Gabe says windows 8 might be catastrophe, wants to port steam to Linux

[BladeVenom]

Faster Zombies! - L4D2 performance on Linux

Linux is faster than Windows
OpenGL is faster than DirectX

 

[thespyder]

At the end of the day, I don't see this whole issue as a bad thing. If Steam starts porting to Linux, they aren't going to STOP porting to Windows. So it is a larger market. And if game support starts doing Linux, we have more options and hopefully more developers. So it is a win/win.

Sure Gabe is looking out for his own stake in the market. And sure people should be worried about GFWL because Microsoft, given an inch will try and take over the world. But, in the end, I don't see Steam going away regardless of if they go to Linux or not. At least not BECAUSE of Windows 8 alone.

 

[wuliheron]

BS. How many Radeon 7000 series users have stable 3D support? How many have video offloading in X? Stable support for 3D and such on 5xxx and 6xxx is still iffy. Getting a display at native res in X is iffy, still, today, for 7xxx GPUs.

AMD doesn't have enough driver devs supporting the open-source drivers, and the Cats are harder to get and keep working than NV's blob. With a HD 3xxx or older, or 4xxx depending on distro, you're good. But, new hardware? Screw that.

That's because everyone has invested all their cookies into the monopoly that is windows. It has nothing to do with Linux being an inferior os for gaming. Apple was the same way for video games for years, but eventually decided to invest in improving the situation. According to Valve L4D2 is 20% faster on Linux. The issue isn't whether Linux is good for gaming, but whether Microsoft's old OEMs and Steam are willing to do what it takes to make it a viable alternative.

 

[Cerb]

That's because everyone has invested all their cookies into the monopoly that is windows. It has nothing to do with Linux being an inferior os for gaming.

But, that's what makes Windows the better OS. Linux has supported more hardware OotB, has been more scalable and responsive than any other major OS but FreeBSD**, and outside of the blights that are ALSA and X11, has proven itself worthy of everything from DVD players to supercomputers. For ALSA, there's PulseAudio. Not perfect, but it reduces crashes, pops, garbled noise, horrible resampling artifacts, and reboots*. For X11, it's basically just a lot of programmers being very careful, and being willing to put in the extra time and effort needed to try to keep it from breaking much...and I must admit, they've done pretty well at it.

What makes Windows a better gaming OS is things like native DirectX. They say what HW will support, what SW must support, they supply OS libraries and Visual Studio add-ons, and so on, and so forth. It's the vertical integration of technology, without the Apple-like stripping of functionality that isn't perfect. It's that MS makes some decisions for the users, the software developers, and the hardware developers. For their ability to do that, and do it well, I truly hope they don't get too marginalized in the coming years.

If AMD supported FOSS drivers like Intel does, it would rock. Despite the Byzantine mess that X is, FOSS drivers have been great, getting better, and are the only way to ensure a long-term stable X (I've yet to have a long-running install where NV or AMD blobs didn't break, and neither blob supports dynamic display configuration well enough), but Intel is the only major vendor that's really serious about it, and that leaves AMD lagging behind on two fronts (maintaining the buggy blob, getting good latest-HW features working in said buggy blob, and getting people bitching about their "open" HW sucking on Linux).

Linux being a worse gaming OS is mostly about software and hardware vendor support, not technical limitations.

Apple was the same way for video games for years, but eventually decided to invest in improving the situation. According to Valve L4D2 is 20% faster on Linux. The issue isn't whether Linux is good for gaming, but whether Microsoft's old OEMs and Steam are willing to do what it takes to make it a viable alternative.

I doubt they will do enough to make it a truly viable alternative, though that would be neat. But, if they can make it enough of an alternative for MS to get a bit scared, and appoint someone with real vision to lead the future development of Windows and its related technologies, I think it would be good for MS, Windows, users, and even Linux (where do the standardized graphics features come from, FI? That's right: Microsoft!).

My view is this is that since tablets are a growing market, MS wants in. Badly. But, they ignore that while stagnant (post-2003 hardware is mostly, "good enough," and here I'm still lugging a 4.5-year-old CPU), the desktop and regular notebook are far from dead, and people that rely on computers for serious work and serious play are well served by what has worked in GUIs for decades, now, not to mention keyboards and mice. The tablet interface needs to be an option, that can rest on top of a normal Windows desktop (for convertible notebooks, tablet app development, and people that like gestures), without changing or removing much of the good old desktop. The mobile-only versions can then get pure Metro. A single unified interface is a bad idea, IMO an idea that only a bean-counter without a real clue would push for (like a guy that would laugh at the 1st gen iPhone? :sneaky.

If they don't come up with better strategies than throwing a bunch of competitors' features together and telling devs to make it work, an app store that may compete with Steam won't end up really being much of a threat to Valve. OTOH, Valve could probably stand to have some decent DRM-enabled competition, so maybe I should hope it takes off.

* as an example, every Intel audio implementation I've used with ALSA in recent years, would eventually get the output stream locked into playing silence, and all attempts to stop it, including rmmod, would fail, meaning no more audio playback until after a reboot. ALSA is fundamentally shit, in my not so humble opinion, but politics has allowed it keep on. Pulse at least abstracts the device more, something that should be the kernel's job, and makes it so sound works properly, if at the cost of some CPU cycles.

** OotB real-time is a goal of Ingo Molnar, so worst-case responsiveness may be better in Linux, already, but if not, I would expect it to be in the coming years.

 

[wuliheron]

My view is this is that since tablets are a growing market, MS wants in. Badly. But, they ignore that while stagnant (post-2003 hardware is mostly, "good enough," and here I'm still lugging a 4.5-year-old CPU), the desktop and regular notebook are far from dead, and people that rely on computers for serious work and serious play are well served by what has worked in GUIs for decades, now, not to mention keyboards and mice. The tablet interface needs to be an option, that can rest on top of a normal Windows desktop (for convertible notebooks, tablet app development, and people that like gestures), without changing or removing much of the good old desktop. The mobile-only versions can then get pure Metro. A single unified interface is a bad idea, IMO an idea that only a bean-counter without a real clue would push for (like a guy that would laugh at the 1st gen iPhone? :sneaky.

If they don't come up with better strategies than throwing a bunch of competitors' features together and telling devs to make it work, an app store that may compete with Steam won't end up really being much of a threat to Valve. OTOH, Valve could probably stand to have some decent DRM-enabled competition, so maybe I should hope it takes off.

* as an example, every Intel audio implementation I've used with ALSA in recent years, would eventually get the output stream locked into playing silence, and all attempts to stop it, including rmmod, would fail, meaning no more audio playback until after a reboot. ALSA is fundamentally shit, in my not so humble opinion, but politics has allowed it keep on. Pulse at least abstracts the device more, something that should be the kernel's job, and makes it so sound works properly, if at the cost of some CPU cycles.

** OotB real-time is a goal of Ingo Molnar, so worst-case responsiveness may be better in Linux, already, but if not, I would expect it to be in the coming years.

Sales don't lie. Portables and all-in-one desktops are taking over the market and even the latest Steam survey shows an increase in the number of people using integrated graphics. You can rant and rave all you want about the days of the desktop not being over, but that has nothing to do with the issue which is a scramble for the cheap PC gaming and portable gaming market. That's a race to the bottom for MS and something they are not prepared to do anymore than Intel was prepared to compete with ARM.

The question isn't whether MS will eventually compete effectively with Linux for cheap tablets and whatnot, but whether by the time they get there the competition will have already established itself as a viable alternative. Within the next couple of years the hardware to play serious games on tablets and all-in-one desktops will be available and the question every consumer will be asking is how cheap. About 2-3 hundred dollars seems to be the sweet spot and that's just too cheap for MS to crush competition like Linux on something as small as a 7" screen.

 

[Skel]

Sales don't lie. Portables and all-in-one desktops are taking over the market and even the latest Steam survey shows an increase in the number of people using integrated graphics. You can rant and rave all you want about the days of the desktop not being over, but that has nothing to do with the issue which is a scramble for the cheap PC gaming and portable gaming market. That's a race to the bottom for MS and something they are not prepared to do anymore than Intel was prepared to compete with ARM.

The question isn't whether MS will eventually compete effectively with Linux for cheap tablets and whatnot, but whether by the time they get there the competition will have already established itself as a viable alternative. Within the next couple of years the hardware to play serious games on tablets and all-in-one desktops will be available and the question every consumer will be asking is how cheap. About 2-3 hundred dollars seems to be the sweet spot and that's just too cheap for MS to crush competition like Linux on something as small as a 7" screen.

Are you including Android as a Linux flavor? Otherwise none of this works. I doubt any of the major Linux players will get anywhere near the traction that Android has in the tablets, it's almost a what's the point. I'd also be careful about the idea that MS can't compete in the lower market, they have deep pockets and can take the hit in the OS to get the market, they'll just pick it back up via Office or similar products.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Sales don't lie. Portables and all-in-one desktops are taking over the market and even the latest Steam survey shows an increase in the number of people using integrated graphics. You can rant and rave all you want about the days of the desktop not being over, but that has nothing to do with the issue which is a scramble for the cheap PC gaming and portable gaming market. That's a race to the bottom for MS and something they are not prepared to do anymore than Intel was prepared to compete with ARM.

The question isn't whether MS will eventually compete effectively with Linux for cheap tablets and whatnot, but whether by the time they get there the competition will have already established itself as a viable alternative. Within the next couple of years the hardware to play serious games on tablets and all-in-one desktops will be available and the question every consumer will be asking is how cheap. About 2-3 hundred dollars seems to be the sweet spot and that's just too cheap for MS to crush competition like Linux on something as small as a 7" screen.

I think tablets have a long ways to go to approach PC gaming or even compete effectively with a console. I see the interface as the main problem. I cant imagine palying a shooter or RTS game with a touch interface. Maybe they could come up with some sort of detachable control device(s), but otherwise, I dont see tablets as serious gaming competition for PCs or consoles. At least unless we are completely taken over by Facebook games (ughh...).

 

[wuliheron]

I think tablets have a long ways to go to approach PC gaming or even compete effectively with a console. I see the interface as the main problem. I cant imagine palying a shooter or RTS game with a touch interface. Maybe they could come up with some sort of detachable control device(s), but otherwise, I dont see tablets as serious gaming competition for PCs or consoles. At least unless we are completely taken over by Facebook games (ughh...).

You have it backwards. The controls already exist and there is no reason whatsoever you can use a standard console control or whatever with a portable system. The only thing holding back portable gaming is the fact it's still a bit expensive and the graphics aren't up to snuff yet for cheaper devices. Manufacturers will no doubt continue to experiment with controls trying to make them more portable and intuitive, but that's not a serious issue holding back portables.

Are you including Android as a Linux flavor? Otherwise none of this works. I doubt any of the major Linux players will get anywhere near the traction that Android has in the tablets, it's almost a what's the point. I'd also be careful about the idea that MS can't compete in the lower market, they have deep pockets and can take the hit in the OS to get the market, they'll just pick it back up via Office or similar products.

Like I said, it's similar to what happened with Intel when ARM came along. MS simply has too many years of investments in high end systems to stop everything they are doing and throw money away on low end systems. They could do it, but their investors would throw a fit. That's why android is already an established alternative just like ARM and the more alternatives the better if they can prove their worth.

As for tablets, it's not just tablets but all-in-one desktops, VR goggles, or whatever comes along. Cheap computing and cheap PC gaming is about to flood the market in a big way and having a free os without anyone controlling what gets sold on it is the key.

 

[Dominato3r]

I think tablets have a long ways to go to approach PC gaming or even compete effectively with a console. I see the interface as the main problem. I cant imagine palying a shooter or RTS game with a touch interface. Maybe they could come up with some sort of detachable control device(s), but otherwise, I dont see tablets as serious gaming competition for PCs or consoles. At least unless we are completely taken over by Facebook games (ughh...).

This is the big plus for Windows. The tablets will plug into the Windows driver model. You can buy a logitech madcatz etc game pad and use it on a Windows 8 or Windows RT tablet without any driver work.

 

[Red Storm]

I think tablets have a long ways to go to approach PC gaming or even compete effectively with a console. I see the interface as the main problem. I cant imagine palying a shooter or RTS game with a touch interface. Maybe they could come up with some sort of detachable control device(s), but otherwise, I dont see tablets as serious gaming competition for PCs or consoles. At least unless we are completely taken over by Facebook games (ughh...).

All they need at this point is an official controller. Tablets easily hook up with TVs nowadays, so you're not actually using the tablet as a touchscreen device, it simply acts as a console. And with how fast tablet hardware advances (as opposed to ~5 year stagnation with consoles), I think it's very probable.

 

[cytoSiN]

At the end of the day, I don't see this whole issue as a bad thing. If Steam starts porting to Linux, they aren't going to STOP porting to Windows. So it is a larger market. And if game support starts doing Linux, we have more options and hopefully more developers. So it is a win/win.

Sure Gabe is looking out for his own stake in the market. And sure people should be worried about GFWL because Microsoft, given an inch will try and take over the world. But, in the end, I don't see Steam going away regardless of if they go to Linux or not. At least not BECAUSE of Windows 8 alone.

/agree

 

[Red Storm]

At the end of the day, I don't see this whole issue as a bad thing. If Steam starts porting to Linux, they aren't going to STOP porting to Windows. So it is a larger market. And if game support starts doing Linux, we have more options and hopefully more developers. So it is a win/win.

Sure Gabe is looking out for his own stake in the market. And sure people should be worried about GFWL because Microsoft, given an inch will try and take over the world. But, in the end, I don't see Steam going away regardless of if they go to Linux or not. At least not BECAUSE of Windows 8 alone.

Man if game devs actually migrated to Linux... I could finally kick Windows to the curb!

 

[cytoSiN]

Man if game devs actually migrated to Linux... I could finally kick Windows to the curb!

I said the same thing, but I have to use it for work, so I'd end up having to dual boot at least, which I'm already doing, so it won't really have the desired effect for me

 

[Red Storm]

I said the same thing, but I have to use it for work, so I'd end up having to dual boot at least, which I'm already doing, so it won't really have the desired effect for me

Well I have a Windows machine at work, but every application I need has both online and mobile app access, so I'd be good to go.

 

[cytoSiN]

Well I have a Windows machine at work, but every application I need has both online and mobile app access, so I'd be good to go.

Citrix is what screws me. My job is often 24/7, so unless I want to come in to the office in the middle of the night/every weekend, I need a windows machine to load citrix properly. Oh well. Maybe when I'm independently wealthy I can switch to a free OS full time. Oh, the irony...

 

[Cerb]

Sales don't lie.

They can, like any statistics.

Portables and all-in-one desktops are taking over the market and even the latest Steam survey shows an increase in the number of people using integrated graphics. You can rant and rave all you want about the days of the desktop not being over, but that has nothing to do with the issue which is a scramble for the cheap PC gaming and portable gaming market. That's a race to the bottom for MS and something they are not prepared to do anymore than Intel was prepared to compete with ARM.

They have an opportunity to alienate customers who aren't gunning to replace everything they own with tablets, including notebook, convertible tablet, and desktop users. If the tablet interface isn't received amazingly well, and the desktop changes aren't, either, they get themselves back in the spot they were in with Vista. They'll almost be there if only the desktop/notebook interface is poorly received.

Portables and all-in-one desktops are taking over the market (...) You can rant and rave all you want about the days of the desktop not being over

No need to rant and rave; you've already negated the problem statement. A subset of a desktop is still a desktop. It is still not mobile, it still needs a keyboard and mouse for non-content-consumption use, and that keyboard and mouse not being attached to the monitor allows for the very critical positioning of them away from said monitor. It would serve a serious business user or coder just fine, like any outside-the-monitor computer from the last 2+ decades could. Just that today, the added cost of miniaturizing the rest of the computer to fit back there is minimal.

Integration is killing the lego ATX desktop, yes. If that results in better values for the future, and more interface options, great (many of those AIWs are also touch, FI, and Gateway's have decent remotes). If it results in proprietary black-box computers that are practically unusable for anything but content consumption, that will suck.

The question isn't whether MS will eventually compete effectively with Linux for cheap tablets and whatnot, but whether by the time they get there the competition will have already established itself as a viable alternative. Within the next couple of years the hardware to play serious games on tablets and all-in-one desktops will be available and the question every consumer will be asking is how cheap. About 2-3 hundred dollars seems to be the sweet spot and that's just too cheap for MS to crush competition like Linux on something as small as a 7" screen.

MS not being run by Gates anymore is enough to keep them from crushing the competition. They've had several chances to seriously get into phones and tablets, and they keep blowing it. Windows 8 RT not being able to seamlessly operate on a domain is just the latest blunder, in that department. If they completely cede their vertically-integrated business market to quality Samba front-ends and Exchange emulators, they'll be right screwed, because they'll never be able to get that lock-in back, and that lock-in a huge part of the "Wintel" inertia for businesses. They won't be able to switch from Windows overnight, but over years...

 

[Skel]

Citrix is what screws me. My job is often 24/7, so unless I want to come in to the office in the middle of the night/every weekend, I need a windows machine to load citrix properly. Oh well. Maybe when I'm independently wealthy I can switch to a free OS full time. Oh, the irony...

Do you happen to know what version of Citrix you're running? My group uses Redhat Laptops and can connect to all our Citrix stuff without any burmps.. well anymore than Citrix gives you anyways.

 

[cytoSiN]

Do you happen to know what version of Citrix you're running? My group uses Redhat Laptops and can connect to all our Citrix stuff without any burmps.. well anymore than Citrix gives you anyways.

Not sure but I'll check tonight. It may technically work, but the biggest issue is that IT won't provide support unless we connect through windows using IE8 or 9. And as you suggested, Citrix provides enough "bumps" that IT is sometimes needed even if it's just to check in a document. I'm dual booting uBuntu and Win7 at home right now, and I only use Win7 for work and Steam.

 

[Skel]

You have it backwards. The controls already exist and there is no reason whatsoever you can use a standard console control or whatever with a portable system. The only thing holding back portable gaming is the fact it's still a bit expensive and the graphics aren't up to snuff yet for cheaper devices. Manufacturers will no doubt continue to experiment with controls trying to make them more portable and intuitive, but that's not a serious issue holding back portables.





Like I said, it's similar to what happened with Intel when ARM came along. MS simply has too many years of investments in high end systems to stop everything they are doing and throw money away on low end systems. They could do it, but their investors would throw a fit. That's why android is already an established alternative just like ARM and the more alternatives the better if they can prove their worth.

As for tablets, it's not just tablets but all-in-one desktops, VR goggles, or whatever comes along. Cheap computing and cheap PC gaming is about to flood the market in a big way and having a free os without anyone controlling what gets sold on it is the key.

It really depends on how you define "Cheap computing and Cheap PC Gaming". If it really was a race to the bottom as you're saying then even Apple would be sucking ass. Even Samsung isn't this dirt cheap market you're talking about.

Cheap Gaming isn't ever going to happen. The AAA titles will always cost money. Unless you're talking about casual Angry Birds gaming, then that's already here.

One last point, there will never be a "Free OS without anyone controlling what gets sold on it". Someone will always be pointing it to the place they can make money on it. Even Android the poster boy for free OS get it's pushes from Google and it's Vendors. The closest version of that Google doesn't get anything from is the Kindle Fire and that lines Amazons money. Even Ubuntu is being shifted towards profit. Just like Arts, it's awesome to create it but you need to pay the bills.

 

[wuliheron]

It really depends on how you define "Cheap computing and Cheap PC Gaming". If it really was a race to the bottom as you're saying then even Apple would be sucking ass. Even Samsung isn't this dirt cheap market you're talking about.

Cheap Gaming isn't ever going to happen. The AAA titles will always cost money. Unless you're talking about casual Angry Birds gaming, then that's already here.

One last point, there will never be a "Free OS without anyone controlling what gets sold on it". Someone will always be pointing it to the place they can make money on it. Even Android the poster boy for free OS get it's pushes from Google and it's Vendors. The closest version of that Google doesn't get anything from is the Kindle Fire and that lines Amazons money. Even Ubuntu is being shifted towards profit. Just like Arts, it's awesome to create it but you need to pay the bills.

The race to cheap computing is no different than the history of any other gadget and has already been going on for years. It's no different than any other device such as a toaster where the average person doesn't want to think about the parts inside, doesn't want to have to read an operating manual, and doesn't want to pay a lot. They want to be able to walk into Walmart and choose based on brand name, warranty, options, and price. Video games are the last big option to be added to cheap computers that many people are still willing to pay extra for.

India has been working on producing a $50.oo tablet they intend to sell to students for $35.oo and worldwide cellphones are now being widely used in the third world for surfing the web. There is an enormous market for cheap computing which, again, is why ARM and Android exist as alternatives to Intel and Windows. Many are suggesting cloud computing is the future of cheap computing.

As for AAA gaming titles, I can buy some games produced a year or two ago for a couple of bucks on Steam. That IS cheap computing. The technology becomes outdated and cheaper rapidly and vendors find it more worthwhile to sell a few hundred million copies at a steep discount than to keep charging top dollar.

 

[frozentundra123456]

The race to cheap computing is no different than the history of any other gadget and has already been going on for years. It's no different than any other device such as a toaster where the average person doesn't want to think about the parts inside, doesn't want to have to read an operating manual, and doesn't want to pay a lot. They want to be able to walk into Walmart and choose based on brand name, warranty, options, and price. Video games are the last big option to be added to cheap computers that many people are still willing to pay extra for.

India has been working on producing a $50.oo tablet they intend to sell to students for $35.oo and worldwide cellphones are now being widely used in the third world for surfing the web. There is an enormous market for cheap computing which, again, is why ARM and Android exist as alternatives to Intel and Windows. Many are suggesting cloud computing is the future of cheap computing.

As for AAA gaming titles, I can buy some games produced a year or two ago for a couple of bucks on Steam. That IS cheap computing. The technology becomes outdated and cheaper rapidly and vendors find it more worthwhile to sell a few hundred million copies at a steep discount than to keep charging top dollar.

I see a place for cloud computing, but am still reluctant to store any items I want to be secure in the cloud. I can see using cloud-based software, but I still want to store my personal items locally. I worry about both loss of data if the cloud system crashes or goes out of business, as well as security that it might be hacked.

 

[Skel]

The race to cheap computing is no different than the history of any other gadget and has already been going on for years. It's no different than any other device such as a toaster where the average person doesn't want to think about the parts inside, doesn't want to have to read an operating manual, and doesn't want to pay a lot. They want to be able to walk into Walmart and choose based on brand name, warranty, options, and price. Video games are the last big option to be added to cheap computers that many people are still willing to pay extra for.

India has been working on producing a $50.oo tablet they intend to sell to students for $35.oo and worldwide cellphones are now being widely used in the third world for surfing the web. There is an enormous market for cheap computing which, again, is why ARM and Android exist as alternatives to Intel and Windows. Many are suggesting cloud computing is the future of cheap computing.

As for AAA gaming titles, I can buy some games produced a year or two ago for a couple of bucks on Steam. That IS cheap computing. The technology becomes outdated and cheaper rapidly and vendors find it more worthwhile to sell a few hundred million copies at a steep discount than to keep charging top dollar.

This is where I'm going to step out of this.. The claims in this post make me laugh, but have nothing to do with any point I was making. If cheap computers were the only factor in buying then Emachines would not only still be around they'd be king. Saying that games that are years old and outdate are the definition of cheap gaming is a joke, you might as well say the used market is what cheap gaming is. I can't help but feel at this point you're just arguing to argue and I'm just plain not interested in that.

 

[wuliheron]

They can, like any statistics.They have an opportunity to alienate customers who aren't gunning to replace everything they own with tablets, including notebook, convertible tablet, and desktop users. If the tablet interface isn't received amazingly well, and the desktop changes aren't, either, they get themselves back in the spot they were in with Vista. They'll almost be there if only the desktop/notebook interface is poorly received.

Talk about your paranoid conspiracy theories. Sales figures are compiled from companies who need to attract investors and who are bound by law to release real figures.

Integration is killing the lego ATX desktop, yes. If that results in better values for the future, and more interface options, great (many of those AIWs are also touch, FI, and Gateway's have decent remotes). If it results in proprietary black-box computers that are practically unusable for anything but content consumption, that will suck.

MS not being run by Gates anymore is enough to keep them from crushing the competition. They've had several chances to seriously get into phones and tablets, and they keep blowing it. Windows 8 RT not being able to seamlessly operate on a domain is just the latest blunder, in that department. If they completely cede their vertically-integrated business market to quality Samba front-ends and Exchange emulators, they'll be right screwed, because they'll never be able to get that lock-in back, and that lock-in a huge part of the "Wintel" inertia for businesses. They won't be able to switch from Windows overnight, but over years...

Even if Gates were still running MS I doubt there is much he could do. They're a regulated monopoly and there is only so much they're allowed to do by law. The whole point of regulating monopolies is to encourage competition and innovation which is exactly what is finally happening. Windows 8 is merely their first dipping of their toe in the water and I wouldn't make too much of it just yet. About all Windows 8 and the surface tablet indicate at this point is they are not going to allow Apple to continue to stomp all over them by commanding the hardware supply chain and they are not going to allow android and other os to cut them out of the market without a fight.

 

[Cerb]

The race to cheap computing is no different than the history of any other gadget and has already been going on for years. It's no different than any other device such as a toaster where the average person doesn't want to think about the parts inside, doesn't want to have to read an operating manual, and doesn't want to pay a lot. They want to be able to walk into Walmart and choose based on brand name, warranty, options, and price. Video games are the last big option to be added to cheap computers that many people are still willing to pay extra for.

While I think there's more than just video games pushing it, I generally agree with this. Mass market commodity is the future of all computing. The big if, to me, is how open the platforms will be to people that do want to get inside. If not at all, we will see cultural regression as the technology marches on, and a repeat of the old days, when programmers and administrators were clandestine wizards with secret knowledge. With hardware as open as Intel's and AMD's historically has been, I think it will end up a bright, if very bumpy, future.

 

[Cerb]

Talk about your paranoid conspiracy theories. Sales figures are compiled from companies who need to attract investors and who are bound by law to release real figures.

Er, no. It would only be a paranoid conspiracy theory if it were planned. What I see is Ballmer having lacked real vision for the company and its products since the time he took over, failing to see what is good and bad for various users in practice.

Sales figures are compiled from companies who need to attract investors and who are bound by law to release real figures.

They are legally bound not to lie about them, but that doesn't mean they're the whole truth. AIOs are desktops. 80% of HP's contribution to Windows Vista Business sales were actually Windows XP (not sure about the total XP as a % of Vista). 1) If you include all forms of desktops as desktop sales, then what do you see? 2) How you work into those sales figures the "good enough" factor, in that so many people today what ATers consider ancient hardware in their desktops, that they use every day, and plan to replace with another dektop (I'm not sure how you could)? 3) Is there a way to identify the split in the tablet market between tablet-only users and uses of tablets as PC supplement devices (for that matter, how do you get that same split w/ desktops and notebooks?)?

People people sitting in front of component keyboard and mouse, looking at a monitor some distance away, or sitting in front of a notebook or convertible tablet in notebook 'mode', are using a desktop GUI, and are most comfortable with a desktop GUI, because it works, and is no different than when they had a loud box nearby taking up several cubic feet of room space. The interface should not be made any more difficult to use for them than it already is. The interface being annoyingly worse was basically what was wrong with Vista, causing MS to include downgrade rights so that they could pretend Vista was selling OK. There's nothing wrong with having a tablet/phone interface on an appropriate device, but too much change in one version of desktop/notebook Windows is not so good, especially if it hasn't been vouched for by users in all meaningful categories, including the content creators and data manipulators.

Even if Gates were still running MS I doubt there is much he could do. They're a regulated monopoly and there is only so much they're allowed to do by law. The whole point of regulating monopolies is to encourage competition and innovation which is exactly what is finally happening. Windows 8 is merely their first dipping of their toe in the water and I wouldn't make too much of it just yet. About all Windows 8 and the surface tablet indicate at this point is they are not going to allow Apple to continue to stomp all over them by commanding the hardware supply chain and they are not going to allow android and other os to cut them out of the market without a fight.

Today, yes, he couldn't crush the competition, but making everything made by Microsoft work together (or at least best efforts towards that goal), helped keep MS so dominant as they have been. Getting a better foothold where people are willing pay real margins, and where MS already has many customers paying them big bucks, should be much easier than normal consumers. Consumers are going to need to know what it gets them that Android or iOS won't, and truth, right now, is, "not much." Business people can be told in meetings how mobile Office neatly integrates with Exchange, Sharepoint, etc., and how they can just join and authenticate to their domain, easily configure and use Windows VPNs (and from there, all kinds of Windows-centric remote access), etc..

As long as that doesn't exist from MS, that leaves more time for developers of other systems to create and improve the same functionality implemented differently. Once it is sufficiently good, and easy to use, companies will not only not need Windows phones, but may start seeing entirely non-MS alternatives for workstation and server as viable, which in turn would provide demand for improved non-Windows business software development. MS will remain dominant for years just with inertia, but how dominant for how long is a big question.