
What is Windows RT? Redmond, we have a problem - mariuz
http://www.osnews.com/comments/26485
======
RyanMcGreal
Direct link to the article:

[http://www.winsupersite.com/article/windows8/windows-rt-
redm...](http://www.winsupersite.com/article/windows8/windows-rt-redmond-
problem-144554)

~~~
xentronium
The site seems to be auto-banned on HN or something, which is surprising to
me:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4682525>

~~~
cooldeal
It's because of overzealous flagging of the site because it is a Microsoft
watcher site and Paul is usually positive about MS. More details here
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3408883>

Not very surprising, given the makeup of HN.

------
mgkimsal
Why not just have called it 'Surface OS' or something similar? "Surface looks
like Windows, but isn't Windows, just like iOS looks like OSX but isn't OSX"
would have been easy to explain, but using the name 'windows' in there
confuses the point.

~~~
jiggy2011
I agree, I have no idea why they keep wanting to cling to the "Windows"
branding even though Windows has never exactly been considered a cool brand.

Perhaps it is easier to sell something called "Windows" to enterprise
customers?

~~~
bergie
The rumor is that the Courier tablet was killed by Ballmer because it wasn't
"Windows enough". So maybe the Surface / Windows on Arm / Windows RT team
actually wants to get their stuff to the market

~~~
DeepDuh
A true visionary.

------
gvb
Windows NT stood for "New Technology".

Whenever I see Windows RT, I think "Reduced Technology".

~~~
cryptoz
The Windows 2000 boot screen said "Built on NT Technology". I couldn't believe
my eyes when I saw that. So annoying.

~~~
freehunter
Officially, NT doesn't stand for anything (just like the RT in Windows RT
doesn't stand for anything). One of the NT developers said that it was derived
from the target processor, the Intel N-Ten chip. Microsoft marketing declared
it "New Technology", but that quickly went away and the official word is that
it's just a couple letters thrown together.

The "Built on NT technology" boot screen does not mean "Built on New
Technology technology".

~~~
rahoulb
I'd heard that "Windows NT" was one step on from VMS (as most of the original
NT team had worked on VMS)

~~~
tarabukka
Windows NT is an entirely different codebase to the MSDOS based Windows 9x
series; it isn't simply a marketing name. Comparable to Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X.

~~~
freehunter
Of course NT is completely different, I apologize if my comment made it seem
that I was arguing that point. NT is the name for the latest kernel, but New
Technology was a marketing term used to describe the reasoning for the name.
In actuality, NT stands for nothing officially. New Technology was just what
the marketers decided on, for a limited period of time.

------
ender7
I think Microsoft could have saved themselves a lot of pain by some renaming
and re-skinning.

\- 'Windows 8' is Microsoft's next version of Windows! It uses the shiny new
Metro UI. You install apps from the Windows App Store (or whatever they call
it).

\- 'Windows 8+' is a special version of Windows 8 that can run apps written
for older versions of Windows.

Both versions of Windows 8 support Office!*

* For Windows 8 vanilla, re-skin the Office apps so they look slightly more like Metro, or at least so they don't look like Windows 7 desktop apps. Hide the fact that they're running in the desktop environment. Include Outlook.

~~~
DeepDuh
How does that clear up anything? Wouldn't it make more sense to not use the
Windows product name at all for the RT version? After all - where are the
Windows? Even Apple, with their annoying iBranding, is more bold when it comes
to introducing new products. Everything about Microsoft's branding schemes
scream committee. "Microsoft(TM) Windows(TM) RT(TM) Surface(TM) tablet with
all new Metro/strikethrough Modern/strikethrough new style/strikethrough
Microsoft style UI.

Do they themselves even know what the design is called now? Even big open
source projects are more consistant than this.

~~~
ender7
Microsoft has clearly decided that "Windows" is now the new Metro UI. The old
stuff is there for backwards-compat and pro/business market reasons, but the
future is Metro. Now, you may not like that decision, but I think that's where
they're going.

Given that, it doesn't make sense to call them two different things since
their only differentiating factor is whether they run "old"-style apps.

------
brudgers
Microsoft isn't rolling out the Windows 8 product line Apple style...tech-
journalists, you may quote me on that.

Why on Earth would they?

They have complex product lines tailored around a B2B strategy. Their
customers need time to test the product. There was a "consumer preview"
version for download. There was a "Release to Manufacturing" version for
download. The nature of their business is to roll out products with no-
surprises. Microsoft is releasing the product with fanfare, but minimizing
drama.

The pile of FUD is built upon an edge cases.

People with a library of disks are the exception in the age of the internet.
For those who haven't noticed, Macbooks don't come with a DVD drive anymore.

I suspect that few people will anticipate running existing Windows software on
ARM devices. Most won't. For the same reasons people don't expect to run
Photoshop on an iPad or AutoCad on a Windows Phone - most people don't run
much on their devices other than what is pre-installed and what they download
directly to it. I also suspect that Microsoft has mined it's huge trove of
data, and concluded that this is the case.

~~~
fauigerzigerk
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. The issue is that Microsoft
is selling the same device with two different operating systems. And one of
those operating systems is defined as "cannot run Windows desktop software",
yet it is advertised as running MS Office, the epitome of Windows desktop
software.

Consumers will not expect to run Windows software on ARM devices because they
don't know what ARM devices are. What they will expect is that something that
is called Windows and comes from Microsoft does indeed run Windows software.

~~~
molmalo
> _The issue is that Microsoft is selling the same device with two different
> operating systems._

Not exactly, both devices may look similar, and be called Surface, but they
are two different devices, with very different hardware. That probably makes
everything much more complicated.

~~~
fauigerzigerk
You call this "very different"? [http://www.microsoft.com/Surface/en-
US/surface-with-windows-...](http://www.microsoft.com/Surface/en-US/surface-
with-windows-rt/help-me-choose)

One is a little bit higher speced, but other than that the only real
difference is the CPU architecture, which is really nothing that any consumer
should have to think about.

~~~
molmalo
Screen: 1366x768 vs 1920x1080 Storage: max 64GB vs max 128GB

Different storage, different screen, different architecture, different battery
life, different capabilities (run x86 vs Metro-only), and yet you fail to see
that they are very different...

> The issue is that Microsoft is selling the same device with two different
> operating systems.

How can you call it "the same device", when _everything_ is different, and
they are targeted for different people?

I'll tell you what happened to me last week. I was talking to a friend of mine
who is a dentist (he was showing me his new dental office). He told me that he
wanted to buy a new Windows Tablet, so he could keep using the software he
uses today in his dental office. He read about the new tablets, and wanted to
buy a $500 Surface. I warned him that those $500 tablets won't run his
software (a desktop application) and he seemed to be really confused about why
a Windows tablet won't run a program he currently uses in a "Windows PC". I
had to explain him that the lower-cost Surface running Windows RT is similar
to an iPad, and that what he really wants is the higher-cost Surface running
Windows 8.

So, when you say: > _the only real difference is the CPU architecture, which
is really nothing that any consumer should have to think about._ , You are
very wrong, they NEED to understand that before they buy the device.
Otherwise, a lot of people will be very disappointed.

~~~
fauigerzigerk
_> How can you call it "the same device", when everything is different, and
they are targeted for different people?_

Everything is different? These are two tablets with almost the same name,
presented on the same web page next to each other and hence targeting the same
people. They look almost identical. They have exactly the same screen size and
aspect ratio. Same types of connectivity as well. One is higher specced than
the other. More storage, more memory, faster CPU and a few other details.
These are clearly two variants of the same device.

And Microsoft itself has made it very clear what the main difference is: Some
obscure sub division within their Windows OS lineup. Take away "RT" and "8
Pro" and the names are identical.

It's as if Apple was offering two versions of the iPad, one running iOS and
another one running Mac OS.

------
scotty79
I don't see much more confusion than was caused by Windows CE. Why do they
insist on calling those "windows"? It's such a loathed brand.

------
crag
Yeah, this is gonna be a serious problem for MS. Frankly I can't believe their
marketing/PR division is so inept.

I hope MS will come up with some kind of "cross-over coupon" for those who
brought RT thinking it was a full version of the OS with Office included
(which is why people are buying it). Cause if not, there are gonna be some
VERY pissed off customers.

------
monk_e_boy
Oh man. I've been a programmer for 15 years. I've used windows on all my PCs
and laptops. My SO is after a netbook and I told her to wait and see what the
Surface is like. We investigated it and both came to the conclusion that
Office wouldn't be supported. We were both wrong? Lol, how do they make it so
hard to figure out what it'll support?

------
JimmaDaRustla
Yes, "RT" is a dumb name. But seriously, how is this a problem to consumers?

Go to Best Buy, Future Shop, Radio Shack (The Source)...heck, even visit a
Microsoft store and ask the "horrific, unexplainable, daunting" question:
"What is the difference between Windows RT and Windows?

You will "shockingly" get a pretty simple answer: Windows for low-end devices,
containing only the new interface and can only run apps available on the
marketplace.

I think we need to have a little more faith that consumers aren't complete
morons, and if this little dilemma causes a major issue...well, it will
probably save MS money because consumers will be calling Apple tech support
instead.

Edit: No complaints yet, but I'm not calling Apple consumers morons - I mean
Apple doesn't have the obfuscated product line to confuse consumers.

~~~
freehunter
Seriously, why not just answer with "Windows RT is Microsoft's tablet OS and
Windows 8 is the replacement for Windows 7"? Consumers understand tablets.
They understand their limitations. Consumers understand desktops. They know
what they're getting into on each platform. It doesn't have to complicated.

RT is iOS. 8 is OSX. Maybe the confusion will go away if you relate it to
Apple's products?

~~~
JimmaDaRustla
Because that is wrong! If you actually spent a moment or two looking at their
lineup, you would know that there are tablets that will run full Windows 8.

People need to be shaken, this has been the huge motive for Windows 8 all
along - full OS on tablets. Windows RT is an unfortunate compromise for ARM
processors.

~~~
freehunter
That doesn't change the fact that Windows RT is a direct competitor to iOS.
Windows 8 might be different, but it's still the successor to Windows 7, meant
to run on x86 machines. Sure it has a much nicer touch-centric UI that allows
it to be put on tablets as well, but for the full traditional computing
experience you'll still be pushed into the desktop.

Windows 8 is not Windows 7, it's the next version of Windows. This brings
changes like it always has. Windows RT is not a traditional PC OS, it's
Windows 8 with the desktop cut out. It runs Windows 8 apps but not Windows 8
programs. The easy way to say it is, Windows 8 is the successor to Windows 7,
and Windows RT is a tablet OS. I'm not seeing how my statement is wrong.

Trust me, I like Windows 8 just as much as you seem to. Check my comment
history to see for yourself. But the question is "how do we explain it easily
to a clueless customer?" and the answer is "by not getting bogged down in
semantics that would turn a clueless customer away." People will see once they
start using it, the hard part is getting them to start using it.

------
stinos
the discussion about the meaning of 'PC' underneath the article is pretty
hilarious

~~~
tayl0r
God, it's infuriating. "Let's not have a discussion about the actual article,
let's just argue bullshit semantics about the definition of PC."

~~~
pohl
In a sense, though, that discussion is entirely on topic. What Microsoft has
done here has been a reaction to Steve Jobs utterance of the phrase "post-pc".
They have been frantic to counter that frame ever since, insisting that they
can deliver a tablet that is also a PC, with "no compromises".

Well, you can't avoid compromises. The best you can do is choose which ones
you will accept. And if you don't choose, then unexpected tradeoffs will be
thrust upon you.

This customer confusion over RT is just fruit from that seed.

~~~
empire29
Its quite clever how Apple used and popularized the term "post-pc" after a
multi-year TV PR campaign (Mac vs PC commercials) drawing a distinct line
between PCs (windows machines) and Macs.

While I take post-pc to mean Post-Desktop (and possibly laptop), Apple has
cleverly separated its Mac personal computer line from "PC"s, allowing it to
sound the death knell for Windows PCs, but not for its "delightful" Mac
computer line up.

------
MatthewPhillips
They should have licensed the name Metro from Metro AG and called it that.
Instead they gave it the same name as their runtime? Seriously? It boggles my
mind as to how they didn't anticipate this being confusing.

~~~
dagw
While I certainly agree as such, have you considered that perhaps they tried
and Metro AG didn't want to license the name? Metro AG is a pretty huge
company with annual revenues that easily match Microsoft's so it's not like MS
could just simply buy them off.

~~~
MatthewPhillips
Apple somehow got the more distinctive name iPhone even though there was a
voip phone with that exact name (owned by a very big company), yet somehow a
grocery store has claimed ownership of a common word in all markets and
industries?

~~~
dangrossman
It's not a grocery store, it's a €67 billion a year wholesale and retail group
with 6 different store chains under its belt including wholesale warehouses,
grocery stores, department stores and -- most importantly -- two consumer
electronics chains. You could have a Metro-owned store with Metro signs over
Android tablets next to a Microsoft store with Metro signs over Surface
tablets. The likelihood of confusion that'd create is the very definition of
trademark infringement.

------
rlpb
"Windows RT is not a computer operating system. Windows RT is an operating
system for mobile devices."

So mobile devices aren't computers?

If this is true, I think this is a major strategic mistake.

~~~
dagw
Also are phones "mobile devices"? If so is WP8 the same thing as WindowsRT? if
not...what exactly is a mobile device?

I (think) I know the answer, but that definition brings up more questions than
it tries to answer.

------
Aardwolf
What I don't understand is this:

If Windows 8 was designed so much for touch that even the desktop version of
it shows a touch interface by default,

why don't they use Windows 8 on a surface??

~~~
ygra
They do, on the Surface Pro. It just comes out a little later, presumably to
not clobber hardware vendors' sales. Microsoft has to be very careful in that
market since so far they have been (largely) only a supplier of operating
systems and software while others built the hardware. Now they risk alienating
their former partners (and large customers).

So essentially they let Dell, Lenovo, HP, ... have a first go at building and
selling tablets that can run the “normal” Windows 8. Surface then is just a
reference implementation of sorts – it needs to be good and compelling and
show off the platform particularly well. But it shouldn't make big sales (and
the price point will probably be chosen to reflect that too) to avoid bad
blood between the usual manufacturers and MS.

------
Aardwolf
"Windows RT will not run any desktop Windows applications beyond the
applications that are bundled with the operating system. Bundled applications
include virtually every single desktop application found in Windows 8—Paint,
WordPad, etc.—except for Windows Media Player."

Ok, this I really, really, do not understand.

Playing media is a large use case of mobile devices. Why the heck would they
sell a mobile device that cannot play movies?

~~~
joenathan
There is a Metro media player via Xbox Music and Xbox Video, of which there is
no desktop counterpart in RT just Metro versions.

~~~
Aardwolf
A gaming console Xbox media player on a tablet running Windows RT, called
Metro? It keeps getting more and more confusing imho :/

~~~
joenathan
Sorry this is hurting your head, maybe you should take a nap?

------
7952
So its a mobile version of Microsoft Office bundled with a tablet computer?

