[Raistlin]

Metro skin though, not a native app right?

What do you mean by native app?

[Raistlin]

The shift to appliances that MS is doing with Win8 RT. This isn't about firefox, it's about blocking access under the guise of security.

I'm still confused. If you don't want to support their 'appliance', why should that stop you from getting a Win 8 tablet?


As far as security goes though, they may have a point. It's possible to get a full-fledged browser working, there are certain access rights needed that are not exposed in the Win RT API. Assuming IE 10 is actually competent in terms of rendering (and MS seems to be making serious strides towards HTML 5 compliance and speed) ... there should be some nice 3rd party browsers that add lots of features.

[RawkHawk2010]

I'm picturing "Microsoft Deputy General Counsel David Heiner" as some menacing army dude that'll track me down and kick my ass upon detecting Firefox or Chrome on my machine.

[amrihua]

I think Clover Trail tablets will still be heavier, guzzle more power, and have less battery life than ARM tablets. Show me some performance comparisons instead of a idealized spec sheet.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5770/l...dfield-phone/6

[LukasTaves]

Is this only regarding the desktop version of other browsers? If so it's understandable, a pity, but understandable... If this is about metro browsers too than Ms has completely lost it XD

[numble]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5770/l...dfield-phone/6

That is performance on Android though, and it shows Medfield being pretty average at best--it had a higher capacity battery than in the iPhone 4S, but with 5.5 hours less battery life (3G) and 6 hours less battery life (wifi). How does that translate to Windows 8 x86, and a bunch of classic apps running in the background?

[Raistlin]

Is this only regarding the desktop version of other browsers? If so it's understandable, a pity, but understandable... If this is about metro browsers too than Ms has completely lost it XD

You have it backwards. This is only for Win RT (Windows on ARM) ... which only has metro apps. Also I assume there can be 3rd party browsers, they just have to use IE to render (just like on WP7)


Windows 8 can have 'true' 3rd party browsers (gecko, webkit, etc) ... both for desktop and metro. Mozilla is already developing a single install Firefox that works for both. http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/a...refox_for.html

[Raistlin]

That is performance on Android though, and it shows Medfield being pretty average at best--it had a higher capacity battery than in the iPhone 4S, but with 5.5 hours less battery life (3G) and 6 hours less battery life (wifi). How does that translate to Windows 8 x86, and a bunch of classic apps running in the background?

How does a Macbook Air work?

[numble]

How does a Mac Air function?

A Macbook Air costs at least $600 more, is heavier and gets less battery life than the iPad 2, which is $399 and gets 12 hours of battery life. The cheapest $999 Macbook Air model is advertised at 5 hours battery life.

[LukasTaves]

You have it backwards. This is only for Win RT (Windows on ARM) ... which only has metro apps. Also I assume there can be 3rd party browsers, they just have to use IE to render (just like on WP7) Windows 8 can have 'true' 3rd party browsers (gecko, webkit, etc) ... both for desktop and metro. Mozilla is already developing a single install Firefox that works for both. http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/a...refox_for.html

Oh, I see... I was actually talking about WoA, but I though Ms simply wouldn't even allow any 3rd party browser on the app store... But forcing them to use IE's rendering engine does make more sense than banning all browsers altogether :P

[Raistlin]

A Macbook Air costs at least $600 more, is heavier and gets less battery life than the iPad 2, which is $399 and gets 12 hours of battery life. The cheapest $999 Macbook Air model is advertised at 5 hours battery life.

Why are you comparing an iPad to a Win 8 table?

[numble]

Why are you comparing an iPad to a Win 8 table?

Macbook Air is not a Win 8 table--what are you talking about?

[Raistlin]

Oh, I see... I was actually talking about WoA, but I though Ms simply wouldn't even allow any 3rd party browser on the app store... But forcing them to use IE's rendering engine does make more sense than banning all browsers altogether :P

Granted they haven't confirmed that, but I see no reason why it would change.

[Raistlin]

Macbook Air is not a Win 8 table--what are you talking about?

lol tablet

What I'm saying is sure the win 8 tablets won't have as good of battery life as the ARM variants, but they can still have usable battery life that shits all over traditional laptops.

[Marty Chinn]

What do you mean by native app?

I mean natively using the Metro APIs.

[Zaptruder]

Gates is right.

Closed computing systems can work... as long as you're Steve Jobs.

[Marty Chinn]

That is performance on Android though, and it shows Medfield being pretty average at best--it had a higher capacity battery than in the iPhone 4S, but with 5.5 hours less battery life (3G) and 6 hours less battery life (wifi). How does that translate to Windows 8 x86, and a bunch of classic apps running in the background?

We already know Windows 8 is significantly more efficient in performance which directly translates to battery life. What that shows is Intel is at least capable of doing something decent in a mobile CPU space and meeting their claims of performance. So based on that, there is some hope they'll hit their tablet spec.

[Branduil]

This is why I will never switch to a walled garden OS. I can decide for myself which browsers meet my requirements.

[saunderez]

This is why I will never switch to a walled garden OS. I can decide for myself which browsers meet my requirements.

I also love how we're supposed to just trust IE10 is secure when most of us have years and years of evidence to the contrary. In my corporate environment IE causes a hell of a lot more work for support staff than if they were allowed to use FF or Chrome but unfortunately we have business apps that only work in IE.

[Sir Fragula]

If the core browsing technology is solid - which in IE10 it evidently is - why does it matter one shit what icon you click to surf on a CE tablet?

99.9% of people wouldn't notice if you ran Safari in the IE9 engine on an iPhone, or vice versa on WP7. They all do the same thing now, interfaces are the differentiation.

[Marty Chinn]

I also love how we're supposed to just trust IE10 is secure when most of us have years and years of evidence to the contrary. In my corporate environment IE causes a hell of a lot more work for support staff than if they were allowed to use FF or Chrome but unfortunately we have business apps that only work in IE.

IE has come a long way since the shitty days. It's not like it used to be.

[AdrianWerner]

I wonder if the article linked in OP was written with specific intent to misinform readers or is it's author just too lazy to actually check the source.

[numble]

We already know Windows 8 is significantly more efficient in performance which directly translates to battery life. What that shows is Intel is at least capable of doing something decent in a mobile CPU space and meeting their claims of performance. So based on that, there is some hope they'll hit their tablet spec.

Would Windows 8 x86 be more power efficient than Android? That "decent" Medfield showing basically is half as efficient as iOS when running Android, losing at least 5.5 hours, even with a larger battery. I also want to know what kind of displays they are targeting for their tablet spec--IPS, AMOLED, high-DPI? Could they accomodate high-DPI screens like the new iPad screen while staying within their battery life, thinness, and weight targets?

[saunderez]

IE has come a long way since the shitty days. It's not like it used to be.

That's fair enough and I'll concede IE9 is an improvement but I still wouldn't call it secure. I think it's going to take a couple more versions to get the taste of IE6 out of my mouth.

[AdrianWerner]

Would Windows 8 x86 be more power efficient than Android? That "decent" Medfield showing basically is half as efficient as iOS when running Android, losing at least 5.5 hours, even with a larger battery. I also want to know what kind of displays they are targeting for their tablet spec--IPS, AMOLED, high-DPI? Could they accomodate high-DPI screens like the new iPad screen while staying within their battery life, thinness, and weight targets?

I would assume even the best intel tablet will be heavier and last shorter time than iPad. But they will still be light and deliver whole day use, so I doubt many people will care.

[Marty Chinn]

Would Windows 8 x86 be more power efficient than Android? That "decent" Medfield showing basically is half as efficient as iOS when running Android, losing at least 5.5 hours, even with a larger battery. I also want to know what kind of displays they are targeting for their tablet spec--IPS, AMOLED, high-DPI? Could they accomodate high-DPI screens like the new iPad screen while staying within their battery life, thinness, and weight targets?

What? Where are you getting your stats?

iPhone 4S - 1,432 mAh
Lava XOLO - 1,460 mAh

Where are you seeing that the 4S has 5.5 hours more battery usage? Also why are we assuming that Intel's power efficiency in their chip development is static?

[Sir Fragula]

That's fair enough and I'll concede IE9 is an improvement but I still wouldn't call it secure. I think it's going to take a couple more versions to get the taste of IE6 out of my mouth.

Why wouldn't you call it secure? The thrust of your opinion is that you don't like IE because you don't like IE.

And IE6 is unfairly lambasted. It was awesome on release and for a good while after. It was IE7 being released as long afterward as it was that sucked.

[numble]

What? Where are you getting your stats? iPhone 4S - 1,432 mAh Lava XOLO - 1,460 mAh Where are you seeing that the 4S has 5.5 hours more battery usage? Also why are we assuming that Intel's power efficiency in their chip development is static?

It's in the charts. Maybe I should've said 5.243 more hours to be more accurate.

[Marty Chinn]

It's in the charts.

Oops, I had looked at the number for the 4 and not 4S in web browsing. Even setting aside the Intel chip, the 4S shits all over the 4 and that's just one generation later. I had not realized the battery life had gone up that much for such a small increase in battery capacity. Is that really accurate from the 4 to the 4S? Also why are we sticking to the 4S? Shouldn't we be comparing something similar? It's getting comparable battery life against other ARM android based phones is it not?

[giga]

I wonder if the article linked in OP was written with specific intent to misinform readers or is it's author just too lazy to actually check the source.

What's the problem?

People are really missing this part. Nothing but Office and IE run in classic mode on WinRT and this was always the case. Classic desktop on WinRT is specifically a special exceptions mode and most people are wondering why it exists at all. I believe it's perfectly fine for Mozilla to make a Metro browser and their whole rant about Metro being prohibitive is bullshit because IE10 Metro is the same as IE10 desktop minus plugins (which is a design decision not a technical one).

No, that's incorrect. IE10 on Windows 8 and RT runs as a privileged, classic process.

http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/a...-classic-.html

It's not precisely "running a browser in Classic" that matters for Windows on ARM. It's that running a browser in Classic is the only way that Microsoft has allowed us to get access to the APIs that a browser needs to deliver modern capabilities and performance in Classic AND Metro. A browser running exclusively in Metro does not have the APIs necessary to compete with IE or any other modern browser. On x86, Microsoft has given browser vendors the same privileges and APIs that IE uses. They have not done this on ARM. That's why Windows Classic on ARM matters.

[tino]

My only puzzlement is that why do MS think they can get away with this in EU?

[Azih]

My only puzzlement is that why do MS think they can get away with this in EU?

Well does Apple allow other browsers in iOS?

I genuinely don't know.

[Frost_Ace]

antitrust sanction in 3...2...1

[tino]

Well does Apple allow other browsers in iOS? I genuinely don't know.

You can reskin the iOS browser into a different browser, and core is still safari broswer.

I am pretty sure iOS allow browser with different rendering engine now. I am pretty sure both Opera Mini and Skyfire have their own engines. When did Apple start allowing this I don't remember.

[eastmen]

It's in the charts. Maybe I should've said 5.243 more hours to be more accurate.

The x900 also has twice the ram and a 4.03 1024x600 screen vs a 3.5 640x960 screen.

There are more variables than just the processor and that includes the OS . When you compare medfield to other andriod . Anand points out that the chip can clock from 100 to 1.6ghz but for some reason is limited to 600 to 1.6ghz. So more powersavings will be had there , the cpu is also fabbed on 32nm . So we will see even greater performance later this year when chips hit 22nm

[FyreWulff]

You have to be kidding me. They should not be allowed to do that. Same with Apple (Though doesn't iOS have third party browsers now?)

AFIAK the only browsers on IOS that are not Safari are rendered on that browser maker's server farms and then sent to the phone, like Opera.

[Azih]

AFIAK the only browsers on IOS that are not Safari are rendered on that browser maker's server farms and then sent to the phone, like Opera.

Huh, I'm sure they could do the same for Windows Phone then, and MS probably has a good case against anti trust suits. The dominant ARM phone/tablet company is being uncompetitive, why can't MS be?

Android is probably wide open though right?

[Greyface]

You can reskin the iOS browser into a different browser, and core is still safari broswer. I am pretty sure iOS allow browser with different rendering engine now. I am pretty sure both Opera Mini and Skyfire have their own engines. When did Apple start allowing this I don't remember.

Apple isn't allowing different rendering engines. Opera Mini and Skyfire render the pages/videos in the cloud and stream the results to the native app. It's using a VNC to access Firefox on the desktop. Microsoft is doing exactly what Apple is doing. Shameful.

[tino]

Apple isn't allowing different rendering engines. Opera Mini and Skyfire render the pages/videos in the cloud and stream the results to the native app. It's using a VNC to access Firefox on the desktop. Microsoft is doing exactly what Apple is doing. Shameful.

Let me get this clear. MS is doing the same thing, but they don't use the "no duplicated function" excuse, but they use the "no 3rd party allowed" excuse?

So there is no reskin browser allowed either?

[Flatline]

The chips have new requirements for security and power management, and Microsoft is the only one who can meet those needs.

ahahahahahahahah

[Mael]

So let me get this straight.
MS is trying to enter the tablet market by making an OS that doesn't provide what the public want because they claim they're more secure (despite the shitty image they have with ....pretty much everyone) and that's a good idea why?

[Greyface]

Let me get this clear. MS is doing the same thing, but they don't use the "no duplicated function" excuse, but they use the "no 3rd party allowed" excuse? So there is no reskin browser allowed either?

Mozilla, Opera etc can build a browser for Windows ARM it just wouldn't have the same capabilities as the IE browser. Just like iCab, Grazing browser etc on iOS aren't allowed the same background operations, javascript engine as mobile safari.

[strata8]

Let me get this clear. MS is doing the same thing, but they don't use the "no duplicated function" excuse, but they use the "no 3rd party allowed" excuse? So there is no reskin browser allowed either?

No, the restriction applies to all third party Metro apps, not just web browsers. Metro apps are contained within a sandbox, and Mozilla wants to go out of the sandbox (so to speak) to speed up the rendering engine. That's my understanding of it, anyway.

You could easily write a Metro web browser, but it wouldn't be as fast as IE10, which is allowed to access restricted functions since it's a first-party application.

[Fantasmo]

It should be illegal to be a spokesperson and say something that's such incredible bs.

[Mael]

No, the restriction applies to all third party Metro apps, not just web browsers. Metro apps are contained within a sandbox, and Mozilla wants to go out of the sandbox (so to speak) to speed up the rendering engine. That's my understanding of it, anyway. You could easily write a Metro web browser, but it wouldn't be as fast as IE10, which is allowed to access restricted functions since it's a first-party application.

What's funny is that this way, the less safe browser is going to be IE10.

[Treefingers]

So let me get this straight. MS is trying to enter the tablet market by making an OS that doesn't provide what the public want because they claim they're more secure (despite the shitty image they have with ....pretty much everyone) and that's a good idea why?

The public seems to be just fine with iOS

[Azih]

So let me get this straight. MS is trying to enter the tablet market by making an OS that doesn't provide what the public want because they claim they're more secure (despite the shitty image they have with ....pretty much everyone) and that's a good idea why?

Because they're aping the strategy of the most successful vendor?

[Greyface]

The public seems to be just fine with iOS

The public doesn't really care either way. Android is doing just fine on phones (where you'd think people would be even more 'security' conscious). This says more about what Apple and Microsoft want than it says about what the public wants.

[Stumpokapow]

Huh, I'm sure they could do the same for Windows Phone then, and MS probably has a good case against anti trust suits. The dominant ARM phone/tablet company is being uncompetitive, why can't MS be?

Well, for one, because the dominant ARM phone/tablet company hasn't been punished in the past for being anti-competitive. When your company is held liable for any kind of anti-trust violations, you are held to a higher standard in the future. That's how it works. It's like a probation situation--someone on probation might not be able to drink or own weapons or something else, even though a regular person can do those things.

Secondly, I suspect they'd have to address the "Is Windows 8 a tablet OS, or a desktop OS?" question. MS wants the best of all worlds--for it to be an excellent tablet OS and an excellent desktop OS. While Apple has a dominant marketshare in tablets (and a plurality in mobile phones), it's relatively difficult to say whether Windows 8 ARM tablets are intended to be in a product category with the iPad or with PCs. This is a question that would need to be answered.

Thirdly, I'm not sure that the EU would not be willing to hold Apple liable at some point over some of its behaviours. That's the thing about claiming something is hypocritical--there are two possible ways to resolve it... treat Apple the way they treat Microsoft, or treat Microsoft the way they treat Apple. You don't really suggest why the latter would be more likely.

So I don't think it's as easy as "Let MS get away with it after all look at Apple".

[zomgbbqftw]

The fuck is this shit?!?

Way to drive me to Android...