Poor guy.
Hey, if it's any comfort, Al Franken thinks you are cute.
Here, enjoy another picture of you that perfectly captures your soul.
Posted on 06/02/2010 4:42:09 PM PDT by SmokingJoe
A high-ranking executive of Microsoft Corp. said that while there are makers, who decided to use Google Android operating system on their tablets, which are to be unveiled during Computex Taipei 2010 trade-show, in the long-term Windows operating system will still be more popular on desktops, notebooks and slates.
“There are always lots of noises at the beginning of new category. When netbooks were introduced three years ago, it was 95% not on Windows, and three years later it is 95% on Windows,” Steve Guggenheimer, a corporate vice president who oversees Microsoft's relationships with PC makers and other hardware companies, in an interview with the Wall Street Journal.
In fact, Microsoft helped tablet PCs to become valuable tools for professionals many years ago. However, Microsoft and its partners have not managed to drive tablets to the mainstream market, partly because clients did not need them, partly because there was a lack of infrastructure to consumer content on them.
At present developers of slates are focused around creation of services that allow to buy/download new content or software onto slates, whereas Microsoft still has to rely on its traditional Windows-based infrastructure, which is sometimes an overkill for solving simple problems. Moreover, there are a lot of makers, including Acer, Dell, HP and others, who decided to use Android instead of Windows since the latter did not support ARM processors, which are more energy-efficient than traditional x86 chips, yet, cannot deliver comparable performance.
But the hardware and software world is not stagnating. Next year Advanced Micro Devices plans to release x86 chips for tablets that integrate DirectX 11-class graphics along with mainstream microprocessor performance.
(Excerpt) Read more at xbitlabs.com ...
Why on earth did Microsoft sit on this fabulous, super advanced innovation? Is it because it was a big-@ss table? Or is it because of patent disputes with Apple?
It’s been deployed in lots of firms actually.
Here, have a look.
http://www.microsoft.com/surface/en/us/default.aspx
“Or is it because of patent disputes with Apple?”
Now, that I’d love to see.
Microsoft has a vast array of patents, including touch screen technology./
Here:
The 10 most inventive US companies
The top 10 Rank Company US patents in 2009
1 IBM (IBM, news, msgs) 4,914
2 Microsoft (MSFT, news, msgs) 2,906
3 Intel (INTC, news, msgs) 1,537
4 Hewlett-Packard (HPQ, news, msgs) 1,237
5 General Electric (GE, news, msgs) 979
6 Micron Technology (MU, news, msgs) 966
7 Cisco Systems (CSCO, news, msgs) 913
8 Broadcom (BRCM, news, msgs) 714
9 Honeywell International (HON, news, msgs) 655
10 Texas Instruments (TXN, news, msgs) 652
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Forbes/the-10-most-inventive-us-companies.aspx
Apple is not even on the list.
None of which were successful in any comparison to the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad. It is not uncommon for lots of dog products precede a good one, so what?
> the super advanced Microsoft Surface Computer, which has touch screen technology that totally trumps anything that the iPhone has,...
Tell me, are you a Microsoft Marketing hack, or just a bedazzled fanboy? You write with adjectives and adverbs like a 13-yr old twit, yet I don't think you are one, since you claim actual industry experience. Which is it?
> ... started development work as long ago as 2001, and was first shown to the public in 2007.
And not counting the demos they gave away, how many were sold to paying customers, and are still in use?
> Microsoft designed Win 7 for both tablets AND netbooks. Windows 7 has been happily running very well on some netbooks without any problems. Win 7 will run fine on the rather great looking new tablets they just announced at Computex.
You're not addressing my point, Joe. I'm not saying Microsoft can't cram Win7 into small form-factor devices. Hell, they'll try to put Windows on postage stamps.
I'm saying, it's not appropriate. Windows is not good at that stuff. It's great as a desktop OS -- I use it for 10 hours every day and manage my System Admin department very comfortably from Win7-64 on a 2-core 4GB machine.
Microsoft may try to mimic the old Contadina trick, but they are not likely to come up with something that does what people want, IMO.
But I tire of arguing with you, so I'll just say this -- let's see what happens, and how it does in the marketplace. After all, that's what matters.
That is besides the point.
Microsoft tablets STILL have been on the market for years, long before the iPhone/Ipad.
Toyota selling more cars than British VW, doesn't mean Toyota invented cars.
“Tell me, are you a Microsoft Marketing hack, or just a bedazzled fanboy? “
Windows doesn't have fanboys. It already has over 90% of the market,. Most computers users on the planet use Windows as a tool to get their work done. They have no time to be rabidfanboys like you brainless Applebot zombies.
“You write with adjectives and adverbs like a 13-yr old twit”
Oh boy! I just love when it you Apple zombies start with the insults (it always comes to that whenever idiotic Apple zombies are losing any argument). You merely give me the freedom to hammer you right back, and nothing pleases me more than bashing you clowns down.
You write like a retarded 5 year old who has been further put through a frontal lobotomy, which went wrong and damaged his brains further.
But hey, who am I to call you out on that? After all, heaven knows you need all the help you can get. Poor guy.
Microsoft has a $17,000 coffee table.
That's like asking how many MRI machines are in use at hospitals.
The Surface Computer is not a mass market product like laptops, which are for sale in the hundreds of millions to consumers. The Surface is sold to businesses with specific needs. Visit one of the hotels listed a the Surface Computers site in Vegas sometime. Now if you want to know how many have been sold, why don't you ask Microsoft?
Meanwhile, what matters here in this debate, is that the Surface Computer technology blows anything the iPhone/iPad can do out of the water. Its vastly more advanced than anything Apple has been able to come up with.
“I'm not saying Microsoft can't cram Win7 into small form-factor devices. “
Cram nothing.
Window 7 WAS designed for netbooks, and works great on netbooks.
“Windows is not good at that stuff”
It is.
” I use it for 10 hours every day and manage my System Admin department very comfortably from Win7-64 on a 2-core 4GB machine. “
Again, Intel is bringing out dual core Atoms for netbooks this very month, and some netbooks are already sporting 4GB of RAM.
“so I'll just say this — let's see what happens, and how it does in the marketplace”
Works for me.
The conversation has nothing to do with who invented anything. Neither Microsoft nor Apple invented multitouch; it was demonstrated years before either of them did anything about it. MS demonstrated it before Apple, and Apple turned it into a wildly successful product line. MS has yet to do so.
> you brainless Applebot zombies
That sorry shot went way wide. I'm not an Apple fan; I do use some of their products, along with a wide variety of others from Microsoft, HP, Dell, etc.
>>>"...super advanced... technology that totally trumps anything..."
>> You write with adjectives and adverbs like a 13-yr old twit
Actually, I take that back. You write with adjectives and adverbs like a tripped-out 55-yr-old to whom everything is "insanely great" and "magical". You know who I mean... Steve Jobs...
> Window 7 WAS designed for netbooks...
Yes, that is the official line from MS, and apparently you are compelled to parrot it. But please, Joe, think for a minute, and remember 2008:
Vista was a huge resource hog, partly because of normal bloat, and partly because it was intended to create hardware demand for the suffering PC hardware vendors. Unfortunately, it arrived too late, too big, too costly, and the market was all about smaller, cheaper devices.
When Microsoft realized it had a complete turkey on its hands, it put Vista on a crash diet, re-badged it as "Win7", and claimed it was designed for netbooks -- because they had to say that. Joe, you're not stupid. You know that history as well as I do. You know that "Win7" was actually the name of MS's next OS project, not the Son-of-Vista NT6.1 that stole the Win7 name to distance itself from its parent. You know that Microsoft was in a blind panic to bury Vista. So don't insult both of us with this party line about how Win7 was designed from scratch for netbooks. Win7 is Vista on a diet. It is Vista Done Right. But it is not some new thing for netbooks.
Win7 is a great OS. I like it -- I'm not knocking it. It's a desktop OS, slimmed down enough that it can be claimed to be suitable for use on netbooks.
The fact that it runs on a netbook doesn't mean it is a good OS for a handheld device. It's just a desktop OS on a diet. Handhelds require a different approach, for lack of a better word.
> Intel is bringing out dual core Atoms for netbooks this very month, and some netbooks are already sporting 4GB of RAM.
So what's left to differentiate these so-called netbooks from laptops, other than display size? Nothing! There is no challenge to making Windows run in 4GB. For God's sake, man, XP runs fine in 512MB.
Microsoft does not understand handheld devices. Apple does.
Microsoft understands desktops and laptops. They will dominate desktops and laptops for a good long time. Personally I think Steve Jobs is full of sh*t talking about his handheld devices replacing desktops and laptops.
And 64k memory is all you’re ever going to need.
Microsoft is dreaming. And leaving the rest of us with a nightmare.
Say, what happened to your “But I tire of arguing with you,”, spiel (post # 19 from you). You can't even have the discipline to carry out your own self imposed statements. You gotta sneak in when no one is looking to try and sneak in even more mindless propaganda on the sly don't ya? Typical.
Back on point, it has to do with the fact that Apple neither invented tablets, nor did they introduce tablets first.
“MS demonstrated it before Apple, “
Microsoft did not just demonstrate tablet computers long before Apple did, Microsoft Windows based tablets have been selling as real products long before the iPad. This idea that before the iPad there were no tablets is the biggest joke I ever heard.
“and Apple turned it into a wildly successful product line”
The iPad has sold 2 million units in 2 months . By comparison, Windows 7 sold a staggering hundred million units in just 2 months. That's what I call a wildly successful product. “Widly successful” iPad product line huh?
Say, didn't you say something about talking like a 13 year old boy?
Plus of course, selling 2 million units of anything, doesn't mean you invented it.
“You write with adjectives and adverbs like a tripped-out 55-yr-old to whom everything is “insanely great” and “magical”.
The only difference is, the Surface Computer from Microsoft IS super advanced technology. There simply isn't anything out there like it out there. The iPad simply isn't.
Get it?
It's not just Microsoft's official line. Win 7 has been running just fine on netbooks. Big difference.
“Vista was a huge resource hog, partly because of normal bloat, and partly because it was intended to create hardware demand for the suffering PC hardware vendors”
Vista is not Win 7. Vista was universally paned at launch. Win 7 was wildy praised even by those who panned Vista, and that was just during the long Win 7 beta program, which reached as many as 8 million users. Win 7 was a success before Win 7 launched, just from word of mouth of the 8 million beta users alone, before the excellent reviews even came in.
“Unfortunately, it arrived too late, too big, too costly, and the market was all about smaller, cheaper devices”
Even today, most computers sold are not smaller cheaper netbooks. Plus Vista computers were no more expensive than XP computers. As a matter of fact, the average selling price of PC’s when Vista launched was much cheaper than it was when XP launched.
” You know that Microsoft was in a blind panic to bury Vista ‘
Most of Vista's problems had to do with
# 1. It broke most XP device drivers and apps, and device makers hadn't written Vista device drivers yet at the time of launch.
# 2. Millions of initial Vista computers were shipped with 512 MB of RAM, which made Vista a dog to use it.
# 3. The overintrsusive intrusive UAC.
All these issues had been fixed by the time SP1 arrived. Later Vista computers had much more than 512 MB of RAM, and most of the device driver and applications issues had been fixed after the first 6 months.
“So what's left to differentiate these so-called netbooks from laptops, other than display size?”
Microsoft has specified screen sizes, CPU types etc where they will charge smaller amounts for for Windows licenses as netbooks.
But then given Moore's Law, netbook specs are only going to get even more powerful. A netbook in June (with dual core Atom), is going to be more powerful than most Vista computers when Vista was launched just a few years back. That's technology for ya. Things always keep getting more powerful.
“For God's sake, man, XP runs fine in 512MB”
Yes. But then XP came out in 2001. Computers are vastly more powerful today.
“Personally I think Steve Jobs is full of sh*t talking about his handheld devices replacing desktops and laptops.”
Steve Jobs is a marketing and product genius. Even I can accept that, but then he is not always right. No one is.
Imagine what Microsoft's profits would be if they also built all the systems their OS runs on (that is, they built closed systems like Apple does).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.