if RT sold well and if OEMs supported it, it's not necessary.
Microsoft is playing the long game and their long term goal is to unify their OS products and have a version for the ARM platform.
ARM is about to hit data centers in a big way with ARMv8 64bit CPUs and Microsoft wants to be there with Windows Server for ARM. RT is basically a test run to allow them to work out kinks with consumers before they offer a product to corporations. RT and Windows Phone will merge (probably as soon as Windows 9) and you'll end up with just one Windows available for both x86-64 and ARM64 in different SKUs (phone, tablet, desktop, server, etc.) That's the end game but it's still of few years off... RT is a necessary step to get there however no matter how well it sells now or how many OEMs choose to come along for the ride.

The only real mistakes I see they made were calling RT "Windows" because Joe Consumer thinks that means compatible and being able to switch to the desktop on an RT device at all. Had they called it "Surface OS" or something else and hid the desktop a lot of this confusion wouldn't have happened.

@Asmodai
calling it "Surface OS" won't work because it's still a "Windows". MS did mention during Surface announcement that RT won't be backward compatible that's it. How Best Buy employee explain to Joe Consumer is not MS fault.
I agree MS commercial shouldn't be about dancing but should be "MAC vs PC" style.

WIn RT is pretty , much full of fail.. They should have just took all the money they were going to invest in RT, and put in driving the price down for the Pro... Not saying the Pro is over priced.. but if it was much cheaper, it would dominate..

The general public, would rather spend $500 on an iPad than a Surface..

Window 7 UI is done and MS focus now is to make over windows as we know it now as modern UI. The future of window start with 8, the bad thing that some people perceive this as window RT shouldn't be call window is two words "Backward Compatible" with previous windows. Backward compatible which we all know and familiar application such as office, registry, notepad, etc. The future of window 8 will be compatible with are the window store with xbox, RT, window phone, and window 8 pro. Really, RT is crucial in the ecosystem because window phone uses ARM, Intel is such d*ck that I think they should be challenge.

Sort of saw this coming.
In general i think RT was MS's way of padding the gap between a desktop OS (7) and an OS designed to be both (8). RT was needed to slowly flow the public in to this idea and i think it's now served it's purpose. I'd imagine that Windows 8.1 and Windows 9 will fill any gaps that are left by the slowly forgotten RT.

In theory it was a great idea, however the problem I saw with RT, is that it included the desktop, but hardly any apps ran on it. Office Desktop was the main push. RT should have just been start screen only like Windows Phone

wv@gt said,
In theory it was a great idea, however the problem I saw with RT, is that it included the desktop, but hardly any apps ran on it. Office Desktop was the main push. RT should have just been start screen only like Windows Phone

This is what I expect will happen in due time. RT will be the OS that runs on phones up to mini 8" tablets without the desktop. 8.1 reduces the need for users to visit the desktop to do basic tasks that they needed to do in 8.0. That's a clear indication that RT will be the first version to drop the desktop fully and become the pure consumption OS.

Compatibility?! Why the **** do I want legacy crap running on a tablet device? If you need that buy an x64 device. RT is meant solely to take on iOS and Android.

Dot Matrix said,
Compatibility?! Why the **** do I want legacy crap running on a tablet device? If you need that buy an x64 device. RT is meant solely to take on iOS and Android.

the problem is MS didn't call it something different... they called it windows still with an RT on the end... which does nothing but confused the *average* user which causes headaches for OEM's... this would be like Apple calling iOS Macintosh OSX Phone Edition... sounds like it's the same thing, but it's not... MS should of called it something besides windows RT that made it stand out as "not the same" as desktop windows...

Yes, the compatibility is unnecessary and confusing here, I think.

Good point on the Windows brand too.

They should have called it something else, like... Surface OS and instead focus on API compatibility with Windows and .NET instead. That would have been good enough for the developers anyway.

Dot Matrix said,
Compatibility?! Why the **** do I want legacy crap running on a tablet device? If you need that buy an x64 device. RT is meant solely to take on iOS and Android.

win32/x86 compatibility can be a great thing on a tablet, because there are lots of windows 8 tablets that are hybrids. Once they are turned into a laptop, it can be useful to be able to run classic windows software on the desktop, or plug any device and be sure it will work.

that eliminates the need to have a computer in addition to a tablet.

even 32bits Atom clover trail devices are powerful enough for most people.

furthermore, there are developers who build desktop apps with touch in mind:
http://www.julien-manici.com/immersive_explorer/

due to sandboxing in Windows RT, iOS, android, there are some kind of applications that are impossible to build on these platforms.

of course, for users who often fall victim to scams pushing them to install malwares, it is a better choice to limit them to windows RT.

Northgrove said,
Yes, the compatibility is unnecessary and confusing here, I think.

Good point on the Windows brand too.

They should have called it something else, like... Surface OS and instead focus on API compatibility with Windows and .NET instead. That would have been good enough for the developers anyway.

Well RT will end up as the phone and tablet OS fully in time so that's probably why it's still called Windows and not something else. Maybe if MS ends up being the only one making RT devices they can change the name but I don't expect that to be the case. I think they should hide the desktop on RT tablets, that stops the confusion and only let's people use store apps. Since they could see the desktop and use it like always the thought they could install their old x86 apps on it.

It is window underneath the RT''s hood. You just call it something else beside windows because it won't run legacy apps.

neufuse said,

the problem is MS didn't call it something different... they called it windows still with an RT on the end... which does nothing but confused the *average* user which causes headaches for OEM's... this would be like Apple calling iOS Macintosh OSX Phone Edition... sounds like it's the same thing, but it's not... MS should of called it something besides windows RT that made it stand out as "not the same" as desktop windows...

link8506 said,

win32/x86 compatibility can be a great thing on a tablet, because there are lots of windows 8 tablets that are hybrids. Once they are turned into a laptop, it can be useful to be able to run classic windows software on the desktop, or plug any device and be sure it will work.

that eliminates the need to have a computer in addition to a tablet.

even 32bits Atom clover trail devices are powerful enough for most people.

furthermore, there are developers who build desktop apps with touch in mind:
http://www.julien-manici.com/immersive_explorer/

due to sandboxing in Windows RT, iOS, android, there are some kind of applications that are impossible to build on these platforms.

of course, for users who often fall victim to scams pushing them to install malwares, it is a better choice to limit them to windows RT.

I can do "real work" on my 2 year old Toshiba Thrive. HDMI out to a monitor, bluetooth keyboard and mouse (or USB), and remote desktop software to put my Windows desktop and all of my x86 applications on my tablet. I can do this on my $200 tablet...why on God's green earth would I want to spend $450-$800 on a Microsoft tablet?

John Nemesh said,

I can do "real work" on my 2 year old Toshiba Thrive. HDMI out to a monitor, bluetooth keyboard and mouse (or USB), and remote desktop software to put my Windows desktop and all of my x86 applications on my tablet. I can do this on my $200 tablet...why on God's green earth would I want to spend $450-$800 on a Microsoft tablet?

well, your "solution" requires a $200 tablet, a $300 computer, and an appropriate network connection.

how can you possibly think it's a better solution than a $350 windows 8 atom clover trail tablet?

can you work in a place without network connection with your tablet?

wouldn't it make more sense to just buy a windows tablet instead?

Always said RT was pointless when its only benefit has been battery life which Atom devices provide, and with improved performance from Bay Trail RT becomes even more pointless. This is where Microsoft should engage their brains and offer a Metro theme for the desktop so it gels even better with the Metro UI, and since its a theme it can be enabled or disabled as desired. With the other desktop enhancements in 8.1 that would truly make it a good well rounded OS.

Win RT products failure is OEMs/MS fault, and they have no one to blame but themselves. If you release a product that people feel is inferior to existing products, but at the SAME OR HIGHER Price, it WILL fail. Most of the RT products that launched last year, were priced at $600 or more. That is GARBAGE for a tablet os device.

Of course, this could be OEMs just outpricing their own android tablets, b/c they don't really care about RT anyways.

Actually OEM should back off and let MS release Surface exclusively just like iPad. OEM just doesn't innovate. I am more excited wtg surface RT 2

minster11 said,
Actually OEM should back off and let MS release Surface exclusively just like iPad. OEM just doesn't innovate. I am more excited wtg surface RT 2

OEM are already backed off. Surfact RT is all MS unloved child now along with several others.

how about Dell, HP, Lenovo?

Auditor said,

OEM are already backed off. Surfact RT is all MS unloved child now along with several others.

Remember, I mentioned that the price gap between RT and 8 itself (both pre-installed) is rather narrow - that, if anything, is a problem for RT On top of that, 8 (and 8.1) is compatible for the most part with 7's hardware base (if not even most of the XP/Vista hardware base). Given that, why buy RT-based hardware when you can either buy new OR buy used hardware and throw Windows 7 (or 8, or even 8.1) on it instead? Google does only Android - there's no real upward path to Chromebooks or even Chromium OS. Apple? The price gap between iOS and OS X is even wider - and I think that is actually deliberate on Apple's part.

PGHammer said,
Remember, I mentioned that the price gap between RT and 8 itself (both pre-installed) is rather narrow - that, if anything, is a problem for RT On top of that, 8 (and 8.1) is compatible for the most part with 7's hardware base (if not even most of the XP/Vista hardware base). Given that, why buy RT-based hardware when you can either buy new OR buy used hardware and throw Windows 7 (or 8, or even 8.1) on it instead? Google does only Android - there's no real upward path to Chromebooks or even Chromium OS. Apple? The price gap between iOS and OS X is even wider - and I think that is actually deliberate on Apple's part.

Didn't MS drop the price for RT on 8" devices already? Seems to me that it's going to end up as the option for mini tablets, phanlets, and phones in another year.

The price drop is not that much compared to the price gap between iOS and OS X; worse, it's still more expensive than Android tablets (which are not only largely identical in terms of hardware, but cost less besides). Basically, in terms of tablets, you have Android at the bottom, Windows (and primarily 8, not RT) in the middle), and iOS at the high end. 8 works entirely *because* of all that backward compatibility with not just 7's hardware base, but 7's software base; that is something RT doesn't have, albeit by design. If you don't WANT backward compatibility, then you basically choose between Android (price) or iOS (build quality - both hardware and software). There's still a lot of *I don't want to change anything* out there in the user community - hence all the hatred and vitriol in terms of 8 and especially RT.

Not surprised in the slightest, i've also owned a dell xps 10 which I sold a month later.

Love the microsoft apps, but RT/8 isn't right for the tablet market...........you can't port a desktop os over to the tablet platform. Sorry, it just doesn't work.

I keep saying RT is a failure, the only forum oblivious to that fact seems to be neowin. No doubt when RT dies, those who have been arguing for RT will soon change their tune and come up with spin as to why they were actually right.....neopoliticians I call them lol

Time will tell, maybe it's me that's wrong but I just can't see RT being sold from anyone other than Microsoft within the next 12 months.

The ONLY way microsoft is going to succeed in this market is to port Mobile 8 over to tablets, but even then....they need to come up with something really fantastic to gain marketshare.....and office 2013 doesn't cut it.

RT is the new HD-DVD

glen8 said,
Not surprised in the slightest, i've also owned a dell xps 10 which I sold a month later.

Love the microsoft apps, but RT/8 isn't right for the tablet market...........you can't port a desktop os over to the tablet platform. Sorry, it just doesn't work.

I keep saying RT is a failure, the only forum oblivious to that fact seems to be neowin. No doubt when RT dies, those who have been arguing for RT will soon change their tune and come up with spin as to why they were actually right.....neopoliticians I call them lol

Time will tell, maybe it's me that's wrong but I just can't see RT being sold from anyone other than Microsoft within the next 12 months.

The ONLY way microsoft is going to succeed in this market is to port Mobile 8 over to tablets, but even then....they need to come up with something really fantastic to gain marketshare.....and office 2013 doesn't cut it.

RT is the new HD-DVD

Windows RT is and isn't a desktop OS. It is meant to compete with iOS and Android. If you want all that legacy junk the desktop still has, buy an x64 device.

Also, [s]Mobile[/s] Windows Phone 8 should never be up scaled as a tablet OS. Tablets are more capable than being reduced to bonafide paper weights. I have a Lumia, why do I need Windows Phone on another device?

ahhell said,
Yeah because NO one would EVER want to use Office 2k13.

You do know that office is the most popular office application right? Used by 99% of enterprise systems.

I'm saying that for tablet consumers, they will need more than just office 2013 to move them away from apple/google

Please try and keep up, I know it's Friday but still

glen8 said,
Not surprised in the slightest, i've also owned a dell xps 10 which I sold a month later.

Love the microsoft apps, but RT/8 isn't right for the tablet market...........you can't port a desktop os over to the tablet platform. Sorry, it just doesn't work.

I keep saying RT is a failure, the only forum oblivious to that fact seems to be neowin. No doubt when RT dies, those who have been arguing for RT will soon change their tune and come up with spin as to why they were actually right.....neopoliticians I call them lol

Time will tell, maybe it's me that's wrong but I just can't see RT being sold from anyone other than Microsoft within the next 12 months.

The ONLY way microsoft is going to succeed in this market is to port Mobile 8 over to tablets, but even then....they need to come up with something really fantastic to gain marketshare.....and office 2013 doesn't cut it.

RT is the new HD-DVD

If you mean phone 8 then no, they're not going to port it over, phone is going to end up running RT without all the desktop stuff. Developers will then code once and target phone, tabs and even x86 devices since windows store apps are cross platform.

RT works as a tablet OS fine, it needs the core apps to be better, happening in 8.1, more official apps that people expect, which are coming. Finally it needs to not depend on the desktop at all. With 8.1 and the updated pc settings screen the need for a tablet user to hunt for a setting in control panel is pretty much gone unless you want to do something really advanced but that's the minority. Have a better price and RT can be a good tablet platform.

glen8 said,
Not surprised in the slightest, i've also owned a dell xps 10 which I sold a month later.

Love the microsoft apps, but RT/8 isn't right for the tablet market...........you can't port a desktop os over to the tablet platform. Sorry, it just doesn't work.

I keep saying RT is a failure, the only forum oblivious to that fact seems to be neowin. No doubt when RT dies, those who have been arguing for RT will soon change their tune and come up with spin as to why they were actually right.....neopoliticians I call them lol

Time will tell, maybe it's me that's wrong but I just can't see RT being sold from anyone other than Microsoft within the next 12 months.

The ONLY way microsoft is going to succeed in this market is to port Mobile 8 over to tablets, but even then....they need to come up with something really fantastic to gain marketshare.....and office 2013 doesn't cut it.

RT is the new HD-DVD


you're definitely wrong.

at some point, Windows RT will replace windows 8 for the general public.

even Microsoft evangelists at the build 2012 said that they expect win32 compatibility to disappear at some point, maybe within 10 years for the general public.

windows RT sales haven't been great due to the fact the tablets running it were more expensive than their windows 8 equivalent.

the poor performance of the tegra3 which powered every windows Rt devices at launch has not helped.

I'm pretty sure asus, Samsung, acer will all be making Windows RT devices in less than 2 years, because by then Windows RT will have a significant market share.

saying that windows RT is a failure is as stupid as saying that Vista was a failure that would cause people to stay forever on XP or migrate to Linux.

history has proven them wrong. Win7 is basically just a Vista with some minor improvements, and it is a huge success.
people are slow to migrate, because they are happy enough with the stability and features of xp/win7, but at some point they'll migrate to windows 8.x, and many of them to windows RT. And of course, there will be x86 versions of windows RT. But by then, the name of this OS may change.

ahhell said,
Yeah because NO one would EVER want to use Office 2k13.
Why not just write 2013 instead of 2k13... All you're doing is making your writing more difficult to read by putting a k instead of a 0.

link8506 said,


you're definitely wrong.

at some point, Windows RT will replace windows 8 for the general public.

even Microsoft evangelists at the build 2012 said that they expect win32 compatibility to disappear at some point, maybe within 10 years for the general public.

windows RT sales haven't been great due to the fact the tablets running it were more expensive than their windows 8 equivalent.

the poor performance of the tegra3 which powered every windows Rt devices at launch has not helped.

I'm pretty sure asus, Samsung, acer will all be making Windows RT devices in less than 2 years, because by then Windows RT will have a significant market share.

saying that windows RT is a failure is as stupid as saying that Vista was a failure that would cause people to stay forever on XP or migrate to Linux.

history has proven them wrong. Win7 is basically just a Vista with some minor improvements, and it is a huge success.
people are slow to migrate, because they are happy enough with the stability and features of xp/win7, but at some point they'll migrate to windows 8.x, and many of them to windows RT. And of course, there will be x86 versions of windows RT. But by then, the name of this OS may change.

You just don't understand this market. Windows Vista was a DESKTOP OS, didn't matter is it was rubbish. They improved it with 7, but it was just a newer DESKTOP OS.

Windows RT is a TABLET OS (but actually it's really a desktop one) which means it's competing for the first time with iOS and Android. Personally I don't agree with this, Wndows RT is so much different over iOS and Android you should not compare it.

I think comparing the two is the entire reason people don't like it. Microsoft are trying to say it's something it's not, or that's the perception. Maybe it's down to poor marketing?

and are you saying Asus are carrying on supporting RT because the article is saying otherwise?

glen8 said,

You just don't understand this market. Windows Vista was a DESKTOP OS, didn't matter is it was rubbish. They improved it with 7, but it was just a newer DESKTOP OS.

Windows RT is a TABLET OS (but actually it's really a desktop one) which means it's competing for the first time with iOS and Android. Personally I don't agree with this, Wndows RT is so much different over iOS and Android you should not compare it.

Windows 8/RT have an interface for tablet, plus the desktop interface. Users are not forced to use the desktop interface on tablet. They just have to use it when they want to do things they could not do on a legacy tablet OS such as iOS. Things like browsing files from a usb key, editing a full office document, ...


I don't see how having MORE features than the competition can be something bad.

mouse support is especially useful for precise editing of documents. Not having that on ios is just ridiculous. "touch only" is not good for actual work.


I think comparing the two is the entire reason people don't like it. Microsoft are trying to say it's something it's not, or that's the perception. Maybe it's down to poor marketing?

and are you saying Asus are carrying on supporting RT because the article is saying otherwise?

I'm saying it's temporary. Asus prefers to have less models of computers on the market and sell more of each. Because it costs them a lot of money to develop and distribute products than will sell only a few 100k units.

for know they think they will spend less money developing windows 8 products and ignoring windows RT.

the remaining windows RT OEMs such as lenovo and dell will sell more windows RT products and be happy with asus decision.

but in a year or two, when a bigger user base will have understood the benefits of windows RT, asus will surely become interested in selling windows RT machines again. As will acer and Samsung.

People are just impatient. I love my Surface RT as well. RT is not bad, it's just the marketing and confusion among users.

Jury is still out on the Modern UI, just no apps other than tablet type things. RT, yeah, I think RT is done without a major revamp. MS just didn't have a clear vision with what to do with RT IMO.

MorganX said,
Jury is still out on the Modern UI, just no apps other than tablet type things. RT, yeah, I think RT is done without a major revamp. MS just didn't have a clear vision with what to do with RT IMO.

They do, it's not there yet though and the OEMs aren't going to wait, well some of them anyways. RT will be the OS for everything from smartphones to tablets. Now I dunno if that will be up to 8" tablets only or up tp 10" still?

If you're going to rebrand Windows Phone OS as RT, maybe. But RT Tablets, I think they're done for now. Under 8", maybe.

They should have waited with RT until they could have removed the desktop from it and make Office all ModernUI. That way there would have been no confusion among consumers as all they would have access to would be the Apps and the Store.

MorganX said,
Jury is still out on the Modern UI, just no apps other than tablet type things. RT, yeah, I think RT is done without a major revamp. MS just didn't have a clear vision with what to do with RT IMO.

No, the Jury has spoken, and they have rejected "metro". WP sales are up, but still at a meager 3.7% globally, RT is NOT selling, hence the fire sales. Windows 8 is not selling, hence the FORTY percent drop in PC sales this quarter.

John Nemesh said,

No, the Jury has spoken, and they have rejected "metro". WP sales are up, but still at a meager 3.7% globally, RT is NOT selling, hence the fire sales. Windows 8 is not selling, hence the FORTY percent drop in PC sales this quarter.


you know that iPad sales have also dropped compared to the same quarter last year, right?

so the iPad has become a failure too?

the Mac sales also have dropped. Will you blame this on Windows 8 too?

the real reason pc shipments have dropped is because PCs can last more than 5 years. People don't want to replace PCs that are still working perfectly.

I know people with 10years old PCs that don't want to replace them. Even I, have only desktop PCs from the vista era. The only PCs I bought since then are win8 tablets. I don't see the point of replacing my old desktop PCs, since they are still powerful enough despite being 5 years old.

@John

Well I'm part of the Jury and I haven't spoken yet. With the changes in 8.1, ModernUI will exist much better with the desktop. There just aren't ModernUI apps worth mentioning except for a few utility or tablet type apps. Even Halo: Spartan Assault shipped without gamepad support

I agree with RT, it shouldn't have had the desktop for the low-end Surface/Arm Tablets. But ModernUI, it hasn't even gotten started yet. MS was waaaay out in front of developers and a lot won't be moving over to the new tools, the smaller guys, but a lot will. We will see. They do have a tough road ahead.

On the gaming front, Xbox One and PS4 using a PC architecture will help there, and XBone's ability to run apps may also help.

MorganX said,
MS just didn't have a clear vision with what to do with RT IMO.

Consumers just got a clear vision of what they didn't want.

John Nemesh said,

No, the Jury has spoken, and they have rejected "metro". WP sales are up, but still at a meager 3.7% globally, RT is NOT selling, hence the fire sales. Windows 8 is not selling, hence the FORTY percent drop in PC sales this quarter.

^this

link8506 said,


you know that iPad sales have also dropped compared to the same quarter last year, right?

so the iPad has become a failure too?

the Mac sales also have dropped. Will you blame this on Windows 8 too?

the real reason pc shipments have dropped is because PCs can last more than 5 years. People don't want to replace PCs that are still working perfectly.

I know people with 10years old PCs that don't want to replace them. Even I, have only desktop PCs from the vista era. The only PCs I bought since then are win8 tablets. I don't see the point of replacing my old desktop PCs, since they are still powerful enough despite being 5 years old.

Actually yes, iPad is slumping as well. Just as every analyst predicted it would. Apple is going back to being a niche product just like they were with the Mac. Guess what? OPEN platforms that are hardware agnostic will beat "vertical" platforms from only one vendor EVERY SINGLE TIME. But we are not discussing the iPad, nor Android, we are talking about RT and desktop PCs with Windows 8. SOME of the decline can be attributed to smartphones and tablets, sure, and some of it can also be blamed on the graceful aging of older hardware...BUT a LOT of the blame can also be laid at the feet of Steve Ballmer and his push for touchscreen computing on desktops, and on Windows 8 itself. There are PLENTY of people who hate it....go read some of the support forums, go talk to the "average joe" on the street. People simply DO NOT LIKE Windows 8, and it is reflected in the sales numbers. PERIOD. There is no arguing that the PC market is in decline, nor that Windows 8 shares a lot of the blame. Its FACT. I know some here will have a hard time accepting that because they drank the kool-aid, but all of the kool-aid in the world is not going to change the fact that ITS NOT SELLING.

MorganX - you are still seeing folks that have a major case of "I-don't-want-to-move" - not just hardware, but also software. They are not merely change-averse, but outright change-hostile; as long as the economy is growing at a snail's pace (which is still true in a lot of the developed world) they will look for (and in fact find) excuse after excuse for that change-hostile attitude (the biggest one being cost/price). The reason there is demand for Android in terms of tablets is entirely price-driven - look at Android tablets vs. WinRT tablets. There is a price difference (but no real hardware/construction difference - remember, ASUS' RT tablets were mostly originally based off Android tablets - the only change was firmware); what works hardware-wise with Android is simply too wimpy to power RT. If you up the hardware specs (necessary to drive RT) you also increase the price - and the market wants cheap tablets. Even more telling, as the price for RT tablets goes up, it runs smack dab into Windows 8 tablets and slates (both of which are, more likely than not, re-engineered Ultrabooks or hybrids). Given a choice between full backward-compatible Windows (even Windows 8 or 8.1) with OR without touch support, and firewalled RT without backward compatibility weith a large amount of the Windows 7 (if not Vista and XP) software base, why would you buy RT? Lastly, Mr. Nemesh - your insistence on blaming ModernUI is centered entirely on pigeonholing it as a touch-only UI. Not only is it untrue, but it has never been true - if it were, why is it on Windows Server 2012? (Windows Server 2012 is a server OS - while you CAN deploy a touch-capable server, why would most businesses do so?) Just because touch support is available, does it mean that users HAVE to use it? Absolutely not - and you know better than that, as that is true of not only iOS, but even Android; iOS hardware, such as the iPad, doesn't even include a physical keyboard, while physical keyboards are mostly optional for Android hardware in general - not just tablets, but even smartphones. I moved, bag and baggage, to Windows 8 with the Consumer Preview, and I'm running Windows 8.1 Pro Preview today - and I do so on desktop hardware (specifically, an ATX mid-tower) with no touch support at all. (I run some ModernUI apps, but mostly desktop software. My choice - not Microsoft's.) I'm able to do so because - contrary to your assertion - Windows 8 is not a cage; if anything, it is LESS of a cage than Windows 7. I have all the Win32 software that 7 (and in a LOT of cases, XP and Vista) supports, alongside ModernUI (which can, but does not have to, support touch - most ModernUI software has little trouble being used with a keyboard+mouse). I'm not caged in at all. I've even explained why I have no interest at all in RT tablets - Windows 8 and 8.1 offer way too much value for a price little above that of RT. (Here's a surprise for you - OEM Windows 8 Pro + a refurbished Windows 7 portable costs less than an iPad. Given that, I'd have any interest in RT "why"?) You are trapped in that touch-only/touch-first assumption - which has not ever been true. Did you run the OS only in a virtual machine - as opposed to a bare-metal or VHD-based installation?

Is this more an issue of Windows 8 itself or OEMS wanting to continue to make cheap products not at the level of the Surface or iPad? I still say if Microsoft released a Windows Phone variant for tablets or a Start Screen only Windows 8 they might be more successful. I'm a fan of Windows 8, but it seems to only work for a certain niche market, not the whole market as Microsoft had hoped.

Auditor said,
Yup blame OEMs. Then will you care to explain then why MS made Surface RT is failing as well.

The fanboys will do anything to defend Microsoft's crappy OS. Even when the OVERWHELMING evidence is that Windows 8 is killing the entire mainstream PC market. Even when two of the biggest OEMs (Acer and Asus) have dropped RT completely. Even when the CEO of Acer says that he is moving his business to "non-Microsoft" operating systems. They will live in denial right up until MS is broken up and sold off in chunks.

John Nemesh said,

The fanboys will do anything to defend Microsoft's crappy OS. Even when the OVERWHELMING evidence is that Windows 8 is killing the entire mainstream PC market. Even when two of the biggest OEMs (Acer and Asus) have dropped RT completely. Even when the CEO of Acer says that he is moving his business to "non-Microsoft" operating systems. They will live in denial right up until MS is broken up and sold off in chunks.


LOL... Windows 8 is "killing" the mainstream PC market? No. Everyone I know who uses Windows 8 loves it, it's the whiners that don't use it everyday that whine. What's killing the market is Windows PCs are built to last. Most consumers and business don't have a 'need' to upgrade yet. Also, there was an article before saying the large selling of cheap netbooks slowed down the market too. Everyone will start switching by the time 8.5 or 9 comes out when their current PCs become dated and XP support officially ends.

j2006 said,

LOL... Windows 8 is "killing" the mainstream PC market? No. Everyone I know who uses Windows 8 loves it, it's the whiners that don't use it everyday that whine. What's killing the market is Windows PCs are built to last. Most consumers and business don't have a 'need' to upgrade yet. Also, there was an article before saying the large selling of cheap netbooks slowed down the market too. Everyone will start switching by the time 8.5 or 9 comes out when their current PCs become dated and XP support officially ends.

I DO use it every day, at it sucks! If I open a "metro" browser, or app, say Pandora, and start playing music, it kills the audio when I switch to the desktop. Windows 8 is a FRACTURED MESS, you know it, I know it, the OEMs know it and are backing off of it, and the developers know it and aren't making apps for it.

Wake me up when MS is no more, okay?

John Nemesh said,

I DO use it every day, at it sucks! If I open a "metro" browser, or app, say Pandora, and start playing music, it kills the audio when I switch to the desktop. Windows 8 is a FRACTURED MESS, you know it, I know it, the OEMs know it and are backing off of it, and the developers know it and aren't making apps for it.

John Nemesh said,

I DO use it every day, at it sucks! If I open a "metro" browser, or app, say Pandora, and start playing music, it kills the audio when I switch to the desktop. Windows 8 is a FRACTURED MESS, you know it, I know it, the OEMs know it and are backing off of it, and the developers know it and aren't making apps for it.

music apps have the ability to play music in the background. Blame app developers who don't exploit the proper feature to allow background music to persist once you switch to another app.

furthermore, OEMs are not backing off of windows 8. There are backing off of windows RT, in profit of windows 8.

wv@gt said,
Is this more an issue of Windows 8 itself or OEMS wanting to continue to make cheap products not at the level of the Surface or iPad? I still say if Microsoft released a Windows Phone variant for tablets or a Start Screen only Windows 8 they might be more successful. I'm a fan of Windows 8, but it seems to only work for a certain niche market, not the whole market as Microsoft had hoped.

It is a failure of marketing. I have the xps 10 and I love it. Does everything Ineed it to.

John Nemesh said,
I DO use it every day, at it sucks! If I open a "metro" browser, or app, say Pandora, and start playing music, it kills the audio when I switch to the desktop. Windows 8 is a FRACTURED MESS, you know it, I know it, the OEMs know it and are backing off of it, and the developers know it and aren't making apps for it.
Don't open Pandora in the IE that gets suspended while not in the foreground. Problem Fixed. It's not a fractured mess... you're just incapable of adaptation. Frankly, on the desktop, why are you opening the touch-centric browser?

Indeed they do - in fact, Xbox Music (8.1 Preview) does so. Not merely in the background while running another ModernUI app, but while running desktop software (such as games, desktop browsers, such as Chrome or Firefox, or even desktop applications such as Word or even Outlook). It's not default behavior; however, it's that way for a reason - to not eat up battery power on portables (from tablets and slates to laptops). You change that default behavior on an app-by-app basis - not every app NEEDS to be capable of running when switched away. And as far as Pandora in Modern.IE, the behavior can be modified in the settings for Modern.IE - did you even LOOK at the application settings?

I have a dell xps 10. I have come to the conclusion it is all marketing. I got it for cheap off of ebay. I have been very impressed with it.

Same here with a Surface RT. I love it, amazing piece of hardware and software, especially with Office included. Not the fastest of course, but fast enough for what it's supposed to do.

Exactly! I'll confess I used to hate on RT as well like most people who comment on here, but I gave in and bought a Surface RT at the cheaper rate, and I was blown away with how much I actually love it. I actually felt stupid for criticizing it. It's a wonderful OS and it's only going to get better once it gets better in future updates.

Lord Method Man said,
Inevitable decision. Windows RT and the Modern UI in general has been very poorly received by the public.

Not saying what you said isn't true however from my experience this isn't the case.

Intel is delivering Bay Trail with competitive price, performance and battery life. There is no reason for OEMs to make RT device anymore.
For MS, it is a different story. MS need RT for the merge of phone/tablet OS and in case ARM CPUs become powerful enough.

acrodex said,
Intel is delivering Bay Trail with competitive price, performance and battery life. There is no reason for OEMs to make RT device anymore.
For MS, it is a different story. MS need RT for the merge of phone/tablet OS and in case ARM CPUs become powerful enough.


people often forget that windows RT has one huge advantage: it is malware-proof.

If only some OEM released 13" or 15" touch laptops, I would recommend that to my customers and family who often fall victim of malicious software they download from the internet.

most people just need a full web browser with flash player, and office.

windows RT has all the features that 50+% users need to accomplish their every day tasks.

I think the lack of (unsandboxed) win32 compatibility would really be a benefit for those users : no toolbars, no spywares, no malwares!

link8506 said,
it is malware-proof.

well, current RT market share are too small to warrant the attention of malware makers.

Torolol said,

well, current RT market share are too small to warrant the attention of malware makers.

I think what he means is it's malware proof from regular Windows malware,

acrodex said,
If you go full Metro in Win8, you are malware proof as well.
It would be interesting if the same hack to get Windows RT to run non-Microsoft applications on Desktop could be used to force Windows 8 to not run any Desktop apps.

Windows 8 is a good product that needed an extra year of development to be something great and well accepted by everyone. Windows 8.1 will fix some of the technical issues but not all of them and the reputation of Windows has already been harmed. Windows RT however is a complete failure, I know there are people with RT tablets that enjoy them. But how many of you own an RT tablet and a Windows 8 tablet and say that RT is superior? The three advantage's it was suppose to have was the price, size and battery life. The prices savings are poor, the size difference isn't much and the battery life isn't noticeably better.

MikeChipshop said,

Not saying what you said isn't true however from my experience this isn't the case.

For every one (incredibly vocal) fan of "Metro" and RT, there are 1000 others who hate it. Doubt me? Just look at the sales figures, then tell me again.

John Nemesh said,

For every one (incredibly vocal) fan of "Metro" and RT, there are 1000 others who hate it. Doubt me? Just look at the sales figures, then tell me again.


Sales figures don't mean anything. Most people don't even know anything about it. That's the problem. The issue is a mix of marketing + availability + price. I was a former criticizer of RT but once I actually gave it a try, it LOVE it (especially in 8.1), and it'll only get better.

link8506 said,


people often forget that windows RT has one huge advantage: it is malware-proof.

If only some OEM released 13" or 15" touch laptops, I would recommend that to my customers and family who often fall victim of malicious software they download from the internet.

most people just need a full web browser with flash player, and office.

windows RT has all the features that 50+% users need to accomplish their every day tasks.

I think the lack of (unsandboxed) win32 compatibility would really be a benefit for those users : no toolbars, no spywares, no malwares!

Hackers don't target platforms that nobody owns....not only will RT not run malware, it won't run much else either.

j2006 said,

Sales figures don't mean anything. .

So i guess if it doesn't matter Apple is then a huge success in the home desktop market and RIM is still going strong in the home mobile phone market ...

Torolol said,

well, current RT market share are too small to warrant the attention of malware makers.

No, Windows RT is similar to iOS and Windows Phone : they are fully sandboxed platform that don't provide their applications a way to interact with other apps data (unless they are shared on purpose), run at startup, or do nasty things such as adding toolbars in the browser, or listen keystrokes in the background.

then of course, there can be security flaws allowing privilege escalation on iOS/windows RT. But in the Windows/linux/osx world, most malwares are just exploiting traditional OS apis to do nasty stuffs, and they don't need to exploit any flaw to exist. Having an OS that restricts such possibilities in a huge step forward for regular people who don't need to do advanced stuffs on their machine.

Thus, it's not just a matter of marketshare that explains the lack of malware on Windows RT. It has been built to make classic malwares impossible to port.

John Nemesh said,

Hackers don't target platforms that nobody owns....not only will RT not run malware, it won't run much else either.

Windows 8 has sales over 100 million and an install base of 88 million+ in less than a year. Can you point to *any* product that has sold as well?

ModernMech said,

Windows 8 has sales over 100 million and an install base of 88 million+ in less than a year. Can you point to *any* product that has sold as well?


Windows 7 ?

John Nemesh said,

Hackers don't target platforms that nobody owns....not only will RT not run malware, it won't run much else either.

no, read my above post.
even if they wanted to, malwares developers can't create malicious app on sandboxed operating systems such as windows RT or iOS. That would require them to exploit kernel flaw. Not every malware developer can do that, and since flaws get patched after a while, that would mean the malwares would no longer work until another flaw is found.

acrodex said,
If you go full Metro in Win8, you are malware proof as well.

it's not that simple. The user can still download malicious apps from the internet and execute them.

you would have to enable app locker or the parental control to prevent that.

John Nemesh said,

For every one (incredibly vocal) fan of "Metro" and RT, there are 1000 others who hate it. Doubt me? Just look at the sales figures, then tell me again.

just because people don't buy something doesn't mean they hate it.

people are happy with xp/win7, that's why they aren't replacing massively their PCs.

but among the people I know who bought new PCs, none of them have complained about windows 8.

recently a friend (who owns an iPad) even asked me to install win8 on his laptop because he loves the win8 start screen, he finds it more beautiful than win7 or ios. Now he regrets having bought that iPad. He wish he had bought a windows tablet, especially because he can't stream flash videos from Chinese web sites on his iPad, due to the lack of flash player.

link8506 said,
.... sandboxed operating systems ....

It's not a fully sandboxed operating system.
The Windows Runtime is sandboxed, but it still runs atop windows kernel.

The only difference between x86/x64 and ARM which prevents malware writers, is that binaries need to be recompiled for the new architecture AND be signed with a Microsoft owned certificate.

I am of course referring to the Desktop side of WindowsRT.

deadonthefloor said,

It's not a fully sandboxed operating system.
The Windows Runtime is sandboxed, but it still runs atop windows kernel.

The only difference between x86/x64 and ARM which prevents malware writers, is that binaries need to be recompiled for the new architecture AND be signed with a Microsoft owned certificate.

I am of course referring to the Desktop side of WindowsRT.

yes, you're technically right.

but in the end, that means users can only install/execute apps from 3rd party developers in a sandboxed environment, WinRT.

it's true that MS can potentially distribute signed MSI files that could install unsandboxed apps to the windows desktop. But that is not a security issue.

that's why windows RT is comparable to Windows Phone, iOS from a user point of view, and it's reasonable to say that it is similarly sandboxed.

The first statement would be true, when the clause "for tablets" is added. It doesn't appear to have been designed for traditional laptop and desktop use. Its the "UI problem," which Microsoft is being very stubborn about not fixing. Touch has a very long way to go before becoming even remotely universally accepted.

link8506 said,

No, Windows RT is similar to iOS and Windows Phone : they are fully sandboxed platform that don't provide their applications a way to interact with other apps data (unless they are shared on purpose), run at startup, or do nasty things such as adding toolbars in the browser, or listen keystrokes in the background.

then of course, there can be security flaws allowing privilege escalation on iOS/windows RT. But in the Windows/linux/osx world, most malwares are just exploiting traditional OS apis to do nasty stuffs, and they don't need to exploit any flaw to exist. Having an OS that restricts such possibilities in a huge step forward for regular people who don't need to do advanced stuffs on their machine.

Thus, it's not just a matter of marketshare that explains the lack of malware on Windows RT. It has been built to make classic malwares impossible to port.

Not exactly accurate, you are conflating two very different design models.

iOS is not 'sandboxed' and does not have OS and App Isolation models equal to what is available in WinRT and on WP.

Just do a check on this yourself. You can install 'sub layer' monitoring software on iOS rather easily. It is impossible to install this type of software on WinRT or WP.

Mobius Enigma said,

Not exactly accurate, you are conflating two very different design models.

iOS is not 'sandboxed' and does not have OS and App Isolation models equal to what is available in WinRT and on WP.

Just do a check on this yourself. You can install 'sub layer' monitoring software on iOS rather easily. It is impossible to install this type of software on WinRT or WP.

isn't that a software you install as part of debugging an app?

it's commonly admitted that ios apps are sandboxed, although the ios sandbox is less restrictive in things like giving access to the user's personal contacts without any confirmation.

link8506 said,

isn't that a software you install as part of debugging an app?

it's commonly admitted that ios apps are sandboxed, although the ios sandbox is less restrictive in things like giving access to the user's personal contacts without any confirmation.

They are just completely different models.

Apps on iOS run in a 'sandbox' with regard to FS access, but are not 'sandboxed' when it comes to the APIs and Framework they run inside.

So iOS has App isolation (storage), but are not truly isolated with regard to various calls and OS level access while running.

This is equivalent to a revised version of Application memory isolation that you will find on any protected mode OS with a few added features like storage isolation.

WinRT and WP use a model that is completely isolated with an abstracted new API framework that it itself is isolated from the OS, with Apps additionally isolated inside the framework.

If you want to know more about the difference, you can find information at MS or even do some anecdotal research with the complaints of WP7/WP8 development as it was and sometimes still is 'too' restrictive for developers as they cannot gain access to anything outside the isolated framework.

Let me be clear, iOS is far more protected than Android, as Apple does try to prevent general App access to key OS functionality like dialing and SMS.

However, as you do mention a lot of iOSes restrictions can be circumvented with jailbroken/development devices. Malware, which has affected iPhones in the past, can also inject itself into lower levels of the OS and gain cross application access.

Going back to other examples, Google was even able to modify Safari's behavior which was occurring outside of the framework or any App isolation.

The previous iPhone malware access examples are simply not possible on WP even if an entry point could be obtained.

John Nemesh said,

For every one (incredibly vocal) fan of "Metro" and RT, there are 1000 others who hate it. Doubt me? Just look at the sales figures, then tell me again.

Using that distorted logic and false equivalency, Macs are a complete failure.

Gaffney said,
I know there are people with RT tablets that enjoy them. But how many of you own an RT tablet and a Windows 8 tablet and say that RT is superior? The three advantage's it was suppose to have was the price, size and battery life. The prices savings are poor, the size difference isn't much and the battery life isn't noticeably better.

I'm typing this on my Surface RT and prefer it to Pro. Lighter, no fan and I can take it through airport security without having to take it out of my bag.

John Nemesh said,

For every one (incredibly vocal) fan of "Metro" and RT, there are 1000 others who hate it. Doubt me? Just look at the sales figures, then tell me again.

Empty vessels make the most noise.

Sales figures mean nothing. Most people only upgrade their OS when they buy a new machine and the current economic climate makes this a harder thing to do. So just because those people haven't upgraded doesn't mean they hate 8 or the Modern UI. Twisted logic mate, twisted logic.

link8506 said,


people often forget that windows RT has one huge advantage: it is malware-proof.

If only some OEM released 13" or 15" touch laptops, I would recommend that to my customers and family who often fall victim of malicious software they download from the internet.

most people just need a full web browser with flash player, and office.

windows RT has all the features that 50+% users need to accomplish their every day tasks.

I think the lack of (unsandboxed) win32 compatibility would really be a benefit for those users : no toolbars, no spywares, no malwares!

They don't need slow and laggy Windows RT for that, a cheap Android tablet or a Linux notebook would do fine.