Microsoft To Sell Its Own Windows RT Tablet

Glasswire writes "ComputerWorld reports that Microsoft will announce a Microsoft-branded tablet on Monday running the Win RT (ARM-based) subset version of Win 8. MSFT choose not to offer a x86 Win 8 version, which could have given them a performance advantage over ARM-based Apple iPads. A PCMag opinion piece titled 'A Microsoft Tablet Would Be Dumb' says, 'The only real reason to introduce a Microsoft-branded tablet is because Microsoft couldn't get anyone else to make a Windows RT tablet.' No reaction yet from Microsoft's system OEM customers that it will now be competing with."

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

The light dawns

[overshoot]

That helps clear up the mystery of why MSFT raised the price of RT for OEMs.

Re:Huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

to be fair, Micro$oft have had some pretty shitty hardware ventures over the years.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Huh?

[CohibaVancouver]

"Micro$oft?" Really? C'mon this is 2012. Enough with the tired cliches already.

(Sigh. Let the "troll" modding begin.)

Re:Huh?

[equex]

Why is it that a person who did something wrong has his record tainted for the rest of his life, but somehow a corporation should be scott-free after it pays its fines?

At $80+ OEM cost only Microsoft can afford to...

[guidryp]

If previous reports of >$80 for OEM WinRT are correct, only Microsoft can reasonably afford to build low end Windows RT tablets, as the $80 becomes prohibitive software cost for low end tablets (where WinRT will compete). For Microsoft it is just inter-divisional funny money.

How do HW OEMs compete with a $200 Kindle Fire (or rumored Google Branded $200 tablet) when saddled with $80+ OS?

This isn't a troll just an observation

[Grayhand]

Why is it that Microsoft can't seem to do anything until some one else does it and it's usually Apple? Apple used a windows environment before Microsoft. Zune came after virtually everyone else had a music player so it never had much of a chance. Now they suddenly decide it's time to get into tablets? FYI there are other examples, just making a point. Just seems like a poor business model to wait until market saturation to launch a product. If Apple launches a TV can we expect a Microsoft TV a few years after? I didn't include things like a portable OS because they have tried that before but it didn't take off where as Android and iOS have done well. They just seem to wait until others take the risk then get their feet wet once the pool is full.

Re:This summary is terrible

[Nerdfest]

The stock symbol usage seems to come from those who have started thinking the worth of a company whose product you use is not the product but the value of the company. Personally, I think a company that makes obscene boatloads of money is charging too much.

Re:This isn't a troll just an observation

[wvmarle]

I don't have the feeling that the tablet market is exactly saturated. Sure there are many players, but it's a fast growing market, and there is definitely place for more players.

Whether MS has what it takes to compete in that market, that's a totally different matter.

And by the way, Apple launched their first-ever mobile phone offering in a mature, and far more saturated market than the tablet market is now. I can't say they didn't do well. So launching a new product in a saturated market is not a recipe for failure - you just have to offer something good that can compete with the rest.

That the Zune was a flop was not because the digital music player market was saturated, it was more because it was a lesser offering than the iPod.

Re:Huh?

[artor3]

False premise. People who do something wrong are generally forgiven after they've "paid their debt to society". There are some people who choose never to forgive anyone for anything, but those people are sanctimonious assholes who want the world to think that they're perfect little saints.

If you had, say, stolen a car, gone to jail, and done your time, do you really think it would be fair for others to treat you as a social pariah and refer to you as a car thief in every conversation even twenty years later?

Re:Huh?

[Belial6]

You seemed to just list everything but search. Many of them have failed, but the items that didn't fail are on that list as well. "Voice Search" a failure? I use it every day. It is wildly successful.

Er ..... a little bit selective?

[Anonymous Coward]

Search
Adwords
Adsense
Gmail
Youtube
Google Docs
Maps
Android
Chrome
Google Earth
Analytics
Blogger

Anyone who can beat Microsoft comprehensively at browsers, phone OSs, and search shouldn't be dismissed.

Re:Huh?

[UnknowingFool]

Hardware licensing to OEMs only benefits MS. OEMs have to differentiate themselves somehow or they are just another Win RT tablet maker. They can on price or features in normal Windows. MS is putting in strict requirements for hardware as it is, a reference model is even more restrictive. For Win RT users it's a more uniform experience. For OEMs, there is less choice in what can do.

Re:Huh?

[Pi Is A Rational]

The whole aspect of M$, Krapple, MAFIAA, etc. just makes you look childish. To me, it proves that you are unable to draw a point without using tired, old cliches. Yes, these corporations have all done awful things, it's no longer a secret. But, using the silly nicknames in what is supposed to be a serious discussion really drags it down.

Re:This summary is terrible

[Anonymous Coward]

Personally, I think a company that makes obscene boatloads of money is charging too much.

No. Any company making boatloads of money is charging exactly the right amount.

Too little and you go broke. Too much and nobody is buying, and you go broke.