Microsoft Surface tablet coming in two flavours

[ChocolateBadger]

So somebody running a linux box is not running a PC? Microsoft is the defining factor for PC?

OMG you are thick. I'm talking about the marketing term, PC (PEE SEE) which yes, is linked with M$. And I'v never met someone running Linux brag about his/her PEE SEE.

 

[JStrike]

OMG you are thick. I'm talking about the marketing term, PEE SEE which yes, is linked with M$. And I'v never met someone running Linux brag about his/her PEE SEE.

Really? Many Linux people I've come across love to brag about their PEE SEE. But if you say they don't, then ok

 

[bekdik]

Saw this on the web. Interesting point of view!

Microsoft has decided to abandon it's traditional user base.

Is this the big opportunity waited for by Linux?

 

[RaptorSA]

Saw this on the web. Interesting point of view!

Err, unfortunately "Linux" cannot see and pounce on an opportunity if it was repeatedly raped in the face by it. Luckily, as a PC UI Linux sucks so bad that I don't feel I'm missing out on anything.

 

[roguemat]

But they're not entirely compatible. Software compiled only for traditional Intel architecture will NOT run on ARM, only new software developed with the WinRT API will run on both. This is going to create endless confusion and frustration. Not every developer/app is going to work in both environments, and neither should they.

Um, how will this create confusion? It simple: If the app is a Metro app and comes from the Windows Store it will run on anything - else it is a traditional desktop app and wont run on WindowsRT.

 

[Lawnchairman]

Looks sweet! Do want that!

The Win 8 Pro version looks like the better option. More applications etc.

+1

Its an app driven world and Microsoft have set up their ecosystem nicely and last week released their android and iphone apps for the xBox. Can see myself getting into this ecosystem with a Surface tablet, Windows 8 ultrabook, Lumia cellphone and an xBox.

Microsoft also have the enterprise space so i can see workflow moving onto these devices.

 

[roguemat]

Err, unfortunately "Linux" cannot see and pounce on an opportunity if it was repeatedly raped in the face by it.

Epic quote is epic.

 

[MrGray]

WinRT has nothing to do with touch interfaces, Metro or any specific UI.

Except that, for now, AFAIK, Metro is effectively it's only implementation so I guess we'd have to take it on faith that it might have other impementations??? I understand it may be an architecture capable of multiple implementations, but for so long as it has only one implementation, that's a bit academic, and I'd need some convincing before betting the farm on it yet if I were an exclusive business developer.

 

[elvis_presley]

But they're not entirely compatible. Software compiled only for traditional Intel architecture will NOT run on ARM, only new software developed with the WinRT API will run on both. This is going to create endless confusion and frustration. Not every developer/app is going to work in both environments, and neither should they.

If you're the kind of user that gets confused, then you'll get all your software from the app store. Exactly the same situation as iPad/iPhone - those apps can me marked by the dev to run on one or both and you just see the relevant app in the app store. People manage to cope okay with that.

 

[Elimentals]

Um, how will this create confusion? It simple: If the app is a Metro app and comes from the Windows Store it will run on anything - else it is a traditional desktop app and wont run on WindowsRT.

Don't forget to mention that Windows RT will have no side loading so you will only be able to access applications via the App store.

I like the Surface Pro device, but for reasons other than Windows 8, I will also be able to install Linux(Ubuntu or Android) on it as well. The only concern I might have is the UEFI "secure boot" that you can not bypass.

 

[MrGray]

Um, how will this create confusion? It simple: If the app is a Metro app and comes from the Windows Store it will run on anything - else it is a traditional desktop app and wont run on WindowsRT.

But will the desktop app run on the Pro (Intel) version of the Surface?? See - confusion. I'm just anticipating what's going to happen here with mainstream/business consumers.

 

[roguemat]

Don't forget to mention that Windows RT will have no side loading so you will only be able to access applications via the App store.

I like the Surface Pro device, but for reasons other than Windows 8, I will also be able to install Linux(Ubuntu or Android) on it as well. The only concern I might have is the UEFI "secure boot" that you can not bypass.

Well that's basically what I said. And don't confuse this with only being able to run apps that are public. Microsoft will have an enterprise publishing solution to allow you to publish hidden apps just for your company. So in that case you will not need side-loading.

 

[MrGray]

Microsoft will have an enterprise publishing solution to allow you to publish hidden apps just for your company. So in that case you will not need side-loading.

And that'll be cost free, will it?

 

[Arthur]

So what's a PC?

Guys, this is a useless squabble. The term PC or Personal Computer has evolved and elided into anything anyone wants it to be. It started off as IBM's brand name for the IBM 5150 "Acorn" device launched in August 1981. I know this first hand because I was there in person, part of a product group that met regularly in Boca Raton (IBM Entry Systems HQ) to plan system specs. Until then, these new-fangled devices were call "microcomputers" (shortened to "micro", or "home computers". But the IBM 5150 was aimed at business, so Home Computer didn't make sense. I well remember Apple Computer Inc's famous "Welcome IBM. Seriously" advert.

With the Rise of the Clones, IBM tried to protect both the architecture and the name. But it was fighting a 17-year antitrust lawsuit by the US government, and this deflected it seriously. It became more and more difficult to initiate lawsuits to protect the IBM PC (architecture and also name), and IBM stumbled seriously as techies were marginalised and lawyer-accounting types started calling the shots.

By the late 80s, most IBM-compatibles were also called PCs by virtually everyone. IBM tried to win back some ground with the launch of the Personal System (called Personal System/2 or PS/2) in 1987. I am sure there are many here who can remember PS/2 and OS/2.

Today, the term is generic and non-proprietary with no reference to any a specific brand or even architecture. It all depend on who uses it and for what purposes. Over years the term shifted to mean any Intel+DOS type computing device, and Apple's marketing tried to distinguish between Macs and PCs (anyone in the USA then will remember the "I'm a Mac. You're a PC" adverts from Apple). But that's just marketing, and it must be seen in the time and context.

Today, my own view is that PC or personal computer (not capitalised) is a generic term for a computing device of whatever form factor that runs an operating system and user-loadable applications that a user can interact with. That covers servers, desktops, handhelds, laptops, notebooks, tablets, smartphones, car computers, some imbedded devices ... you name it. This is a personal view and of course quite arbitrary. But I think there's little sense in appealing to Wikipedia or anything else - they are not authoritative.

 

[Vegeta]

Ag jirre please can't believe you f**kers are here arguing about wtf is a PC and whats not, who cares shut the f**k up.

Lets discuss the new Windows 8 Tablets please.

 

[Elimentals]

Well that's basically what I said. And don't confuse this with only being able to run apps that are public. Microsoft will have an enterprise publishing solution to allow you to publish hidden apps just for your company. So in that case you will not need side-loading.

Will not help me as my company develop and run Open Source applications that is banned from Microsoft Market.

Guess we will have to stick to iOS/Android and give Windows Users a web page.

 

[roguemat]

And that'll be cost free, will it?

Yes. Well besides a yearly publishing account which is negligible.

EDIT:
@Elimentals, what do you mean they are banned from Microsoft Market? Because they are not written in WinRT? If so, you can list traditional desktop apps in the Store which links to a purchase page (setup by you). Of course, that type of app wont run on ARM devices - but if you're not willing to target them then you can't expect them to run.

 

[MrGray]

Yes. Well besides a yearly publishing account which is negligible.

Will that be Microsoft's idea of "negligible", or normal peoples' ??

 

[Elimentals]

@Elimentals, what do you mean they are banned from Microsoft Market? Because they are not written in WinRT? If so, you can list traditional desktop apps in the Store which links to a purchase page (setup by you). Of course, that type of app wont run on ARM devices - but if you're not willing to target them then you can't expect them to run.

Nothing to do what is was written in/for. RT is just compiled for.

Microsoft bans open source from the Marketplace

Microsoft has raised the ire of the open source community with its Windows Marketplace licence by specifically refusing to allow software covered under an open licence to be distributed.

The licence, which anyone wishing to distribute Windows, Windows Phone, or Xbox applications through the company's copy of Apple's App Store is required to agree to, is the usual torrent of legalese - but hides a nasty surprise for those who support open source ideals.

Jan Wildeboer, open source evangelist and Red Hat employee, was one of the first to spot the restrictions in Microsoft's licence this week. "One thing is extremely obvious," Wildeboer claims in a post to his personal blog. "Microsoft wants to keep its platform clear of Free Software. Period."

As evidence, Wildeboer points to Article 5 of the Application Requirements section of the Microsoft Application Provider Agreement, which states: "The Application must not include software, documentation, or other materials that, in whole or in part, are governed by or subject to an Excluded License, or that would otherwise cause the Application to be subject to the terms of an Excluded License."

The reference to 'Excluded License' refers to an earlier section which explicitly names the GNU General Public License version 3 and its Lesser derivative - two of the most common open source licences around - along with 'any equivalents.'

Effectively, the agreement requires that products shipped through the Windows Marketplace contain no open source code at all. Considering that Microsoft uses open source libraries in its own products, and has even contributed code to open source projects in the past, it's a poor showing.

The licence doesn't just stop the release of open source programmes on the Windows Marketplace, however: taken at face value, it would also prevent closed-source apps from including open source libraries - a major blow for developers.

"This, coming from the company that publicly claims to be a friend of open source," argues Wildeboer, "should make app developers think again if this mobile platform is the platform of choice."

The full Microsoft Application Provider Agreement can be downloaded directly from the Microsoft Developer Network, if you want to check Wildeboer's interpretation.

http://www.itproportal.com/2011/02/17/microsoft-bans-open-source-marketplace/

Also See : http://create.msdn.com/downloads/?id=638 Application agreement.

 

[recre8]

OMG you are thick. I'm talking about the marketing term, PC (PEE SEE) which yes, is linked with M$. And I'v never met someone running Linux brag about his/her PEE SEE.

I wanted to laugh, but then I saw that you spelt with MS with a dollar sign like we are still back in 1995.