Well Said, I actually agree with most of these points you made.

Well Said, I actually agree with most of these points you made.

Spot on Aaron. Gruber’s in Job’s back pocket.. and blinded by it all.
Least you are open to new ideas. and very true in your thoughts of Windows 8 (I personally think Windows 8 will be a great OS across the board

Spot on Aaron. Gruber’s in Job’s back pocket.. and blinded by it all.
Least you are open to new ideas. and very true in your thoughts of Windows 8 (I personally think Windows 8 will be a great OS across the board

You seem to be a highly intelligent man in your field. The fundamental flaw of your argument with Gruber’s article is your “all or none” reaction to his opinion of Window’s 8.  Your approach makes you look foolish. I read nothing “non-sensical” as in “insensible” in his opinion.

I like a number of your points and believe here is another case of finding the truth somewhere in the middle ground of the two points of view.

You do come across as ranting at times and this brings to mind the late, great George Carlin doing a riff on “Stuff vs. S**t.” He ranted, “I don’t get it, can’t people respect my stuff.  It’s my stuff!  They all want me to respect their s**t but who can respect that.  It’s not like their **t is as good as my stuff anyways.”

You seem to be a highly intelligent man in your field. The fundamental flaw of your argument with Gruber’s article is your “all or none” reaction to his opinion of Window’s 8.  Your approach makes you look foolish. I read nothing “non-sensical” as in “insensible” in his opinion.

I like a number of your points and believe here is another case of finding the truth somewhere in the middle ground of the two points of view.

You do come across as ranting at times and this brings to mind the late, great George Carlin doing a riff on “Stuff vs. S**t.” He ranted, “I don’t get it, can’t people respect my stuff.  It’s my stuff!  They all want me to respect their s**t but who can respect that.  It’s not like their **t is as good as my stuff anyways.”

I don’t understand.  Your article spends its entire time complaining that Gruber is comparing Apples to Oranges.  Yet, your entire article is comparing a product that has been announced as not being available for a year, to a product that is currently available, with expanding features coming in 3 months.

I guess I might pay attention to any of this ranting from either side once I can actually walk into a retailer and try to use a tablet based on Windows 8.

Until then, I can really only compare what is actually available.

I don’t understand.  Your article spends its entire time complaining that Gruber is comparing Apples to Oranges.  Yet, your entire article is comparing a product that has been announced as not being available for a year, to a product that is currently available, with expanding features coming in 3 months.

I guess I might pay attention to any of this ranting from either side once I can actually walk into a retailer and try to use a tablet based on Windows 8.

Until then, I can really only compare what is actually available.

Let’s see, I got my iPad 1 in 2010 and have been working productively on it since the day I installed Pages on it. I’ve sold my iPad when I got my iPad 2 and am looking forward to the changes in iOS 5 coming _this_ year. And you want me to… What… Wait for a company to finish something that looks halfea**ed in its preview and won’t be out for at _least_ another year? Sure…

Let’s see, I got my iPad 1 in 2010 and have been working productively on it since the day I installed Pages on it. I’ve sold my iPad when I got my iPad 2 and am looking forward to the changes in iOS 5 coming _this_ year. And you want me to… What… Wait for a company to finish something that looks halfea**ed in its preview and won’t be out for at _least_ another year? Sure…

Hi there @0156c390e7be7bc7ea5e0e7d20c4b40e:disqus – I don’t want you wait for anything. Use your iPad to your heart’s content – I sure do.  I wasn’t trying to discredit the iPad, I was trying to demonstrate to Gruber that his argument was contrived and forced and that it was a pathetic attempt to try and appease a pro-Apple audience.  I simply demonstrated that his argument could be deconstructed point by point on the basis of having no merit.

Thanks for stopping by.

Hi there @0156c390e7be7bc7ea5e0e7d20c4b40e:disqus – I don’t want you wait for anything. Use your iPad to your heart’s content – I sure do.  I wasn’t trying to discredit the iPad, I was trying to demonstrate to Gruber that his argument was contrived and forced and that it was a pathetic attempt to try and appease a pro-Apple audience.  I simply demonstrated that his argument could be deconstructed point by point on the basis of having no merit.

Thanks for stopping by.

Hi @PorthosJon:disqus – actually, Gruber was comparing the two products and I was pointing out to him that his forced belitting of Windows 8 was pretty pathetic.  Thanks for stopping by.

Hi @PorthosJon:disqus – actually, Gruber was comparing the two products and I was pointing out to him that his forced belitting of Windows 8 was pretty pathetic.  Thanks for stopping by.

Ah, sorry. I didn’t take most of your blog-post very seriously, since it was basically just a rant without any good points. You seem to be a firm believer in Microsoft’s tablet strategy. The one from ten years ago. I don’t see it succeeding, and I *do* see Apple succeeding (currently) where Microsoft has continually failed in the past.

Ah, sorry. I didn’t take most of your blog-post very seriously, since it was basically just a rant without any good points. You seem to be a firm believer in Microsoft’s tablet strategy. The one from ten years ago. I don’t see it succeeding, and I *do* see Apple succeeding (currently) where Microsoft has continually failed in the past.

“[The] iPad is … a consumption device, not a creation device. With iWork, Apple are making glorified document viewing programs that have simple editing features.”
That right there sounds like discrediting to me.  It also sounds completely untrue, I use the iWork suite regularly and it is most certainly NOT a glorified document viewing program.

I know Microsoft Office is seen as the be-all and end-all of office software, but it’s my belief that that is mostly down to network effect.  People just expect .doc and .xls.  There are equal or better alternatives, often for less money or even no money.

Also…

“Carbon which was an afterthought in the migration towards 64bit Intel CPU’s(sic).”

Carbon was a transitional API for developers to port existing classic Mac apps onto the new OS X platform without a complete rewrite.  It was a convenience.  And when Apple switched to newer 64 bit Intel hardware they used that as an excuse to discontinue updating this old API which some (Adobe, Microsoft, and hell, even Apple) developers were still using like a crutch.

Bunga bunga!

“[The] iPad is … a consumption device, not a creation device. With iWork, Apple are making glorified document viewing programs that have simple editing features.”
That right there sounds like discrediting to me.  It also sounds completely untrue, I use the iWork suite regularly and it is most certainly NOT a glorified document viewing program.

I know Microsoft Office is seen as the be-all and end-all of office software, but it’s my belief that that is mostly down to network effect.  People just expect .doc and .xls.  There are equal or better alternatives, often for less money or even no money.

Also…

“Carbon which was an afterthought in the migration towards 64bit Intel CPU’s(sic).”

Carbon was a transitional API for developers to port existing classic Mac apps onto the new OS X platform without a complete rewrite.  It was a convenience.  And when Apple switched to newer 64 bit Intel hardware they used that as an excuse to discontinue updating this old API which some (Adobe, Microsoft, and hell, even Apple) developers were still using like a crutch.

Bunga bunga!

Yes, it had nothing to do with the iPad.  Or the abject failure of Windows Mobile, Windows Vista, and the complete and utter uselessness of NetBooks.  The fact that Microsoft had thrown all-in with those same NetBooks shows how forward thinking and groundbreaking their “development” efforts were taking them: A broken down OS for a crippled, broken down platform.

Yes, it had nothing to do with the iPad.  Or the abject failure of Windows Mobile, Windows Vista, and the complete and utter uselessness of NetBooks.  The fact that Microsoft had thrown all-in with those same NetBooks shows how forward thinking and groundbreaking their “development” efforts were taking them: A broken down OS for a crippled, broken down platform.

What I find fascinating is that Gruber’s well thought out criticism is real-world like the iPad and your version of the market history and Microsoft is pure fantasy much like the current state of the Microsoft Tablet.
You should write science fiction, I think you’d be good at it.

What I find fascinating is that Gruber’s well thought out criticism is real-world like the iPad and your version of the market history and Microsoft is pure fantasy much like the current state of the Microsoft Tablet.
You should write science fiction, I think you’d be good at it.

You seem to miss the point that people are not wanting Tablets that doc to anything. Even Apple has cut the strings with IOS5, so you no longer need a PC/Mac to use one. It is all cloud based etc. It is a different type of device and usage.

I do not own a Tablet but if Windows legacy compatibility is key, why is Apple selling more product that they can manufacture? And why for 10 years has Microsoft / PC manufacturers not been able to sell any? I would guess that in 18 months Apple has sold more tablets that the whole industry put together for the last 10 years. I could be wrong but not by much.

Having had 20 years experience using both PC and Mac I can say today that you still have market share in one camp and tight integration in the other camp. Vista was the apocalypse of all OS’s and this was made with Apple in plain sight. So to argue that Microsoft would have produced W7 and W8 without having to respond to IOS and Android does not quite ring true.  Android was in response to IOS. So not to give Apple a little bit of credit is short sighted.

Alas till the end of times will have MS bashing Apple and Apple making there stuff the way they want to. Leaving it to the consumer to decide what they want. It is just unfortunate that at the moment MS, Nokia and Rim, in terms of the mobile field, have nothing that the consumer wants, that either IOS or Android does not supply.

Who knows what 2012 will bring, although given the speed of progress, all those developments may be old by the time they arrive. 6 & 7 year development cycles leave you dead in the water.

You seem to miss the point that people are not wanting Tablets that doc to anything. Even Apple has cut the strings with IOS5, so you no longer need a PC/Mac to use one. It is all cloud based etc. It is a different type of device and usage.

I do not own a Tablet but if Windows legacy compatibility is key, why is Apple selling more product that they can manufacture? And why for 10 years has Microsoft / PC manufacturers not been able to sell any? I would guess that in 18 months Apple has sold more tablets that the whole industry put together for the last 10 years. I could be wrong but not by much.

Having had 20 years experience using both PC and Mac I can say today that you still have market share in one camp and tight integration in the other camp. Vista was the apocalypse of all OS’s and this was made with Apple in plain sight. So to argue that Microsoft would have produced W7 and W8 without having to respond to IOS and Android does not quite ring true.  Android was in response to IOS. So not to give Apple a little bit of credit is short sighted.

Alas till the end of times will have MS bashing Apple and Apple making there stuff the way they want to. Leaving it to the consumer to decide what they want. It is just unfortunate that at the moment MS, Nokia and Rim, in terms of the mobile field, have nothing that the consumer wants, that either IOS or Android does not supply.

Who knows what 2012 will bring, although given the speed of progress, all those developments may be old by the time they arrive. 6 & 7 year development cycles leave you dead in the water.

Talking about people who write long articles when it comes to Microsoft… As I see it, you’re speculating that Windows 8 will be a better platform because it’s Windows (or Microsoft). Your argument is invalid.

While Gruber actually said something, you just threw arguments that have been proven wrong for a decade. It’s sad…

Talking about people who write long articles when it comes to Microsoft… As I see it, you’re speculating that Windows 8 will be a better platform because it’s Windows (or Microsoft). Your argument is invalid.

While Gruber actually said something, you just threw arguments that have been proven wrong for a decade. It’s sad…

I hardly call Gruber’s assertion that Nokia, HP and Microsoft are all failing “only” because of Apple “real world criticism”.  More like wishful thinking from an Apple enthusiast.  Like I said in the article, those companies are killing themselves and they had it coming to them sooner or later – bad management would be a more accurate indication of their failures.

The current state of the Microsoft Tablet isn’t pure fantasy, it’s purely non-existant. Windows 8 is make or break for them – whether they win or fail, at least the OS isn’t fundamentally flawed in response to the iPad – all indications are that MS have done what they needed to do.  Now they just need a gold master and some sales.  Tough job, totally agree on that.Thanks for stopping by.

I hardly call Gruber’s assertion that Nokia, HP and Microsoft are all failing “only” because of Apple “real world criticism”.  More like wishful thinking from an Apple enthusiast.  Like I said in the article, those companies are killing themselves and they had it coming to them sooner or later – bad management would be a more accurate indication of their failures.

The current state of the Microsoft Tablet isn’t pure fantasy, it’s purely non-existant. Windows 8 is make or break for them – whether they win or fail, at least the OS isn’t fundamentally flawed in response to the iPad – all indications are that MS have done what they needed to do.  Now they just need a gold master and some sales.  Tough job, totally agree on that.Thanks for stopping by.

I didn’t say that the design of Windows 8 had “nothing” to do with the iPad – I said that Microsoft would have designed the same kind of interface anyway because that was where they were headed with their ideas for touch computing with Windows 7 (and their first attempt failed – Windows 8 is attempt number two and not a fundamentally flawed one).  Microsoft would have been designing that sort of stuff in Windows 7 before the first iPhone/iOS release came out in 2007.  

Gruber was trying to argue that the iPad is the ONLY reason that Windows 8 was designed the way that it is so it’s hard to accept that this is the case when MS didn’t even see the iPad in their rear-vision mirror when designing this stuff themselves.  He’s trying to paint Microsoft as a dog chasing cars because he’s convinced that every company not named Apple are singularly focused on taking down Apple and copying them.  He’s pretty over the top.

I’ll get the last laugh with my comments about shells too when this thing is released – Microsoft are buildling Med-V and Hyper-V technologies straight into Windows NT which means that the Immersive UI we all saw in the demo by Sinofsky isn’t an app running over the top of the “broken down OS” you refer to in the Windows shell (like Windows Media Center does over Windows, for example), it’s just NT with the Metro UI running as a virtualised shell.  Win32 is the battery draining, system resource hogging mess that everyone refers to and it’s currently making every Windows 7 tablet look stupid too – not relevant here.  Win32 will just be a 2nd virtualised shell completely suspended in the background and will only milk the tablet when switched over to (assuming nothing changes with the Windows shell from Windows 7 whatsoever, which is never the case).  

If I were to buy a Win 8 tablet, I would never EVER run the standard Windows shell on it and I think MS are just making it available for people who want the option to run old apps that they want to use on the go – fair enough.  That demo of Office 2010 on the tablet that MS showed was the worst thing they could have done coz it made the tablet look as old and backward as Win7 tablets – there will be a new version of that in Office 2012 which will run in the immersive UI instead and won’t be a hog like previous versions – it’s launching the same time as Windows 8.

It’ll be interesting when the thing is finally launched.

I didn’t say that the design of Windows 8 had “nothing” to do with the iPad – I said that Microsoft would have designed the same kind of interface anyway because that was where they were headed with their ideas for touch computing with Windows 7 (and their first attempt failed – Windows 8 is attempt number two and not a fundamentally flawed one).  Microsoft would have been designing that sort of stuff in Windows 7 before the first iPhone/iOS release came out in 2007.  

Gruber was trying to argue that the iPad is the ONLY reason that Windows 8 was designed the way that it is so it’s hard to accept that this is the case when MS didn’t even see the iPad in their rear-vision mirror when designing this stuff themselves.  He’s trying to paint Microsoft as a dog chasing cars because he’s convinced that every company not named Apple are singularly focused on taking down Apple and copying them.  He’s pretty over the top.

I’ll get the last laugh with my comments about shells too when this thing is released – Microsoft are buildling Med-V and Hyper-V technologies straight into Windows NT which means that the Immersive UI we all saw in the demo by Sinofsky isn’t an app running over the top of the “broken down OS” you refer to in the Windows shell (like Windows Media Center does over Windows, for example), it’s just NT with the Metro UI running as a virtualised shell.  Win32 is the battery draining, system resource hogging mess that everyone refers to and it’s currently making every Windows 7 tablet look stupid too – not relevant here.  Win32 will just be a 2nd virtualised shell completely suspended in the background and will only milk the tablet when switched over to (assuming nothing changes with the Windows shell from Windows 7 whatsoever, which is never the case).  

If I were to buy a Win 8 tablet, I would never EVER run the standard Windows shell on it and I think MS are just making it available for people who want the option to run old apps that they want to use on the go – fair enough.  That demo of Office 2010 on the tablet that MS showed was the worst thing they could have done coz it made the tablet look as old and backward as Win7 tablets – there will be a new version of that in Office 2012 which will run in the immersive UI instead and won’t be a hog like previous versions – it’s launching the same time as Windows 8.

It’ll be interesting when the thing is finally launched.

As a contractor and consultant I have worked in soooo many corporate and enterprise workplaces and the standard desktop is pretty universal – people use laptops in docking stations with a monitor, keyboard and mouse attached.  The idea is that a person can have one “computer” which allows them to work productively at a desk whilst still being able to be portable as well.

Take that exact same vision, subtract the laptop and put a tablet in its place.  Microsoft are aiming to provide that exact solution because they know that the workplace are creating a huge demand for tablets right now, but money is tight for most companies to provide them when their workers already have laptops to use instead.  Microsoft are going to try and aim for tablets to be used in PC refresh cycles so that people can have workstations that they can “undock” and hold in their hands whilst in meetings, etc.  Sneaky but clever.

Oh, and around 90% of all IT spending is done in the workplace so this approach alone would sell a lot of Windows 8 based tablets and MS knows it.

Apple wouldn’t dream of offering this kind of solution right now because MacBook’s and iMacs have a higher profit margin than iPads and they are so beloved right now that people are willing to buy a Mac + an iPad to have both solutions.  Windows 8 is designed to allow their PC partners to attack this strategy with one device.

Now you tell me that this isn’t a “fundamentally flawed” strategy.  The way I see it, it’s about the only hope PC manufacturers have left in competing with Apple unless they want to just lay down and voluntarily die right now.

As a contractor and consultant I have worked in soooo many corporate and enterprise workplaces and the standard desktop is pretty universal – people use laptops in docking stations with a monitor, keyboard and mouse attached.  The idea is that a person can have one “computer” which allows them to work productively at a desk whilst still being able to be portable as well.

Take that exact same vision, subtract the laptop and put a tablet in its place.  Microsoft are aiming to provide that exact solution because they know that the workplace are creating a huge demand for tablets right now, but money is tight for most companies to provide them when their workers already have laptops to use instead.  Microsoft are going to try and aim for tablets to be used in PC refresh cycles so that people can have workstations that they can “undock” and hold in their hands whilst in meetings, etc.  Sneaky but clever.

Oh, and around 90% of all IT spending is done in the workplace so this approach alone would sell a lot of Windows 8 based tablets and MS knows it.

Apple wouldn’t dream of offering this kind of solution right now because MacBook’s and iMacs have a higher profit margin than iPads and they are so beloved right now that people are willing to buy a Mac + an iPad to have both solutions.  Windows 8 is designed to allow their PC partners to attack this strategy with one device.

Now you tell me that this isn’t a “fundamentally flawed” strategy.  The way I see it, it’s about the only hope PC manufacturers have left in competing with Apple unless they want to just lay down and voluntarily die right now.

As for Microsoft not selling much of anything, one reason worth considering is that they’ve been crippled by Intel who totally missed the mobile revolution – ARM is making them look silly.  No decent Intel mobile CPU’s = no decent Windows based tablets, no matter how well the OS is or isn’t designed.  That’s not making apologies for MS, it’s just a worthy consideration.

Apple have been able to react quicker with the integrated solution, they absolutely deserve all the credit for that. 

Also, the fundamentally flawed strategy in the past for MS has been trying to use the old Windows shell which is too bloated and resource heavy.  The Immersive UI is a virtualised shell running directly on top of core NT, the standard Windows shell will be available but NOT running at the same time – it’ll be a second virtualised shell completely suspended in the background.  That is the aboslute best possible way that MS could provide a bridge from the old to the new without chewing up resources and not alienating their existing customer base and/or getting an antitrust suit from the US government for cutting off the old methods.  That’s not a fundamentally flawed idea either.  Gruber doesn’t want to see things that way, he just wants to sing the old song of “Windows is Windows” so therefore it’s automatically shit.  What and idiot – he’s blinded to what he doesn’t want to see.

As for Microsoft not selling much of anything, one reason worth considering is that they’ve been crippled by Intel who totally missed the mobile revolution – ARM is making them look silly.  No decent Intel mobile CPU’s = no decent Windows based tablets, no matter how well the OS is or isn’t designed.  That’s not making apologies for MS, it’s just a worthy consideration.

Apple have been able to react quicker with the integrated solution, they absolutely deserve all the credit for that. 

Also, the fundamentally flawed strategy in the past for MS has been trying to use the old Windows shell which is too bloated and resource heavy.  The Immersive UI is a virtualised shell running directly on top of core NT, the standard Windows shell will be available but NOT running at the same time – it’ll be a second virtualised shell completely suspended in the background.  That is the aboslute best possible way that MS could provide a bridge from the old to the new without chewing up resources and not alienating their existing customer base and/or getting an antitrust suit from the US government for cutting off the old methods.  That’s not a fundamentally flawed idea either.  Gruber doesn’t want to see things that way, he just wants to sing the old song of “Windows is Windows” so therefore it’s automatically shit.  What and idiot – he’s blinded to what he doesn’t want to see.

Thanks for your comment.  That’s about the fairest criticism anyone across either this site or Business Insider has provided.

However, you’ve missed a critical point – I don’t think it’s “all or none” with Windows 8 at all.  A lot of people have thought that I was trying to diss Apple and paint the iPad as garbage compared to Windows 8 tablets – not so.  I was merely trying to demonstrate to Gruber that Windows 8 is not fundamentally flawed in response to the iPad, as the article was titled.  Unfortunately, there is no possible way of actually saying something critical about Apple without making myself looking like I don’t like them because the discussion was about Microsoft and Apple.  The background on the discussion of those two companies has been historically one or the other and people anticipate that one side is taken.  I only regret not being more critical of MS in the article to try and paint a more neutral setting.

See some of my comments above – the coming war from Microsoft isn’t to just try and compete with the iPad – it’s to use the PC refresh cycles to compete with the Mac and give people a reason to not need a companion “tablet” when they already have one in their primary device.  It’s a gutsy, hail mary move by Microsoft and it may very well blow up in their face in spectacular fashion but for Gruber to call it a fundamentally flawed strategy just reeked of panic rather than any sort of intelligent insight on his part.

Seriously – I just read his article and thought “oh shut the fuck up”.  What came next is what you read.  I’d love to see him try and take a second stab at his original article (and I know he read mine) but I doubt he’d be game to debate the merits of his original piece – he’d know it’s full of holes and wouldn’t expose himself to even more criticism.  The fundamental flaw was his article, not what he saw in Windows 8.

Thanks for stopping by.

Thanks for your comment.  That’s about the fairest criticism anyone across either this site or Business Insider has provided.

However, you’ve missed a critical point – I don’t think it’s “all or none” with Windows 8 at all.  A lot of people have thought that I was trying to diss Apple and paint the iPad as garbage compared to Windows 8 tablets – not so.  I was merely trying to demonstrate to Gruber that Windows 8 is not fundamentally flawed in response to the iPad, as the article was titled.  Unfortunately, there is no possible way of actually saying something critical about Apple without making myself looking like I don’t like them because the discussion was about Microsoft and Apple.  The background on the discussion of those two companies has been historically one or the other and people anticipate that one side is taken.  I only regret not being more critical of MS in the article to try and paint a more neutral setting.

See some of my comments above – the coming war from Microsoft isn’t to just try and compete with the iPad – it’s to use the PC refresh cycles to compete with the Mac and give people a reason to not need a companion “tablet” when they already have one in their primary device.  It’s a gutsy, hail mary move by Microsoft and it may very well blow up in their face in spectacular fashion but for Gruber to call it a fundamentally flawed strategy just reeked of panic rather than any sort of intelligent insight on his part.

Seriously – I just read his article and thought “oh shut the fuck up”.  What came next is what you read.  I’d love to see him try and take a second stab at his original article (and I know he read mine) but I doubt he’d be game to debate the merits of his original piece – he’d know it’s full of holes and wouldn’t expose himself to even more criticism.  The fundamental flaw was his article, not what he saw in Windows 8.

Thanks for stopping by.

LOL – I haven’t been a firm believer in Microsoft’s past tablet strategy at all.  My vote has been with my wallet – I’m a current iPad 1 owner and have never bought a Windows XP or Windows 7 tablet (they are garbage).

Windows 8 is fundamentally different with the introduction of Hyper-V and Med-V built into NT – no more clunky Windows shell running persistently whilst in operation – the Immersive UI can run independently of the parts of Windows that belong only on a desktop.  It only took Microsoft ten years to figure it out and Intel ten years to figure out that they need to build the kind of hardware to support that kind of strategy but nonetheless they got there and here we are facing a credible solution, not a fundamentally flawed one.  If the developer community supports MS’s HTML5 + JavaScript approach to Metro apps for the immersive UI (I’m willing to bet that they will) then I’d actually consider this kind of tablet.  Sounds like I could use it in a lot more usage cases than I could an iPad – and there we have, for the first time, a compelling reason for someone (anyone) to not want to just buy an iPad instead.  That’s what MS needed to do.  That’s not a fundamentally flawed response, it’s a bloody good one.

Gruber, therefore, is wrong.

Thanks for stopping by @0156c390e7be7bc7ea5e0e7d20c4b40e:disqus 

LOL – I haven’t been a firm believer in Microsoft’s past tablet strategy at all.  My vote has been with my wallet – I’m a current iPad 1 owner and have never bought a Windows XP or Windows 7 tablet (they are garbage).

Windows 8 is fundamentally different with the introduction of Hyper-V and Med-V built into NT – no more clunky Windows shell running persistently whilst in operation – the Immersive UI can run independently of the parts of Windows that belong only on a desktop.  It only took Microsoft ten years to figure it out and Intel ten years to figure out that they need to build the kind of hardware to support that kind of strategy but nonetheless they got there and here we are facing a credible solution, not a fundamentally flawed one.  If the developer community supports MS’s HTML5 + JavaScript approach to Metro apps for the immersive UI (I’m willing to bet that they will) then I’d actually consider this kind of tablet.  Sounds like I could use it in a lot more usage cases than I could an iPad – and there we have, for the first time, a compelling reason for someone (anyone) to not want to just buy an iPad instead.  That’s what MS needed to do.  That’s not a fundamentally flawed response, it’s a bloody good one.

Gruber, therefore, is wrong.

Thanks for stopping by @0156c390e7be7bc7ea5e0e7d20c4b40e:disqus 

Hi Tiago.

I’m not speculating that Windows 8 will be a better platform, I’m speculating that it won’t be fundamentally flawed in response to the iPad.  The iPad is a fantastic device and Windows 8 tablets are taking a totally different approach to portable computing to try and attack Apple from a different angle – using the PC refresh cycles so that people will buy Win8 tablets as their new PC’s.  If people then already have a ‘tablet’, then they won’t need to buy an iPad to have that kind of computing experience as well – they’ll already have a tablet.  There is a lot of money to be made in corporate IT budgets that says this isn’t a fundamentally flawed idea – difficult, gutsy and could totally flop yes, but not fundamentally flawed.  Gruber was ignorant in his criticism of the OS.

Now if you want to talk about the PalmPad or Xoom as a response to the iPad….

Hi Tiago.

I’m not speculating that Windows 8 will be a better platform, I’m speculating that it won’t be fundamentally flawed in response to the iPad.  The iPad is a fantastic device and Windows 8 tablets are taking a totally different approach to portable computing to try and attack Apple from a different angle – using the PC refresh cycles so that people will buy Win8 tablets as their new PC’s.  If people then already have a ‘tablet’, then they won’t need to buy an iPad to have that kind of computing experience as well – they’ll already have a tablet.  There is a lot of money to be made in corporate IT budgets that says this isn’t a fundamentally flawed idea – difficult, gutsy and could totally flop yes, but not fundamentally flawed.  Gruber was ignorant in his criticism of the OS.

Now if you want to talk about the PalmPad or Xoom as a response to the iPad….

‘The tablet is destined to also become your ‘PC’ and there is nothing that anyone can do about it including Apple’

This kind of reminds me of that movie from c.1950 which tried to predict how the world would operate in the future. Cars will also be aeroplanes they said…

‘The tablet is destined to also become your ‘PC’ and there is nothing that anyone can do about it including Apple’

This kind of reminds me of that movie from c.1950 which tried to predict how the world would operate in the future. Cars will also be aeroplanes they said…

It is possible that people will purchase the tablet as a replacement for their PC using a docking station but just going by history, this seems unlikely. As already noted Tablets have been around for years and no one has really bought them.

As you rightly state 90% of IT spend is in the workplace – but just how many of me and my fellow “drones in sector 7″ (Simpsons Ref) attend meetings that need tablets. This seems to be a very small market. Given the form factor, why would you even bother to have docking stations. If it is as powerful as a current workstation then add a keyboard (if needed) and you are good to go. You can remove all that costly CAT5 cabling and wall connectors as well. This would really save some money.
Apple for better or worse has somehow come up with the a form factor and a function that has hit a sweet spot – sales seem to prove that.The argument has been made that there is not a Tablet market but an iPad market and so far that seems to be a valid observation. This may change over time with new designs and OS updates.

Like what the Wii did for gaming, the iPad has opened up a new group of people to IT. It is just the right device for them and the fact that with IOS5 they will no longer need a computer as well, we could see some very interesting things happening to the PC market in general.

There is enough room in the sandbox for everyone to play but it would seem that we will have two types of computer users – those that create content and those that consume it. PCs will still be needed to create applications etc, but if you EmailTwitterYouTubeVideoPhoto, then do you need anything more that an iPad or its like? You also have no requirement for any form of backward compatibility and do not care about MS Office. The complexity of Win8 may just be too much for that group of people.

Just some thoughts – it is an interesting debate to have. 2 or 3 years will show where things are at. Or sooner if certain companies like Nokia and RIM have a hard time. The former suffering will also have a knock on effect for Microsoft in its push for a Win7 phone. (Already a dead technology? Given the Win8 claims?)

It is possible that people will purchase the tablet as a replacement for their PC using a docking station but just going by history, this seems unlikely. As already noted Tablets have been around for years and no one has really bought them.

As you rightly state 90% of IT spend is in the workplace – but just how many of me and my fellow “drones in sector 7″ (Simpsons Ref) attend meetings that need tablets. This seems to be a very small market. Given the form factor, why would you even bother to have docking stations. If it is as powerful as a current workstation then add a keyboard (if needed) and you are good to go. You can remove all that costly CAT5 cabling and wall connectors as well. This would really save some money.
Apple for better or worse has somehow come up with the a form factor and a function that has hit a sweet spot – sales seem to prove that.The argument has been made that there is not a Tablet market but an iPad market and so far that seems to be a valid observation. This may change over time with new designs and OS updates.

Like what the Wii did for gaming, the iPad has opened up a new group of people to IT. It is just the right device for them and the fact that with IOS5 they will no longer need a computer as well, we could see some very interesting things happening to the PC market in general.

There is enough room in the sandbox for everyone to play but it would seem that we will have two types of computer users – those that create content and those that consume it. PCs will still be needed to create applications etc, but if you EmailTwitterYouTubeVideoPhoto, then do you need anything more that an iPad or its like? You also have no requirement for any form of backward compatibility and do not care about MS Office. The complexity of Win8 may just be too much for that group of people.

Just some thoughts – it is an interesting debate to have. 2 or 3 years will show where things are at. Or sooner if certain companies like Nokia and RIM have a hard time. The former suffering will also have a knock on effect for Microsoft in its push for a Win7 phone. (Already a dead technology? Given the Win8 claims?)

>That demo of Office 2010 on the tablet that MS showed was the worst thing they could have done 
Exactly – For better or worse Microsoft is represented as the parent and Apple the young hip player even though both companies are 30+ years old.

Apple visually re-invented its OS with the IOS first on the Phone and then on the iPad.

Microsoft does not seem to want to take this approach. However any mention of backward compatibility means running MS Office, which means real work and is never going to be a headline on a consumer device.

We will see if it even gets a chance given that it is about a year out and will be going against IOS6 and Android 4.

As the saying goes, we live in interesting time.

>That demo of Office 2010 on the tablet that MS showed was the worst thing they could have done 
Exactly – For better or worse Microsoft is represented as the parent and Apple the young hip player even though both companies are 30+ years old.

Apple visually re-invented its OS with the IOS first on the Phone and then on the iPad.

Microsoft does not seem to want to take this approach. However any mention of backward compatibility means running MS Office, which means real work and is never going to be a headline on a consumer device.

We will see if it even gets a chance given that it is about a year out and will be going against IOS6 and Android 4.

As the saying goes, we live in interesting time.

Actually, you are not pointing out the how badly he compared items, you are making assertions of your own that don’t hold water.

“For Windows 8 in particular, Microsoft might definitely have some Apple envy but at the end of the day, they would have still designed the same kind of interface for Windows 8 no matter what happened outside of their own walls.”

A.  You don’t know what the Windows 8 interface is.
B. What proof could you possibly have that this statement is anything other than your own musing.

“Actually John, iOS IS built on top of Mac OS X and its core principles. It is common knowledge that it is a modified version of OS X with a touch centric shell on top.”

Well.. as both a Mac & iOS developer, I can tell you that your statement is false.  iOS is based on a Linux core, but not OS X.  OS X uses a Cocoa interface layer on top of a base operating system and iOS uses a Cocoa-Touch interface.  Despite the commonality in the names, they are wholly different systems.  I cannot automatically port my programs from Mac OS X to iOS in any way shape or form.  There are advanced memory management features on Mac OS X that don’t exist on iOS.  Both platforms use Objective-C for programming in XCode, but that is like saying that Android is based on Mac OS X because it uses Linux.

Try not to make definitive statements about things that you are not knowledgable about.

“…say all you want about Microsoft products but Office has no peers, particularly in the enterprise, and has three times the amount of features of anything else. There are no comparisons to be made here.”

Um… Open Office, for one.  And let’s also compare price… $20 for each iWork App (total of $60), Google Apps & Open Office are Free, or $500 for Office.  Office used to be a good product, but the “Metro Makeover” you are touting is yet another “ribbon to screw you up” product.  With Office 2011 I ceased using office and look for any alternative possible.

“Apple are taking an anti-PC approach to try and push more iPad sales and their tone of “it’s a consumption device” could be influenced to change just as soon as people start to lose their level excitement for iDevices that they currently have.”

Is this the same trend that said that iPods were a niche device that would blow over soon.  Or how about the iPhone, no one would want that, it’ll blow over soon.  So now people who own the iPad, 10s of millions of them, are just going to wake up one day and say “oops, wasted my money, it’s just a fad.”  If you had any evidence for this statement, I’m sure you’d present it.

“Actually, the iPad succeeds because it enables you to read websites whilst sitting on the toilet and play casual games in bed. It’s a toy.”

Speaking as someone who uses it for remote access, developemnt, content creation, content consumption, cooking, photo editing, photo sharing, you couldn’t be more wrong.  I bought it so that I could prevent having to carry my laptop about 60% of the time and save my back from hurting quite as much.  I was wrong, I can use my iPad about 75% of the time for business & work.

“Microsoft wants your tablet to be your total solution and just because Apple can’t do it, doesn’t mean that someone else can’t either…”

Microsoft has wanted that since they introduced Windows-Tablet in 2001.  They haven’t been able to do it, make it work, or make anyone want it.  Apple isn’t doing it because they can’t, they’re not doing it because it doesn’t make any sense and MS has proven that people don’t want it.

Actually, you are not pointing out the how badly he compared items, you are making assertions of your own that don’t hold water.

“For Windows 8 in particular, Microsoft might definitely have some Apple envy but at the end of the day, they would have still designed the same kind of interface for Windows 8 no matter what happened outside of their own walls.”

A.  You don’t know what the Windows 8 interface is.
B. What proof could you possibly have that this statement is anything other than your own musing.

“Actually John, iOS IS built on top of Mac OS X and its core principles. It is common knowledge that it is a modified version of OS X with a touch centric shell on top.”

Well.. as both a Mac & iOS developer, I can tell you that your statement is false.  iOS is based on a Linux core, but not OS X.  OS X uses a Cocoa interface layer on top of a base operating system and iOS uses a Cocoa-Touch interface.  Despite the commonality in the names, they are wholly different systems.  I cannot automatically port my programs from Mac OS X to iOS in any way shape or form.  There are advanced memory management features on Mac OS X that don’t exist on iOS.  Both platforms use Objective-C for programming in XCode, but that is like saying that Android is based on Mac OS X because it uses Linux.

Try not to make definitive statements about things that you are not knowledgable about.

“…say all you want about Microsoft products but Office has no peers, particularly in the enterprise, and has three times the amount of features of anything else. There are no comparisons to be made here.”

Um… Open Office, for one.  And let’s also compare price… $20 for each iWork App (total of $60), Google Apps & Open Office are Free, or $500 for Office.  Office used to be a good product, but the “Metro Makeover” you are touting is yet another “ribbon to screw you up” product.  With Office 2011 I ceased using office and look for any alternative possible.

“Apple are taking an anti-PC approach to try and push more iPad sales and their tone of “it’s a consumption device” could be influenced to change just as soon as people start to lose their level excitement for iDevices that they currently have.”

Is this the same trend that said that iPods were a niche device that would blow over soon.  Or how about the iPhone, no one would want that, it’ll blow over soon.  So now people who own the iPad, 10s of millions of them, are just going to wake up one day and say “oops, wasted my money, it’s just a fad.”  If you had any evidence for this statement, I’m sure you’d present it.

“Actually, the iPad succeeds because it enables you to read websites whilst sitting on the toilet and play casual games in bed. It’s a toy.”

Speaking as someone who uses it for remote access, developemnt, content creation, content consumption, cooking, photo editing, photo sharing, you couldn’t be more wrong.  I bought it so that I could prevent having to carry my laptop about 60% of the time and save my back from hurting quite as much.  I was wrong, I can use my iPad about 75% of the time for business & work.

“Microsoft wants your tablet to be your total solution and just because Apple can’t do it, doesn’t mean that someone else can’t either…”

Microsoft has wanted that since they introduced Windows-Tablet in 2001.  They haven’t been able to do it, make it work, or make anyone want it.  Apple isn’t doing it because they can’t, they’re not doing it because it doesn’t make any sense and MS has proven that people don’t want it.

“Well.. as both a Mac & iOS developer, I can tell you that your
statement is false.  iOS is based on a Linux core, but not OS X.  OS X
uses a Cocoa interface layer on top of a base operating system and iOS
uses a Cocoa-Touch interface.  Despite the commonality in the names,
they are wholly different systems.  I cannot automatically port my
programs from Mac OS X to iOS in any way shape or form.  There are
advanced memory management features on Mac OS X that don’t exist on iOS.
 Both platforms use Objective-C for programming in XCode, but that is
like saying that Android is based on Mac OS X because it uses Linux.

Try not to make definitive statements about things that you are not knowledgable about.”

Ummmmmmm…. dude.  Mac OS X is based on Unix.  iOS is a heavily stripped down version of Mac OS X, with an entirely new interface built on top.  It is not based on Linux at all – Apple would never touch Linux with a ten foot pole as they would have to open source the work that they put on top.  Steve Jobs himself introduced iPhone OS as a stripped down version of Mac OS when he introduced the first iPhone in 2007.

And you’re telling me that I shouldn’t make definitive statements about things that I’m not knowledgable about.

“Well.. as both a Mac & iOS developer, I can tell you that your
statement is false.  iOS is based on a Linux core, but not OS X.  OS X
uses a Cocoa interface layer on top of a base operating system and iOS
uses a Cocoa-Touch interface.  Despite the commonality in the names,
they are wholly different systems.  I cannot automatically port my
programs from Mac OS X to iOS in any way shape or form.  There are
advanced memory management features on Mac OS X that don’t exist on iOS.
 Both platforms use Objective-C for programming in XCode, but that is
like saying that Android is based on Mac OS X because it uses Linux.

Try not to make definitive statements about things that you are not knowledgable about.”

Ummmmmmm…. dude.  Mac OS X is based on Unix.  iOS is a heavily stripped down version of Mac OS X, with an entirely new interface built on top.  It is not based on Linux at all – Apple would never touch Linux with a ten foot pole as they would have to open source the work that they put on top.  Steve Jobs himself introduced iPhone OS as a stripped down version of Mac OS when he introduced the first iPhone in 2007.

And you’re telling me that I shouldn’t make definitive statements about things that I’m not knowledgable about.

As for your comment about creation vs consumption – of course the iPad can _do_ creation, it’s just a question of personal taste whether you would want to.  I’m sure I could update my WordPress blog using morse code but the question begs to ask why I would want to if it’s more difficult to do.

I was merely pointing out that the device is marketed as a consumption device and the “revolutionary” aspect of the device, as Gruber was gloating about, was merely that poeple find it ultra convenient to do very basic tasks like web and email – the very same reasons that they were previously buying PC’s for, then netbooks.

The statement wasn’t intended as a slur on the iPad, nor was anything else I said in the original piece. I was just pointing out to Gruber that his overstating of what the iPad does “well” and “better” was far-fetched. iPad does consumption better but not necessarily creation better.

I own an iPad too.  You like using yours for creation over your laptop, I’m the other way around.  I’d rather break my back carrying a laptop then break my wrists typing awkwardly on a flat touchscreen device.  Each is to his own – it’s hardly a convincing argument.  I’m willing to bet that no more than 3-5% of all iPad owners use the device for any kind of meaningful creation.