Microsoft's Surface RT Was Doomed From Day One 442
Nerval's Lobster writes "Last fall, Microsoft launched its Surface RT tablet with high hopes. The sleek touch-screen ran Windows RT, a version of Windows 8 designed for hardware powered by the ARM architecture, which dominates the mobile-device market; it also included a flexible keyboard that doubled as a screen cover. Microsoft executives told any journalist who would listen that Surface RT would position their company as a major player in the tablet arena, ready to battle toe-to-toe with Apple and various Android device manufacturers. Fast-forward to this week, and Microsoft announcing its financial results for the quarter ended June 30. Amidst metrics such as operating income and diluted earnings per share, one number stood out: a $900 million charge (the equivalent of $0.07 per share) related to what Microsoft called 'Surface RT inventory adjustments.' Microsoft had already slashed Surface RT prices by $150, so that nearly-billion-dollar charge wasn't a total surprise — but it did underscore that Surface RT is a bomb. From the outset, Surface RT had an issue with the potential to mightily trip up Microsoft: While Windows RT looks exactly like Windows 8, it can't run legacy Windows programs built for x86 processors, limiting users to what they can download from the built-in Windows Store app hub. While the Windows Store launched with 10,000 apps, that seemed paltry in comparison to the well-developed Android and iOS ecosystems. There's likely nothing that Microsoft could have done about this—every platform has to start somewhere, after all—but the relative lack of apps put Surface RT between the proverbial rock and the hard place: it couldn't rely on Windows' extensive legacy, and it didn't have enough content to make it a true contender from the outset against the iPad and Android tablets. Then there was the matter of price. Microsoft could have taken the Amazon route and sold Surface RT at a relative pittance in order to drive adoption—something that made the Kindle Fire a sizable hit. However, that sort of pricing scheme isn't in Microsoft's corporate DNA: it only cut Surface RT's price several months after release, as a defensive maneuver, when it's likely to do much less good."
XBOX (Score:5, Informative)
"..'that sort of pricing scheme isn't in Microsoft's corporate DNA..."
Er. No. MS sold both the original XBOX and the XBOX360 at a loss to drive adoption, the exact opposite of what the author is saying MS will not do...
Re:Microsoft cross platform problem. (Score:5, Informative)
There isn't a technical reason why they couldn't have made .net applications work on arm, or Surface RT. In fact, you can build Metro applications with .net and they'll run on the RT just fine.
The problem is that they only want Metro stuff on there (except for Office).
Re:awesome (Score:4, Informative)
Two words. Secure Boot. That is I think, the entire purpose of secure boot.
Re:I'm glad (Score:5, Informative)
> Most of this anti-Window nonsense, is decades old.
Microsoft is still up to the same kind of dirt tricks that earned them that kind of hatred in the first place.
It's just that now people are beginning to see that they have alternatives.
Re:Slashdot... (Score:2, Informative)
The saddest instance, for me, is what MS did to Be. Be had deals in place with Dell and other vendors to sell computers preconfigured with BeOS. At the time, BeOS was a far-superior OS to Windows. MS didn't like that and added a 100%-illegal exclusivity clause to their contract...either sell all Windows machines or sell no Windows machines. They eventually got a wrist-slap fine, but it came way too late for Be which ran out of money and was forced to sell.
For this alone, I will never buy, support or in any way further a Microsoft product.