Ruslan Drinko

Tablets become obsolete within a year or a year and a half, incl. The future fate of the platform is not important. Unless software developers will not spend their time on it and there will be some “hunger” of applications.

Ruslan Drinko

Anton

Ruslan Drinko: Vadim, I think here http://www.oszone.net/user_img/vadblog/windows-rt06.png meant Acer W510 ;)
Tablets become obsolete within a year or a year and a half, incl. The future fate of the platform is not important. Unless software developers will not spend their time on it and there will be some “hunger” of applications.

Well, the same Android is updated without problems, with iPads it’s a little more complicated, but Windows is a no-no, or will the Windows Blue RT firmware come via WU?

Xitroff

Is iOS more difficult to update than Android? :))) You made my day :)))

Anton

Vadim Sterkin: Anton, what do you mean “updated without problems”? If the OEM does not support the update, you are left alone with problems. If you are interested in solving them, that is your choice, but such consumers are in the minority.

Vadim, there are always problems, but for a handy IT specialist they are solvable, aren’t they? An ordinary user, if he wants, will take the device for repair (not necessarily authorized) and they will do it for him there.

Xitroff: Is iOS more difficult to update than Android? :))) You made my day :)))

IOS has a strictly defined list of supported devices, but Android is completely open to manipulation; if you have direct hands, it’s not difficult to twist it.

AndrewTishkin

Georgiy

I've been eyeing the tablet market for a long time, but I haven't made a choice yet. Finding a suitable device is also complicated by the fact that I don’t yet see “my” tablet in the entire huge assortment. For me, many completely opposite factors are important at once: from screen resolution and weight, to the ability to install third-party applications and a set of ports. In general, I have a dream: to replace a laptop with a tablet with a docking station (keyboard case). But so far I don’t see anything more interesting than http://www.kupaworld.com/products.php. And although the price is high, and I have not yet seen this miracle in the vastness of Russia, I think that a device of this kind can well replace an ordinary laptop. And everything else (in my opinion) is an armpit Internet + TV\player+reader\player... Fortunately, I don’t need such an “advanced” gadget! As for the rest, I’m sure: tablets are the future.
Best regards, Georgiy.

Xitroff

Anton:
Vadim, there are always problems, but for a handy IT specialist they are solvable, aren’t they? An ordinary user, if he wants, will take the device for repair (not necessarily authorized) and they will do it for him there.
IOS has a strictly defined list of supported devices, but Android is completely open to manipulation; if you have direct hands, it’s not difficult to twist it.

iPhone 3GS, released in 2009, has the current version of the OS. iPad 2 (2011) too. Which Android was supported at least half of this time? Why should the user cut something? This should be the vendor's concern. Regarding Windows RT and the “interest” of developers, many call it stillborn

Denis Borisych

There is one good quote in the article
“But, paradoxically, the Z2760 has made it almost impossible to buy Windows on ARM devices!”
I'd like to rephrase it
But, paradoxically, there is practically no point in Windows on ARM!

It’s not at all clear to me why we should make another under-axis.
They are like uncut dogs, and then there is Microsoft with its developments.
And if there is no way to drag all the software onto this platform, then there is no point in it, because the main point is that Vyn, no matter how much they criticize her, has a huge number of applications of any kind and focus + the ability to write some things for it “ on my knee."

Anton

Vadim Sterkin: Anton, why does an ordinary user need to take his tablet for repair so that they can make him a new Android for money?

Vadim, Android quickly acquires new features with each version than any other mobile OS, it becomes faster and more customizable. And the security of the system increases.
IMHO, it’s nonsense to buy the most crooked Windows RT, which can do even less than the currently developed Firefox OS.

... and also the most expensive OS in terms of cost (both for vendors and for the end user (he also bears the burden of the OEM cost)

Denis Borisych

Vadim Sterkin,

Vadim, let’s not get childish, there is a huge layer of highly specialized software that exists only for Windows, a good example is restaurant and other systems.
Unfortunately, the tendency in our country is that it is easier to buy third-party (foreign) software and maintain it, not to mention the fact that most software for enterprises and laboratories of the “agroprom” generally works under DOS and has no analogues.
I was engaged in “anonism” for 2 months, rewriting grain procurement software for Windows, which had been working God knows how long under DOS and was written about 15 years ago. but now in the laboratory there is a normal computer with a normal OS (win7) and sane software, which works equally well under all versions of Windows, except for AWS.

AndrewTishkin

I'm ok.

Vadim, maybe you still have the picture in your cache?
I’m talking about the one that comes after the words “not only for consuming information.”

And it’s not just me - an external check confirms the absence of the file. For example:
http://www.bertal.ru/index.php?a764214/www.oszone.net/user_img/vadblog/windows-rt04.png#h

Anton

Vadim Sterkin: Denis Borisych, I am aware of highly specialized software. Do you need software for harvesting grain on your tablet? And why do you think that an OS for tablets has no right to life just because such software will not work on them?

Agree, Vadim, the tablet should be universal - the younger brother of the PC, but no longer a nephew. Previously, everyone bought tablets so as not to take a laptop on the road, but now they don’t run anything other than Engrybirds on them. So, entertainment, and nothing more... From the same iPad, it is impossible to upload anything to the network except through iTunes, and Android requires synchronization with a PC. It would be better to make a 10-hour battery for tablets with Windows 7 or buy devices with Windows 8 Pro

Anton

Vadim Sterkin

Vadim, people haven’t yet invented anything better for contacts than the iPad (IMHO). Windows 8 RT is still unfinished. When Windows Blue RT comes out, and maybe even Windows 9 RT (if Microsoft doesn’t abandon its plans), then we’ll talk about whether to buy it or not.

Dmitriy

For me, the most important thing about a tablet is its integration with my other devices, in particular, what this number of applications voted for. Without applications and integration, a tablet even with 8 cores will be just a stove. and here it would seem that MS could shoot with her mouth, but she stepped on the same rake as earlier with the zuna.

Vitaly K. ©

For what? It doesn't even need to be close. What I like about Android is that it is a self-sufficient system. If you have direct hands and the right device, you can at least sew custom firmware, look at it, roll back to a backup without connecting to a PC. I’m not talking about downloading any content in any convenient way, even movies via torrent, and installing any applications. Neither iOS nor VinRT have the above; they are tied to a PC and can do little without it.
For some reason, VinRT made a desktop. Why is it on the tablet? In desktop OS tiles. Why are they there? It is because of these misunderstandings that neither Vin8 nor VinRT are selling well.

The entire operating system is ported to ARM, which means Windows RT has the desktop and all the apps that come standard with Windows.

But opposite “Maximum number of SMB connections” for VinRT is empty.

By the way, Android is also available for x86 architecture. Thanks to the Dalvik virtual machine, most of the software does not even require recompilation; it runs this way, except for games and other software that uses the NDK.

Vitaly K. ©

Vadim Sterkin: I also understand if a developer came and said - well, I’m missing a, b, c and d in WinRT, so I can’t implement d, f, g and h in my application.

Option - in RT there is no support for native applications without hacking the system, so you can’t just take it and recompile it to the ARM version.

Vitaly K. ©

Anton

Vadim Sterkin Now I need Windows RT."

Vadim, “a man loves with his eyes.”

Vitaly K. ©:
Option - in RT there is no support for native applications without hacking the system, so you can’t just take it and recompile it to the ARM version.

Vitaly, Vadim By the way, regarding the jail: is it tied or not? Does Microsoft still have a warranty on the system after application?

Vitaly K. ©

Anton: By the way, regarding the jail: is it tied or not? Does Microsoft still have a warranty on the system after application?

What I don’t know, I don’t know. It is unlikely that the manufacturer encourages this, and it is unlikely to be of high quality - the system is poorly distributed and is not interesting to hackers.

Vitaly K. ©

Anton

Vadim Sterkin

Vadim, regarding Apple, don’t confuse God’s gift with scrambled eggs. Jobs' company does not seek to combine the concepts of Mac and iOS; on the contrary, the further it goes, the stronger the convergence goes. Microsoft, on the contrary, is puffing up its sweat to unite both the x86 and ARM ecosystems. This is why a number of geeks are tempted to port applications. Remove at least the name Windows from the ARM product, remove the desktop - and everything will fall into place.
By the way, it’s always a great mystery for me: will Windows XP x64 run on a regular intel-corei5 laptop without an emulator or not?

Vitaly K. ©

Anton: By the way, it’s always a great mystery for me: will Windows XP x64 run on a regular intel-corei5 laptop without an emulator or not?

It will start on its own, the problem is in the drivers for all kinds of hardware such as WiFi. Switching hybrid video cards will not work at all, only the one built into the processor, or, at best, you can switch to using only an external one.

Alexei

In my (and not only my) opinion, MS greatly missed the mark with the Metro concept. Just as this interface is pointless on desktop PCs, RT is also pointless on tablets.
What do we expect from windows? Of course, the ability to launch our favorite application. What do we get? Just an office, a bare market and the illusion that we have a full-fledged Windows.
IMHO, Android will solve comparable problems in comparable time for much less money

Denis Borisych

Vitaly K. ©,

It starts up and works, sometimes you need to change the Beavis.

Denis Borisych

Vadim Sterkin: No one is upset that MacOS apps don't work on iOS and vice versa. But when it comes to Windows RT, the labels “unfinished”, “unfinished”, etc. immediately appear.
No, I understand that the consumer may get confused - he wanted Windows 8, but it turned out that there was something missing. But here are the comments from people updating Android themselves, recompiling XP x64, rewriting cereal applications. But something is missing somewhere...

Yes, just those people who will buy a tablet with Windows in order to get exactly “that same Windows”, and not its likeness, otherwise it’s just another expensive technical castrato.

Denis Borisych

Vitaly K. ©,

Given the existing restrictions, users are also not interested.

Denis Borisych

Vadim Sterkin: Vitaly, this is not because it’s “not finished”, but because that’s what we intended :)

This is precisely why when the small ones released the first tablet computer, there was no excitement, and when the iPad was introduced, the world crap with joy.

Denis Borisych

Vadim Sterkin: Anton, excuse me that I didn’t wait, but today I asked the question “To whom Now I need Windows RT."
And cliches like “not finished” are in favor of the poor. I also understand if a developer came and said - well, I’m missing a, b, c and d in WinRT, so I can’t implement d, f, g and h in my application. You get blah blah.

but from your point of view it turns out “I don’t care what bullshit, but it’s a BMW,” so what?
It’s just that in expectations it’s one thing, but in practice, as always, it’s another...

Denis Borisych

Vadim Sterkin: Anton, the device must match your range of tasks. If you need software for grain procurement, buy a tablet with Windows 8. If the main thing for you is to be on VKontakte, Windows RT will be enough for you.

Vadim, everyone has their own range of tasks, you can’t please everyone, it’s just an option when another platform appears, instead of a proven and working Windows, and even it’s completely shredded, without the ability to run your favorite applications, and also with the price of the issue being like a “stub” ", seems very doubtful to me.
In such situations, I will buy an Android, both cheaper and more practical.

If I show you Windows Phone (that's also an OS), the anticipation for these apps to launch will be even higher - it's Windows after all, why not? And now I show you a tablet with Windows RT. It's not Windows 8, mind you, but you 100% expect the OS to run the same apps.

The problem is based on a lack of knowledge about the OS. Since the mass consumer does not have this knowledge, the problem can only be solved by marketing. And then Microsoft had a problem.

Because most devices come from OEMs, the company can't control their names to highlight functional differences the way Apple does. Moreover, even with its Surface, Microsoft made the mistake of deciding that the RT set-top box was enough for customers to understand the difference.

Hence the perception, which is very negative. And so much so that you are ready to forget about your favorite software and buy Android :)

Denis Borisych: and from your point of view it turns out “I don’t care what bullshit, but it’s a BMW” so what?

metro-holivare, and even here it is visible well, because the topic is related.

When entering into polemics with me in the comments, people forget that I have already said all the most important things in the text of the post. Some people don’t even read it, and some draw conclusions from it that are directly opposite to those stated in the text. And this quote of yours is an excellent illustration of the last point :)

To make it clearer, here is a simple exercise. Re-read the entry from “Who needs Windows RT now” to the end. Now, based on this block, try to formulate an answer for me in one short thesis.

sokrat

It seems that Windows RT, with such demand, will have to be abandoned as a failed project. Therefore, in 5 years it will most likely not become obsolete, but will be completely phased out.
But perhaps Microsoft dreams of cross-platform (in terms of hardware) and therefore will persistently push Windows RT further (they know better).
I have a tablet on regular Windows 8, and I chose it for only one reason - a minimum of movements when switching to the tablet. With Windows RT, you will again have to look for analogues, which is not much different from changing the platform.

Denis Borisych

Vadim Sterkin: Denis Borisych,
your rhetoric is entirely based on the problem of false expectations. I will slightly exaggerate the examples below to highlight it. If I show you a microwave, you will know for sure that it cannot run Windows applications. If I show you a tablet with Android or iOS, you will also know this, but somewhere the thought may flash - what if there is all sorts of virtualization. But it doesn’t occur to you to call them under-axes and trims.

This is for the simple reason that between Androids of all versions and iOS there is almost complete cross-platform, which is expressed in the fact that software written for 1 iPad works on 4, and the difference between the mobile version for phones and the version for tablets is almost non-existent, in any case In this case, the interchangeability is almost complete, it all depends only on the amount of hardware on board (it’s clear that a tablet without 3G cannot make calls like a phone)

If I show you Windows Phone (that's also an OS), the anticipation for running these apps will be even higher - it's Windows after all, why not? And now I show you a tablet with Windows RT. Note, this is not Windows 8, but you 100% expect this OS to run those same applications. The problem is based on a lack of knowledge about the OS.

the problem is not here, the problem is the lack of banal compatibility between products of the same line of different versions, a clear example is MS Office, no one has such leapfrog with versions

Since the mass consumer does not have this knowledge, the problem can only be solved by marketing. And then Microsoft had a problem.
Because most devices come from OEMs, the company can't control their names to highlight functional differences the way Apple does. Moreover, Microsoft, even with its Surface, made the mistake of deciding that the RT set-top box was enough for customers to understand the difference. Hence the perception, which was very negative. And so much so that you are ready to forget about your favorite software and buy Android :)

then you don’t need to position it as Windows 8 and that’s it, then there won’t be any expectations, it’s just that if the special software doesn’t work under RT, then it won’t work under Android, and under Y-OS either, but all other things being equal, Android is simply cheaper and simpler and more functional.

But this is another interesting phenomenon that I observe on my blog. It manifested itself most clearly in the metro-holivar, and even here it is visible well, because the topic is related. When entering into polemics with me in the comments, people forget that I have already said all the most important things in the text of the entry. Some people don’t even read it, and some draw conclusions from it that are directly opposite to those stated in the text. And this quote of yours is an excellent illustration of the last point :)
To make it clearer, here is a simple exercise. Re-read the entry from “Who needs Windows RT now” to the end. Now, based on this block, try to formulate an answer for me in one short thesis.

Conclusion
Due to the negligible difference in size/weight and battery life between ARM and Clover Trail tablets, there is no consumer benefit to Windows RT devices (even if we assume they are not more expensive). On one side of the scale there is little need for Office 2013 RT in a tablet, the inability to run third-party classic applications, and on the other there is nothing to put.

The situation may improve if Microsoft starts listening to users rather than effective managers. The only question is whether they need it.

Anton Additionally, I looked through various types of information, there are tests of the Pi Calculator program.
Of course, I am not a specialist in electronics and computing technology, but a user who has a certificate in the specialization “Computer in a modern office”...
If you don’t mind, could you at least briefly describe how long the hard drive of a modern PC can last without breakdowns?
Thank you for the information provided. Alexander.

Anton

Vadim Sterkin: Anton, I don’t impose anything on anyone. So it would be better for you to refrain from comments in such a tone.

We'll wait and see, but I'm afraid there won't be a miracle

Vadim Sterkin:
Meanwhile, as I already said, software for MacOS does not work on iOS and vice versa. Those. the situation is exactly the same.

I don’t respect the bitten one and I sincerely consider it technical castrato No. 1, I work on it only because I got it almost for free.

Vadim Sterkin:
What kind of leapfrog is this with Office versions and what specific lack of compatibility do you mean? If we mean 2003 and DOCX, then this is not even serious.

doc-x is not even a problem, it's just a feature
But what about the incompatibility of macros in different versions of the office, the worst thing in Excel, when a document is edited in different offices, the document is totaled and can no longer be restored by any means, I wrote a letter to MS support, but they never really answered me, please provide the files to you Unfortunately, I can’t because these are documents related to working with contractors (the funny thing is that these files are displayed absolutely correctly through Dropbox from an iPhone). By the way, the problems with version compatibility do not end there.

Vadim Sterkin:
Of course not. They seemed to be trying to isolate themselves (they called it RT, not 8), but they couldn’t really convey the difference, which is what I wrote about in the comments above. And this is exactly why the post appeared :)

There are 2 errors here
1) if the MS product had been called win-mobile/winOS or something else, it would have been positioned more correctly (by isolating it from the classic system)
2) in your article you say that this is not Windows almost at the very end of the article, which many probably did not read, which again causes a certain problem of perception and “righteous anger”.

Vadim Sterkin:
Mmm... You rewrote the conclusion in your own words, but I wanted to understand how you see my answer to the question “Who needs Windows RT now” based on what I wrote. Let me remind you that the request was generated by your comment:

The answer I see is something like this: this OS is not really needed by anyone yet, but it will undoubtedly be of interest to many enthusiasts and simply curious people, of course, if it gets rid of a number of problems inherent in the original system.
In reality, it will become in demand if the MS unties it from the device and makes it possible to put it on a vacuum cleaner or on a refrigerator.

Windows RT(formerly known as Windows 8 ARM) is an edition of the company's operating system for tablets and other .

Windows RT is not compatible with Windows applications built for x86-64/x86-32 processors (,). Tablet computers with pre-installed Windows RT are produced by . Tablet computers with Windows RT are also available in the , and model ranges.

Programs for Windows RT

When writing programs for Windows RT and its updated version Windows 8.1 RT, they use the same high-level programming languages ​​as for, based on a new architectural programming model, at the OS kernel level containing support for touch screens, as well as an interface providing, including , and style implementation. The main instrumental system is , running under .
The main source of programs is the company's online store, which contains tens of thousands of application programs, most of which are available for free. Basic programs and packages are also available for Windows RT. First of all, about the most popular: (Word, Excel, Outlook, OneNote, Powerpoint), Adobe Photoshop, Abbyy Finereader and a number of others.
Reading of electronic books in , and .
At the end of 2013, more than 13 thousand games of various classes alone were registered, programs in the “Music and Video”, “Books and Reference Books” sections - more than 10 thousand each, in the "Entertainment" section - more than 7 thousand, "Sports" - more 3 thousand, “News and weather”, “Productivity”, “Recreation” - more than 2 thousand, more than a thousand - in the sections “Social networks”, “Health and fitness”, “Food and nutrition”, “Photos” and a whole range of others sections. In addition, it should be noted that some programs and other applications have an indication that they are unable to run on ARM processors. However, in terms of the number of available applications, Windows RT is significantly inferior to Android, iOS, ARM versions of Linux and FreeBSD.

Windows RT 8.1

Windows RT 8.1 is a Windows operating system optimized for thin and light computers with longer battery life. Windows RT 8.1 only works with built-in apps and apps downloaded from the Windows Store. The Windows Update client component automatically updates the software on your computer, and Windows Defender protects your computer from viruses and other malware.

There is a free update to Windows RT 8.1 from the Windows Store. Windows RT 8.1 can only be installed on computers or tablets that are already running Windows RT.

The history of Windows RT can be safely counted from the moment when Microsoft realized that the Windows line of desktop operating systems was completely inapplicable in tablets, this happened around the summer of 2009, at the same time the company allocated a special department that began to create the dream tablet. In 2012, the company presented with great fanfare the results of the work of this secretive department - the Microsoft Surface tablet.

Microsoft has been trying to create an operating system for tablets since 2002. On November 7, the company showed its Tablet PC concept, and dozens and later hundreds of devices began to appear on the market. A version of Windows XP Touch Edition was offered for use on mobile tablets. MS Office was included as standard, but this did not become a competitive advantage, since the tablets were bulky and did not work well due to the Intel x86 architecture, which was not optimal for mobile devices. And the operating system itself was minimally redesigned compared to the desktop version; it was almost impossible to control with your fingers; a stylus was required. Until 2011, the company consistently updated different versions of its OS to work with touch screens, but could not solve the root problem - short operating time, bulky devices compared to competitors, plus menu stubs, windows from desktop versions that looked ridiculous on tablets and did not allow comfortable work because they were inappropriate. The introduction of Apple's iPad in 2010 changed the market and tablets became successful for the first time. And Microsoft did not want to give this market segment to competitors. Attempts to adapt Windows 7 and the existing architecture from Intel were predictably unsuccessful. But by this time, the company was already working on Windows 8, and the next version of the OS for mobile devices - it was simply called Windows on ARM. The key decision was the choice of ARM processors that are aimed at mobile devices and can provide long operating time and acceptable performance. For Microsoft, this allowed them to adapt existing code for the ARM architecture without having to create a new operating system from scratch. This approach made it possible to reduce development time and add many existing programs for Windows, for example, MS Office. But it also had pitfalls - the OS requirements for hardware were quite high, its mobility and battery life were shorter than those of competitors originally created for the ARM architecture. The code of Windows RT, which is what this OS was called, contained a lot from the desktop version, although the kernel became the same as in Windows 8. For third-party developers, it was impossible to ensure direct portability of program code to the new version of the mobile OS, that is, programs it was necessary to create anew or seriously rewrite (this explains the lack of a large number of programs at the moment). But despite these limitations, Microsoft's approach promised to make developing programs for the new mobile OS easier and more powerful, despite a number of inherent shortcomings. This was an attempt not to catch up with the market, but to present its vision of a mobile OS and attract buyers with a number of strong aspects that were not found among competitors. Let's try to understand the strengths and weaknesses of Windows RT, which went on sale on October 26, 2012. Unlike other versions of Windows, this one cannot be downloaded and installed independently, it only comes with the devices.

To make this material easier to navigate, I have divided it into chapters in which we discuss certain features of the operating system. The division is, of course, conditional. The Microsoft Surface tablet was chosen to study the OS, since it was designed taking into account all the requirements and is the company's own product. So, let's hit the road and explore the tablet operating system - Windows RT.

Interface dualism or the heavy legacy of Windows 7

Windows RT borrowed too much from the desktop version of the OS, both Windows 8 and Windows 7. If Android went from smartphones to tablets and the OS was not adapted to the latter, which resulted in a huge number of shortcomings, poor presentation of programs and similar flaws , then Apple created a complete solution focused on mobile devices. Initially, when the iPhone appeared, Apple even said that a stripped-down version of MacOS X was used inside, but they quickly abandoned this rhetoric; it turned out to be unnecessary.

Microsoft planted a time bomb and made Windows RT difficult for most ordinary users, as they tried to combine the simplicity of the Metro UI interface (renamed Modern UI in October 2012 due to patent claims) with the confusing menus and settings of the previous version, which was removed in a separate section “Desktop”.

The developers praised the Metro UI interface as something very simple to understand and master (for simplicity, I will call it that way hereafter, since most people remember this particular term). The tiles that make up the main screen can be viewed in completely different ways; some people find them annoying, others admire them, but one thing is certain – this is a fairly original solution.

Microsoft made the tiles “live”, information can be updated on them, you can change the size of the tiles, change their places. Unfortunately, there aren't too many tiles to fit on the main screen; you'll have to rotate the list. But given that there are only so many programs you need all the time, you will be able to bring them to the first screen. This is a different ideology that is different from Android, iOS, but it works. The lack of widgets, any settings and the ability to change the appearance of this menu is intended as a limitation of the operating system. I don't like this limitation because most devices start to look the same. They can be distinguished only by the location of the tiles and their color. Not too much variety.

It is possible that understanding this or meeting the wishes of users, a desktop mode was added to Windows RT, which was absent in the summer builds of Windows RT. On the desktop you see familiar icons and you can create shortcuts and folders. Unfortunately, you cannot install programs on your desktop. That is, all programs are installed in the Metro interface, and Microsoft has reserved the ability to work with the desktop only for itself. By default, you see MS Office icons in the bottom bar of your desktop.

The lack of logic also lies in the fact that many desktop-related features must be launched from the Metro UI, for example, the program list. From here you can launch the command line, control panel, calculator. Do you feel the logic of duality? You launch programs from one interface in another interface, but in appearance they differ, like the sea and the land. These are two different worlds that, apart from the name Windows, have nothing in common.

There is only one way to explain this mockery of the user - they did not have time to rewrite MS Office for Windows RT and therefore the program was adapted for the desktop, that is, having missed the deadline, they decided that it was better to introduce such discord than to abandon MS Office. The decision is forced, but it leads to a number of unobvious consequences. First, and I mentioned this, the OS is not perceived as a single whole, it is a patchwork quilt assembled from different parts. Secondly, most people who are not very interested in details about the OS, seeing a familiar desktop, start looking for the “Start” button, but it’s not there. The second thing people try to do is download familiar applications and run them on the tablet. They can't do it. External similarity hints that there should be compatibility, but in reality there is none.

Unfortunately, the attempt to start life from scratch and make an initially “correct” mobile OS ran into a failure to meet internal deadlines at Microsoft; as a result, the system turned out to be not well thought out, but consisting of a number of controversial decisions.

For example, the Metro interface has a nice menu with settings for the tablet (it’s called a PC here, that is, even at the ideological level they left the name computers).

But already on the first day of using the OS, you will find out that you cannot do everything that is necessary in this menu - most of the functions are placed in the classic control panel on the desktop.

For example, searching for OS updates through the Metro UI will not show all updates, but the same search through the control panel will be the most complete.

There is no logic in this decision at all; on the one hand, they tell us how good Metro UI is, on the other hand, they show us that we can only fully work with the OS from the old menus on the desktop. What's the point?

The complexity of the decision is also reflected in the fact that Microsoft decided that Internet Explorer could be presented in two types of menus - in the Metro UI and on the desktop. However, open tabs on the desktop are not shown in IE in Metro UI and vice versa. In addition, in IE, the Metro interface does not have the ability to configure the browser; as you may have guessed, these capabilities are given to the desktop.

How Microsoft is going to solve these problems of interface confusion is unclear to me. Ideally, the company will have to rewrite everything under the Metro UI (if it becomes popular with Windows 8). But when this will happen and how is unknown. I think that, at least in the next year, we will see such a bifurcated interface in Windows RT and it will become a common norm of life. It’s a pity, but there wasn’t a clean start – the system turned out to consist not of tiles, but of scattered pieces in which we are pushed to actively use the desktop.

Touch screen - gesture control

The tablet control system is completely identical to that in Windows 8. The entire Windows family of 2012 was made touch-sensitive, this is a rather bold step that is aimed at tablets. And here there is a certain benefit from such management, although Microsoft tried to be original without much sense.

In a short video you can see the basic gestures for controlling the tablet; I don’t think it’s necessary to describe them in text.

There is only one gesture that causes criticism, from top to bottom - not in all programs in the Metro UI it is clear where it works and where it doesn’t - there is no intuitiveness as such. The rest of the gestures are fine. In the desktop view, the menus are not very beautiful, and the experience with them has not changed since Windows 7 (that is, it remains at the same awkward level). For example, next to each item in a folder or file manager you see a check mark. The first click is a selection, the second is a file launch. Comparing this behavior with Android and iOS, you understand that this is a somewhat outdated type - usually pressing a finger on an icon leads to the launch of a program or file, but here everything is the same. It can also be attributed to haste, to the fact that the company did not have time to do everything correctly, but this plays against Microsoft, as it creates unnecessary movements and ergonomics suffer.

Remnants of the past interface are visible everywhere. For example, you can adjust the screen brightness on the desktop from the settings menu. I couldn’t pull the slider right away; it’s extremely difficult to do it the first time. When working with Windows RT, you constantly come across similar fragments of old menus and interfaces that are simply not adapted to finger control. There are not many of them, but not so few either.

Another example of a non-optimized interface is the unlock pattern. On the left is a panel, on the right is a picture that you can swipe to unlock the tablet. Very often gestures are not recognized correctly, this happens, and there is no problem at all. But after that, a button appears saying there is an error, and you need to click OK to try to enter the key again. And this button is on the left side of the screen. The ergonomics were clearly not created for a mobile device, where usually an incorrect input causes a message that does not block the screen and immediately allows you to repeat the input. And this behavior is normal, and not some other kind.

Operating system for tablets or flaws of the interface creators

I decided to specifically make this point separately because it struck me so much. It hurt me to the core, because it seems that Microsoft did not think about the fact that tablets are mobile devices and the battery level is extremely important for them. Information about this should be seen in most applications, with the only exception being games. On the screen in lock mode you can see the battery indicator - percentages are not shown. In all menus when working with the tablet (except for the desktop and status bar), there is no battery indicator. Absolutely not! To call the indicator, you need to call the right menu (pull the screen on the right) - then a pop-up menu will appear on the left, which, among other things, will have a battery indicator, and again without percentages. Attempts to click on the indicator, set the energy saving mode, or do something similar are useless.

At the same time, a battery indicator is displayed in the status bar of the desktop; by clicking on it you can see the charge percentage. There you can also access energy saving settings. The settings themselves are borrowed from previous versions of Windows and are well known from laptops. You can customize the tablet's behavior with additional accessories, such as a cover. But in general, the settings are quite ascetic (timeout, screen brightness).

It's a shame that Windows RT did not provide a status bar with basic information that is important for mobile use. The ideology of the OS creators remained in the PC world, and this is not true.

We'll talk about battery drain in standby mode and dependence on external conditions in detail in our Surface review, although many problems are related to the OS itself and its architecture.

Multitasking and Snap mode

Up to this point, when describing the OS interface and its capabilities, I talked about the shortcomings that resulted from the fact that Windows RT emerged from the desktop OS family. But this relationship also has its advantages, which distinguish this OS from its competitors. The first and main point is multitasking. Windows has always had full multitasking, you can switch between programs and return to the files you need. And in Windows RT you get exactly the same features. In this aspect, the operating system wins over both Android (here multitasking is such that you can lose information in open programs if you try to work in several of them in turn) and iOS. In this case, you can switch using both the touch screen and the keyboard, if you have one.

Another mode that I really like and gives a unique opportunity is Snap. You can have two programs on the screen at the same time (in Metro UI). For example, you open a dialogue or chat, and do something else in the main window. It’s very convenient and allows you not to be distracted - an ideal solution for those who are constantly on Skype (however, Skype itself looks and works very poorly, but that’s a different story).

USB and peripheral support

Another advantage of Windows RT is the support for a regular, full-size USB connector, to which you can connect any peripherals. In theory, you can connect anything - from a printer to an inkjet plotter or something equally exotic. But the problem is that ARM tablets require drivers from manufacturers. An external keyboard, mouse, storage media, including hard drives, are connected without any problems. Unfortunately, it was not possible to connect a regular HP laser printer. It was identified in the device panel as another device, no drivers were found. It is clear that HP printers are the most common on the planet, and the lack of drivers in the standard package and in the update center is a clear miscalculation of Microsoft, they also did not have time.