Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Microsoft Charging OEMs $85 for Windows RT

Last response: in News comments
Share
June 13, 2012 11:41:45 AM

That's still cheap considering it can run all x86 applications

Oh wait, it can't
Score
22
Related resources
June 13, 2012 11:51:47 AM

It comes with Office suite. That's why it's expensive. I'll bet it'll be much cheaper without the Office suite.
Score
-12
June 13, 2012 11:52:31 AM

Way to go killing RT before it is even released, Microsoft :pfff: 
Score
29
June 13, 2012 11:54:59 AM

It's got fail written all over it.
Score
16
June 13, 2012 12:04:09 PM

I don't belive this article, the price is too hight. Microsoft is trying hard to enter in to mobile market (this is the main reason for putting the metro UI in windows 8). They need developers attention to create applications for metro.
Score
-1
June 13, 2012 12:10:58 PM

mariusmoteaI don't belive this article, the price is too hight. Microsoft is trying hard to enter in to mobile market (this is the main reason for putting the metro UI in windows 8). They need developers attention to create applications for metro.


I think the picture of Steve Balmer is enough to make this believable. ;) 
Still unlikely that Microsoft would be this mad.
Score
7
June 13, 2012 12:11:42 PM

I also feel this article is false due to a google/apple bashing.
Score
-8
June 13, 2012 12:15:24 PM

killerclickThat's still cheap considering it can run all x86 applicationsOh wait, it can't

LOL
vincentyuIt comes with Office suite. That's why it's expensive. I'll bet it'll be much cheaper without the Office suite.

Win8RT comes with Office suite, there will not be a non-office version. What they need to do is have a 'home' and 'pro' version so that there can be cheap products for consumers, and then charge a little more for domain functionality and other business class services. Having a $100 OS will not make business buyers blink... but nobody is going to spend the same cash for a stripped down version of windows as they do for the real thing.
Score
5
June 13, 2012 12:17:30 PM

This OS Will be all fail.

Who the hell would buy this over the "i" option?

Hell I don't like Apple, but I would buy an Ipad before I spent 700 dollars on this crap. Microsoft is ran by idiots. Its time to find a new OS for all my products... including the PC.

And yeah Metro is going to suck too.
Score
0
June 13, 2012 12:20:19 PM

caedenv Having a $100 OS will not make business buyers blink... but nobody is going to spend the same cash for a stripped down version of windows as they do for the real thing.


I disagree. Businesses will be buying 1000s of tablets so the extra 100 apiece will add up. Additionally, this will price the product above the price of an Ipad. So the incentive will be to simply move to an all Apple product line, which is considered higher end anyway.

Or if the company is cheap (and why not be?) then they will move to an Android line and use free Google Office products.
Score
-3
June 13, 2012 12:20:43 PM

There could be some sort of back end rebate for the device manufacturer that reduces the overall cost significantly, and it would likely be based on sales volume to create an incentive to sell the devices. Who knows? It would be ludicrous for them to charge that much for each individual license and not offer a program like that.
Score
1
Anonymous
June 13, 2012 12:30:05 PM

It's very cheap considering you get Office.
Perhaps they should do a cheaper light version without office.
Score
-5
June 13, 2012 12:42:54 PM

LOL Lotsa LOL
Score
-2
June 13, 2012 12:43:33 PM

I'm surprised there are companies stupid enough to make Windows RT tablets instead of x86 ones.
Score
2
June 13, 2012 12:44:39 PM

fightingsluand this article is posted 13 hours after this article http://www.tomshardware.com/news/c [...] 15977.html which claims the windows 8 tablets to be iPad killers

Windows 8 x86 tablets may have some potential, considering that they can do everything that a regular computer can.
Score
10
June 13, 2012 12:50:57 PM

i can see cheap tablets comming with android and getting windows off the piratebay
Score
7
June 13, 2012 12:53:25 PM

fightingsluand this article is posted 13 hours after this article http://www.tomshardware.com/news/c [...] 15977.html which claims the windows 8 tablets to be iPad killers



My $2 mousepad is an iPad killer!
Score
-6
June 13, 2012 12:54:27 PM

math1337Windows 8 x86 tablets may have some potential, considering that they can do everything that a regular computer can.


Can it bring me booze and chicks home?
Score
-4
June 13, 2012 12:56:00 PM

nikolayivanov321Loving that pic though.

Looks like Microsoft's Ballmer is taking a crap on the Consumers and in turn themselves.

I guess they haven't looked at the embedded costs for Apple and Google -- effectively $0. Therefore, that cost gets passed on... The literal $100 question is -- is a Windows Tablet 'worth' a $100 more than either the iPad, Android or Chrome OS Tablets??

The answer in my Home or Office is no, hell no, and I hope this info is pure rumor. I could see $10~$20 max and add-on charges for MS Office, etc.
Score
7
June 13, 2012 12:59:18 PM

math1337I'm surprised there are companies stupid enough to make Windows RT tablets instead of x86 ones.


Now that's a good point. With Medfield, why make any ARM Windows tablets at all? MS could have simply spent the R&D money that they went to W8RT on a light Office and performance-optimized version of Windows Starter (well, if MS remembers how to optimize an OS much for performance). MS and Intel reportedly are making over a dozen tablet models soon, so what's with having RT as well? Does MS intend to compete with itself just as much as with it's other competitors?
Score
0
June 13, 2012 1:11:03 PM

$600~1000 tablets? I sure don't want to see a post saying "Apple charges too much" ever again.

A month ago, I was sold on MS taking over the tablet/phone market with the tight connection between desktop/notebooktabletphone. With Metro a useless POS for desktop usage, the high price of Windows RT with $800~1000 hardware, a phone that very few people actually buy... a gaming market that is gutted by xbox consoles (I'll go Playstation 3/4)... for the most part...

Who the Frack really needs windows? Other than a launcher for Office 2010/2012? Office 365 will run on anything.

This is going to be fun to watch... either MS pulls a rabit out of their butt or that go done in flames trying.
Score
0
June 13, 2012 1:15:33 PM

southerns
mariusmoteaI don't belive this article, the price is too hight. Microsoft is trying hard to enter in to mobile market
Its more than adding $100 to the price, its the more expensive parts (HD/SSD) that are required to run all the bloat.

In Dallas, a new iPad2 goes for $365 off the shelf... MS is going to throw a $750 tablet against that?
Score
2
June 13, 2012 1:25:09 PM

MS is delusional. Windows 8 is going to be a flop and no one with brain will get $750 Tablet. I'd rather get GTX680 for my PC running Windows 7.
Score
3
June 13, 2012 1:26:55 PM

blazorthonWith Medfield, why make any ARM Windows tablets at all?

As Intel refuses to lower their prices, ARM chips are a much more cost effective solution.
Additionally, even with Intel's manufacturing lead, ARM based SOC's still have a lead in power consumption.

Current prices for the 3.5W N2600, without an accompanying chipset, is $42.
If memory serves, nVidia prices their Tegra 3 SOC's at around $25 and their competition should be somewhat comparable.
Score
-1
June 13, 2012 1:41:24 PM

element1981There could be some sort of back end rebate for the device manufacturer that reduces the overall cost significantly, and it would likely be based on sales volume to create an incentive to sell the devices. Who knows? It would be ludicrous for them to charge that much for each individual license and not offer a program like that.


I can't see OEMs subsidizing the cost for a rebate on top of the fact that they already had the rug pulled from under them about the pricing to begin with.
Score
-1
June 13, 2012 1:45:10 PM

If Ballmer has gotten tired of shooting himself in the foot, I'll gladly do it for USD $80-95 dollars, with $85 being the most commonly quoted price.
Score
0
June 13, 2012 1:45:23 PM

Oh well, it's been a good 20 years with MS. Time to move on I guess.
Score
0
June 13, 2012 1:48:08 PM

That price is astonishing...

I guess if you are gonna fail, you might as well fail as hard as you can?

Charge 20$ for the OS (drop office if needed), and take a cut from app sales... at least then you have a chance of actually gaining some traction in the market...

But being the class clown is a close second to actually being successful, I guess.
Score
0
June 13, 2012 1:54:45 PM

outlw6669As Intel refuses to lower their prices, ARM chips are a much more cost effective solution.Additionally, even with Intel's manufacturing lead, ARM based SOC's still have a lead in power consumption.Current prices for the 3.5W N2600, without an accompanying chipset, is $42.If memory serves, nVidia prices their Tegra 3 SOC's at around $25 and their competition should be somewhat comparable.


Yet, Windows RT costs $85, far worse than a $20-$30 jump in the processor/chipset cost. Also, keep in mind that Medfield doesn't win in power consumption because it is based off of Core 2... An IB-based version on 22nm would probably double power efficiency. That, and the compatibility with current software should matter.
Score
0
June 13, 2012 1:58:44 PM

blazorthonYet, Windows RT costs $85, far worse than a $20-$30 jump in the processor/chipset cost.

True, but to get a true budget device, manufacturers will be cutting costs in every way possible.
Having an ARM based Windows machine also leaves open interesting possibilities like dual booting Android, gaining access to their entire app database.
In the end, considering the intended form factor, I highly doubt the majority of users will ever be able to tell the difference between a x86 and ARM based laptop, other than a $50+ price difference (you forget the price of the chipset ;) ).
Score
0
June 13, 2012 2:07:58 PM

If this is true I don't understand it anymore. Why would Microsoft aim for domination in tablet sector, while pricing it in an absurd manner?
Score
2
June 13, 2012 2:32:14 PM

I think they are conditioning people, making them think the worst of Microsoft with these rumors, so that when they finally do set the price to $50 or so, everyone will feel a wave of relief and euphoria and have nothing but good thoughts about how benevolent Microsoft is. That way when everyone spends a ton of money on the product, they think they are getting a good deal because they COULD HAVE been spending a lot more, while Microsoft is happy that they got the price they wanted AND everyone thanks them for it :-)
Score
0
June 13, 2012 2:37:05 PM

koehlerd said:
I think they are conditioning people, making them think the worst of Microsoft with these rumors, so that when they finally do set the price to $50 or so, everyone will feel a wave of relief and euphoria and have nothing but good thoughts about how benevolent Microsoft is. That way when everyone spends a ton of money on the product, they think they are getting a good deal because they COULD HAVE been spending a lot more, while Microsoft is happy that they got the price they wanted AND everyone thanks them for it :-)


Yes, because $50 for an OS competing against tablets with a free OS is really benevolent.
Score
0
June 13, 2012 2:42:32 PM

outlw6669 said:
True, but to get a true budget device, manufacturers will be cutting costs in every way possible.
Having an ARM based Windows machine also leaves open interesting possibilities like dual booting Android, gaining access to their entire app database.
In the end, considering the intended form factor, I highly doubt the majority of users will ever be able to tell the difference between a x86 and ARM based laptop, other than a $50+ price difference (you forget the price of the chipset ;) ).


Android is getting an X86 port and since most of the code for apps and such is Java, it should be compatible with X86, so no need for ARM there. X86 also could have compatibility with many preexisting X86 Windows programs, other X86 operating systems (such as Linux), and software for those operating systems. Anyone who couldn't tell the difference between all of that and tablet with an ARM CPU if they had one of both such tablets side-by-side is beyond ignorant. They often wouldn't know why there is a difference, but when you load up full Windows or whatever one one and run a few current programs compared to the simpler apps on the other, that there is a difference will be obvious.
Score
-3
June 13, 2012 2:58:59 PM

blazorthon said:
Yes, because $50 for an OS competing against tablets with a free OS is really benevolent.



People THINK it is benevolent, because they thought they would have to pay $85 :D 
Score
-1
June 13, 2012 3:16:12 PM

Considering that there are 100$ tablets , 85$ for Windows is waaaay too much.Well M$ might be after business clients only.
Score
0
June 13, 2012 3:16:48 PM

koehlerd said:
People THINK it is benevolent, because they thought they would have to pay $85 :D 


People should try to think better because they aren't very good at it if they fall for MS's apparent * business strategy* :) 
Score
0
June 13, 2012 3:18:56 PM

Would rather buy a cheap Android tablet (as long as it's x86) and make it a hackintosh for mere 20 bucks. I only use Windows because of games and since Win8 (and tablets in general) aren't quite appropriate...
Score
-2
June 13, 2012 3:24:00 PM

K2N haterWould rather buy a cheap Android tablet (as long as it's x86) and make it a hackintosh for mere 20 bucks. I only use Windows because of games and since Win8 (and tablets in general) aren't quite appropriate...


What's that supposed to mean? Windows 8 x86 is better than Windows 7. If you don't like Metro, then don't use it. Classic Shell it away. Besides, wouldn't making a Hackintosh out of it require that Apple have driver support for both Medfield CPUs and compatible chipsets?
Score
3
June 13, 2012 3:35:40 PM

Who the hell is deciding these things, because microsoft is on a roll these days... rolling towards a precipice.

Also microsoft seems to forget its own past, since bundling Office with Windows brings memories of the old Internet Explorer antitrust lawsuit in Europe. If Microsoft bundles Office with WIndows RT there's a high possibility of another lawsuit.
Score
0
June 13, 2012 3:53:19 PM

belardo...Office 365 will run on anything.

Office 365 cost per user: $4/mo [$48/yr] (Exchange only) to $20/mo [$240/yr] (Online + Desktop), and while the Business $6/mo [$72/yr] is the best 'deal' the FREE Google App Business (10 user) is a no brainer.
Score
1
June 13, 2012 3:59:12 PM

blazorthonWhat's that supposed to mean? Windows 8 x86 is better than Windows 7. If you don't like Metro, then don't use it. Classic Shell it away. Besides, wouldn't making a Hackintosh out of it require that Apple have driver support for both Medfield CPUs and compatible chipsets?

It's been told here the final release won't allow the registry trick to disable Metro. Concerning Medfield I assume the stock driver would allow it out of the box but if it doesn't... Hackintosh is all about hacking Mac files, right?
Score
-3
June 13, 2012 4:06:11 PM

K2N haterIt's been told here the final release won't allow the registry trick to disable Metro. Concerning Medfield I assume the stock driver would allow it out of the box but if it doesn't... Hackintosh is all about hacking Mac files, right?


Classic Shell isn't a registry hack, lol. It's a UI shell and Metro can't bypass that. Classic Shell still works with every version of Windows 8 and will work with the released version because it is not a get rid of Metro hack, it is a UI program. MS can't block that without cutting off support for a large list of many different kinds of programs and that would piss many people off far more than Metro ever could.

If OSX doesn't support the Medfield platforms, then you don't need to hack anything... You need to write entire drivers for OSX on Medfield. That's not hacking preexisting files, that's creating new and fairly complex ones.

Also, there are many other ways to not use Metro, or to at least get a start menu (among other stuff) back, even in the release candidate and what will be the completed release versions. These aren't hacks that can be disabled by MS changing the registry.
Score
-1
June 13, 2012 4:09:13 PM

When are people going to realize tablets are also computers.

If you price it too low people are going to think it sucks because it's cheap.
If you price it too high people are not going to buy it. (But at least they pirate it and make everyone need to have the thing too for compatibility!)

The big point for Windows RT and x86 on tablets is compatibility with ways (people and corporation habits) and software from the desktop world. This is what most corporations and people want. Familiar interface and more importantly familiar brand!
Score
-2
June 13, 2012 4:12:11 PM

outlw6669True, but to get a true budget device, manufacturers will be cutting costs in every way possible.Having an ARM based Windows machine also leaves open interesting possibilities like dual booting Android, gaining access to their entire app database.In the end, considering the intended form factor, I highly doubt the majority of users will ever be able to tell the difference between a x86 and ARM based laptop, other than a $50+ price difference (you forget the price of the chipset ).


Oh boy. Most people don't know computers have different processing capabilities.
(true, seriously, I mean average people buying tablets.)
They will expect their old software to run on he tablet, ARM is going to get something!
Score
1
June 13, 2012 4:15:02 PM

annymmoWhen are people going to realize tablets are also computers.If you price it too low people are going to think it sucks because it's cheap.If you price it too high people are not going to buy it. (But at least they pirate it and make everyone need to have the thing too for compatibility!)The big point for Windows RT and x86 on tablets is compatibility with ways (people and corporation habits) and software from the desktop world. This is what most corporations and people want. Familiar interface and more importantly familiar brand!


Windows 8RT is ARM... What was that about compatibility with desktop software? Besides that, just having a low price does not make everyone think that it's cheap and why would someone pirate a tablet/smartphone OS? That doesn't make much sense at all. Any devices that it is made to be compatible with would almost definitely already have it.
Score
-2
Anonymous
June 13, 2012 4:32:49 PM

How are they going to compete with Android/iPad tablets for $500 or less? From a consumer perspective, with an ARM Windows tablet you won't be getting that much more than you would with Android/iPad:
1) Office. Yes Office is good, but will the average consumer be prepared to spend that much more for it?
2) Legacy application support: most apps are x86/x64 right now so no benefit there.
3) Better compatibility with devices. This is not a benefit yet but I imagine it could be once Windows 8 tablets hit the market IF everyone starts writing ARM drivers for their peripherals.
4) Printing. This is a big one in Microsoft's favor assuming all of the printer companies start writing ARM drivers (another big IF). Currently iPad and Android both have problems with this unless you buy specific printers.
5) Enterprise. I'm not sure how well Windows for ARM will interact with Enterprise but I expect it to be better than Android/iPad. Unfortunately this is a small subset of all consumers.

IMHO, the only solution I see is for heavy subsidies by Microsoft (at least initially). Looking at the success of the Kindle Fire, it appears that a $200 tablet is within many consumers' price range but a $500 tablet is about the limit. Making a $750+ tablet will only appeal to a small subset of the population.
Score
0
!