The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Feeds

Microsoft's ARM blunder: 7 reasons why Windows RT was DOA

Redmond's low-rent tablet OS was doomed from the start

Ensure Ease of Recovery with Asigra’s Agentless Software

Analysis Industry doomsayers were circling Windows 8 like buzzards before it even launched, but they picked the wrong carcass. Microsoft's real 2012 roadkill was Win8's ARM-powered cousin, Windows RT.

The chattering class's comparisons of Windows 8 and Windows Vista are premature – it will take several more quarters before we can gauge how Redmond's latest OS will play out in the marketplace. But with the holiday season behind us, it's now plain that Window RT is a flop.

Let's be clear: we're not slagging Surface, Microsoft's design-minded line of convertible tablets. By most accounts, Surface is a compelling piece of kit from a hardware perspective. The prospect of Microsoft launching an Intel-based Surface with Windows 8 Pro later this month should have Redmond's OEM partners tugging nervously at their collars.

The problem is that Microsoft chose to launch Surface based on an ARM processor running Windows RT, a misguided stab at a tablet-centric user experience that hoped to capture something of what made Apple's iPad so successful. Instead, Redmond delivered an oddly hobbled OS that's neither fish nor fowl, one that falls somewhere between Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8 – but with the advantages of neither.

For all Microsoft's hype around Surface RT, customers aren't buying it – literally.

According to the latest estimates from UBS analyst Brent Thill, Microsoft has sold only around 1 million Surface fondleslabs since the line launched in October 2012. And Thill was an optimist; he expected Redmond to shift twice that many.

Microsoft Surface tablets

A rough illustration of how many Surface slabs running Windows RT that Microsoft has sold so far

But even sales of 2 million would have been a pittance. Apple sold 14 million iPads in the three months before the holiday season, and that was considered a "disappointing" quarter.

So what went wrong? The fact that Surface is a newbie in a market with a deeply entrenched leader takes some of the blame, but that's not the whole story. The ARM-powered Surface falls flat on multiple levels, and any other vendor who tries to sell a Windows RT device will face the same problems.

1. Windows RT devices are too expensive

Before the Surface launch, gadget fans were rubbing their hands at the prospect of a Windows-powered fondleslab at a price that would compete with the likes of Google's Nexus 7. Lenovo, one of Microsoft's OEM partners, said to expect a raft of Windows RT devices priced as low as $300. Some analysts predicted Surface would be even cheaper.

No such luck. Instead, Surface RT arrived with a price tag of $499 for the lowest-end model – the one without a keyboard. Other vendors followed suit with their own Windows RT devices priced the same or even higher. Lenovo's IdeaPad Yoga 11, for example, lists for $799 – a far cry from $300.

Just why Windows RT slabs cost so much isn't clear. Maybe system requirements make high price tags necessary. Maybe Microsoft's license fees have something to do with it (in addition to the OS, all Windows RT devices include a copy of Office 2013).

Whatever the reason, the prices don't make sense. Customers would be better off waiting for tablets based on Intel's new "Clover Trail" Atom platform, due this year. They'll cost about the same as today's Windows RT devices, but they'll have beefier specs and run full Windows 8.

One analyst suggested that if Surface RT is to be competitive, Microsoft needs to cut its price down to at least $399. Even that sounds a little high to us.

True, the iPad is no cheaper than the current crop of Windows RT devices. But Apple is a master at marketing products as high-end, aspirational items for sophisticated consumers. That's never been Microsoft's strong suit. What's more, Apple's rich developer ecosystem means customers can just plain do more with their iPads than they can with any WinRT device – which brings us to our next point ...

2. The software stinks

Play with a Surface RT for a few minutes and you're intrigued by how sophisticated and fun it seems. Use it for a few hours or days and the charm soon wears off. Again, the problem isn't the hardware but the Windows RT operating environment that runs on it.

Sure, it comes with Microsoft Office – almost. The version that's bundled with Windows RT can't handle any add-ins, and it doesn't support documents or templates that include macros. Power users will not be impressed. What's worse, you're not allowed to use it in a business setting without purchasing a separate, commercial-use license – technically, at least – so there goes some more cash.

But the real problem is that – with the exception of Office – the only programs that will run on Windows RT are apps from the Windows Store. A recent jailbreak hack that allows users to load desktop apps is largely academic, since only Windows programs that have been compiled for the ARM architecture will actually launch – and there aren't any.

That leaves Windows RT users with few options. Microsoft isn't saying how many apps are in the Windows Store, but according to the independent website MetroStore Scanner, there are fewer than 40,000. Even Research in Motion's BlackBerry 10 platform has more developer engagement than that, and it hasn't even launched yet.

Worse, from what we can see, only a fraction of Windows Store apps are actually useful. Many are outright junk – although Microsoft seems to be working on pruning those out. Of the top 30 highest-rated apps, more than half are published by Microsoft itself, and many of those come bundled with the OS.

When third-party apps do add value, they often feel half-baked, with details glossed over and major features missing. Many of the ones we've tried simply aren't as good as similar apps for other mobile platforms, and they're certainly not as good as the software we're accustomed to using on Windows.

Customer Success Testimonial: Recovery is Everything

Surface Pro will also fail

There's no reason at all to buy it over buying an Ultrabook which it costs about the same, performs about the same, and weighs about the same as Surface Pro including the keyboard cover. The only difference is Ultrabooks will have a better keyboard and be available with better CPUs, neither of which is in favor of Surface Pro.

On their fourth attempt to enter the tablet market since the mid 90s, Microsoft still doesn't understand it, even after Apple showed them what people want! They still try to make something that does everything a PC does, when the Apple and Android tablet sales demonstrate people aren't asking for that. If they were, the iPad would have flopped and there would still be no tablet market.

52
3

Re: Surface Pro will also fail

@Allison Park

You say, "Open source, Open O/S, Open HW it's all BS"

If it is BS, please explain how Android is taking market share away from Apple. Android, which owns over 75% of the mobile market, is open source, is a relatively open O/S (compared to Apple), uses open standards and can run on open H/W.

The world is moving towards openness not away from it.

HP seem to be more interested in the IT Services industry than flogging kit these days, so HP will probably stick around, IBM style. Intel are struggling to answer ARM - which arguably is a more open HW system, BTW. And Microsoft is a dinosaur will stick around as a legacy software supporter, getting paid a fortune by enterprise. But it will be a shadow of its former self and eventually IBM will buy it.

48
3

here comes the onslaught

I thought a comment on slashdot recently specifically on the topic of the dual UIs was excellent.

they cited this microsoft paper

http://www.sigchi.org/chi96/proceedings/desbrief/Sullivan/kds_txt.htm

"The Windows® 95 User Interface: A Case Study in Usability Engineering"

"Separate UI for Beginners

The first major design direction we investigated was a separate UI ("shell") for beginning users. The design was quickly mocked up in Visual Basic and tested in the usability lab. (See Figure 4.) While the design tested well, because it successfully constrained user actions to a very small set, we quickly began to see the limitations as more users were tested:

If just one function a user needed was not supported in the beginner shell, s/he would have to abandon it (at least temporarily).

Assuming that most users would gain experience and want to leave the beginner shell eventually, the learning they had done would not necessarily transfer well to the standard shell.

The beginner shell was not at all like the programs users would run (word processors, spreadsheets, etc.). As a result, users had to learn two ways of interacting with the computer, which was confusing. "

"For these reasons and others, we abandoned the idea. Importantly, because we used a prototyping tool and tested immediately in the usability lab, we still had plenty of time to investigate other directions. "

---

Those same conclusions should of been drawn with the new Metro/Modern/whatever UI. MS was too impatient, they should of taken the time to do it right, don't give two different UIs that you have to switch between. Especially if they are not compatible with each other (e.g. doing certain things can only be accomplished in one or the other, and I have read things like IE is separate in each, not having any knowledge of the other as well).

For that reason alone Windows 8 should of never had been allowed out of the gate. Forcing the same metro UI on windows server 2012 (which they do if I recall right - one of my friends who is a MS employee was complaining about it recently) is even more absurd.

Also it appears that the low end Win8 laptops are getting terrible reviews and high return rates (too slow, bad quality, etc). I imagine the cost of the touch technology just compromises the rest of the system too much for a low end box.

41
6

More from The Register

SCO vs. IBM battle resumes over ownership of Unix
Zombie lawsuit back and wants to suck the brains out of Linux
Bjarne Again: Hallelujah for C++
Plus: Now officially OK to admit you never used STL algorithms
Interwebs taunt Sir Jony over Apple eye candy makeover
Hey Ive, Ive... add more unicorns, willya?
Apple: iOS7 dayglo Barbie makeover is UNFINISHED - report
Plus: You don't like the icons? Blame marketing
Red Hat to ditch MySQL for MariaDB in RHEL 7
So long, Oracle! Don't let the door hit you on the way out
Shy? Socially inadequate? Fiddling with your phone could help
App 'tells the brutal truth' about social inadequates' chatup lines
Java EE 7 melds HTML5 with enterprise apps
New release arrives with GlassFish, NetBeans support
 breaking news
'Office Facebook' firm Tibbr wants you to PAY for mobe-meetings app
Great idea. Punters won't cough for it though
 breaking news
The only Waze is Google: Ad giant tipped to gobble map app 'for $1.3bn'
Pac-Man-satnav-ish upstart in bidding war with Apple, Facebook
 breaking news
PM Cameron calls for modern, programmable computers! (We think)
IT education musings to G8 chiefs to mystify IT industry