Microsoft reveals Surface RT pricing, starts at $499 for 32GB

Still not buying one until im allowed to install apps outside the MS store. Thats pathetic. it really is.
 
Still not buying one until im allowed to install apps outside the MS store. Thats pathetic. it really is.

Kind of a dumb reason. Anything outside of the app store isn't even supported by Surface RT. You do know there's a Surface Pro coming later...right?
 
Kind of a dumb reason. Anything outside of the app store isn't even supported by Surface RT. You do know there's a Surface Pro coming later...right?
If I'm not mistaken Surface Pro would require the app creator to pay a premium for selling their app in the app store, even if all they were interested in was to bare the Windows 8 logo. I'm not supporting Microsoft in their efforts of thievery, forcing app creators to pay a premium when they want their app used in Windows 8 RT or sold in the app store of Windows 8 Pro or just to bare the Windows 8 logo which automatically places the app in the app store.
 
It's a computer.

Doesn't matter if tablet, all other tabs r trying to be an iPad. This is a full blown PC, but on you at all times (ie: mobile computer). Most people who need a laptop/notebook, do so for typing. Those who use touchscreen tablets use them for watching movies & multimedia... web browsing.

The MS Surface is both, but better because it conforms to ur PC at home too.. I don't own an apple computer, so why own an iPhone, or a iPad..? What I have @ home, I want identical to my mobile experience. Obviously, I am not going to play BF3 on a MS surface, but blogging, spreadsheet finalizations, editing, etc.. all within easy grasp now.

Touch screen + keyboard = brilliant.
 
If I'm not mistaken Surface Pro would require the app creator to pay a premium for selling their app in the app store, even if all they were interested in was to bare the Windows 8 logo. I'm not supporting Microsoft in their efforts of thievery, forcing app creators to pay a premium when they want their app used in Windows 8 RT or sold in the app store of Windows 8 Pro or just to bare the Windows 8 logo which automatically places the app in the app store.

The Surface Pro runs on x86 architecture. So it's a regular PC.

In other words, none of what you said makes sense.
 
The Surface Pro runs on x86 architecture. So it's a regular PC.

In other words, none of what you said makes sense.
According to the comments I read here - Minecraft creator 'Notch' is the latest to speak out against Windows 8
Microsoft is differentiating between who gets certified and who doesn't, depending on which creator pay royalties to Microsoft.

I did not once say that apps will no longer run under Windows 8 Pro. I did say they may not bare the Windows 8 logo which represents being Windows 8 certified. And getting Windows 8 certified automatically places the app in the app store which comes with an outrageous price for being there. And if all this is true you will never see any freeware within the app store. Which also means non of these apps will ever be available to the Windows 8 RT Surface, even though they could potentially qualify.
 
The Surface Pro runs on x86 architecture. So it's a regular PC.

In other words, none of what you said makes sense.
According to the comments I read here - Minecraft creator 'Notch' is the latest to speak out against Windows 8
Microsoft is differentiating between who gets certified and who doesn't, depending on which creator pay royalties to Microsoft.

I did not once say that apps will no longer run under Windows 8 Pro. I did say they may not bare the Windows 8 logo which represents being Windows 8 certified. And getting Windows 8 certified automatically places the app in the app store which comes with an outrageous price for being there. And if all this is true you will never see any freeware within the app store. Which also means non of these apps will ever be available to the Windows 8 RT Surface, even though they could potentially qualify.

I think you are confused my friend.

Windows RT and Windows 8 are not the same OS. They really only share the Start Screen.

The Surface Pro is a regular ultrabook running full Windows 8. The Surface RT runs, well, Windows RT.

The reason Notch is mad is because he wants his game to be sold through the Store on RT devices, but he doesn't want to pay royalties to Microsoft. But here's where it gets funny: this model is <I>no different</I> than when he sells Minecraft through Xbox Live Arcade on the Xbox 360, as Microsoft also collects royalties off of the purchase.

If you purchase a Surface Pro, just like by upgrading a Windows 7 computer to Windows 8, you have the option to either use the Store or download legacy applications through the web. If you don't want your software to be Windows 8 certified (which only means you don't want to pay MS royalties for publishing your app on <I>their</I> OS), then you have the option to have users go directly to your website and download the software, like always.
 
I think you are confused my friend.
Nope, not confused, you've not said anything that I don't already understand.

In my twisted little mind all these year, windows certification has always represented software that would run on Windows. I guess I was wrong as it really means windows certification was bought for those that wanted the right to bare a Windows Logo. This certification is a misrepresentation of all the software titles available for use with Windows.

When I go to the store looking for applications to run on Windows 8, should I be looking for a logo that represents the apps compatibility or should I be looking for an app that bares a bought logo? I don't have a problem with paying royalties to Microsoft for promoting apps in the app store. I do have a problem with the windows certification program having a price tag for any app to bare Window certification that should represent compatibility.
 
Kind of a dumb reason. Anything outside of the app store isn't even supported by Surface RT. You do know there's a Surface Pro coming later...right?
I should have said im not buying any windows 8 tablet if I cant get software outside of the MS store. Even if its ~$200.
Microsoft wants to push people off the desktop and towards tablets, but I cant live off of just store apps, I want my PC to feel like its MINE, that I made the software suite on it the way it is, and requiring a specific store makes it feel like it belongs to microsoft.
 
Judging by the commercial, the device can only be used to produce a sexy click sound when the cover is attached to the display. Priceless.
 
Nope, not confused, you've not said anything that I don't already understand.

In my twisted little mind all these year, windows certification has always represented software that would run on Windows. I guess I was wrong as it really means windows certification was bought for those that wanted the right to bare a Windows Logo. This certification is a misrepresentation of all the software titles available for use with Windows.

When I go to the store looking for applications to run on Windows 8, should I be looking for a logo that represents the apps compatibility or should I be looking for an app that bares a bought logo? I don't have a problem with paying royalties to Microsoft for promoting apps in the app store. I do have a problem with the windows certification program having a price tag for any app to bare Window certification that should represent compatibility.

Nah, I think you're confused.

App Certification, as the term implies, is not simply "software that would run on Windows," but software that meets certain criteria and performance standards to be included in the store. Remember, Windows RT is not Windows 8; it is a ARM-compatible, heavily sandboxed, and most of all, striped-down version of Windows 8 made for tablets. Thus, only carefully certified apps are allowed to enter the Store to maintain consistency. App certification shouldn't be a mystery: Apple does it for their App Store, and Google does it for Google Play.

What you seem to be confused about is a couple of things:

1) There's no such thing as a "Windows 8 certified" logo. I don't know where you got that from. Certification here refers to be included in the Store in the first place.

2) The Surface Pro (or any PC upgraded to Windows 8) can use both x86 applications as well as WinRT applications. So developers have the option to <I>not</I> distribute their software through the Store if they so choose; which brings us to my other reply to your second post about Notch's complaints.

There's no "thievery" here, as only developers who wish to have their apps run on RT devices have to go through certification. But guess what? If your "app" happens to be a legacy, x86 program, you could still be included in the store, and that "app" will also go through certification; though it'll just take you to the developer's website to download the app instead of downloading it directly from the Store like with WinRT apps.

For more info, here's the app certification program page that outlines app requirements to enter the Store.
 
And yes I do believe its thievery and nothing you can say will change my mind. As you say Microsoft is not the first company to use such tactics with an app store, its just the first time these tactics include me personally and I do not agree with them. Thievery in the same sense as the music industry taking the biggest chunk of profit from the music artist. And there is nothing the artist can do about it if they want their music published. It the same problem I have with the big companies intentionally squashing little companies.
Nah, I think you're confused.
Perhaps I am confused because, I didn't understand a thing you just said. And to be honest, I don't think the majority of consumers would understand either. It's nice knowing you think Windows certification has always included Microsoft shimming off the top of every app sold within an app store. They apparently changed the rules with Windows Certification when they created the app store.
 
And yes I do believe its thievery and nothing you can say will change my mind. As you say Microsoft is not the first company to use such tactics with an app store, its just the first time these tactics include me personally and I do not agree with them. Thievery in the same sense as the music industry taking the biggest chunk of profit from the music artist. And there is nothing the artist can do about it if they want their music published. It the same problem I have with the big companies intentionally squashing little companies.
Nah, I think you're confused.
Perhaps I am confused because, I didn't understand a thing you just said. And to be honest, I don't think the majority of consumers would understand either. It's nice knowing you think Windows certification has always included Microsoft shimming off the top of every app sold within an app store. They apparently changed the rules with Windows Certification when they created the app store.

"Thievery" is not even the right word. You don't have a choice when someone robs you. You either give up the valuables or suffer the consequences.

If you don't want your app certified to appear on the Store, you could just publish it online like other developers, or, more importantly, like everyone has done since the beginning. Download.com, SoftPedia, hell, TechSpot's own Download section comes to mind.

Your other example doesn't make sense; artists are given a contact in which they are explained how royalty pay works. And they sign it. It's called a 360 deal. Artists don't have to sign, they can always go independent.

But imagine if the label allowed you to <I>not</I> have to sign a 360 deal, and still enjoy the benefits of the label (sponsors, marketing, etc.)? Well, those exist too. And in our analogy, that would be Microsoft.

And you don't understand perhaps because you don't want to. Consumers are not meant to know about the app certification process, so I don't know where that came from.

Lastly, I don't know what you've been reading, but the certification process was first created for Windows 8. They haven't "changed" anything lol. I guess that's my cue to just leave it at that...
 
Lastly, I don't know what you've been reading, but the certification process was first created for Windows 8. They haven't "changed" anything lol. I guess that's my cue to just leave it at that...
Windows Installer and Logo Requirements
The Certified for Microsoft Windows Logo identifies products that have been verified through independent testing to comply with the Application Specification for Windows. This specification was developed by Microsoft in cooperation with customers and other developers to provide a road map for building reliable and manageable applications. Software vendors who comply with the specification qualify for the Certified for Microsoft Windows logo and then license the logo for use on their product packaging, advertising, collateral, and other marketing materials.
Am I making it more complicated than it really is? Has there not been any changes in how app creators get their apps certified in Windows 8? Is this not the very same thing that has been present since the beginning of Windows Logo only now it has changed since the inclusion of the app store?
 
I would very much consider purchasing this product. I am a Windows user and it would have serious potential for me because it would work with the other 5 Windows based machines that I own. I have owned two iPads and to be honest could not stomach them at all. I sold them both...an iPad 1 and then the 2. I know that a lot of folks wanted to see Microsoft come in at a lower price point and then there is also those that argue the Ultrabook point, but on both fronts they have no reason to lowball the jeepers out of the Apple products and it has a different use than an Ultrabook. Folks will ALWAYS complain because it is their nature and that is a fact of life just like it is a fact of life that a behemoth like Microsoft can offer a new product at the price point that they do because folks will buy it. Personally I was sad when they gave up on the Zune. I had 2 of them and LOVED them. Once again I could not stomach the iPods at all. My Zunes were more durable, the software less taxing, and the audio/video quality was great. The biggest thing about Apple is that they are smoke and mirrors. Their products have issues just as much as others yet the fans have a misguided notion that their beloved Apple is infallible.
 
I should have said im not buying any windows 8 tablet if I cant get software outside of the MS store. Even if its ~$200.
Microsoft wants to push people off the desktop and towards tablets, but I cant live off of just store apps, I want my PC to feel like its MINE, that I made the software suite on it the way it is, and requiring a specific store makes it feel like it belongs to microsoft.


What do you need outside of the store as far as apps go? The Windows Store is simply a centralized application to get the apps. This is the same thing Apple does wit the App Store, any web link is going to send you to the Apple App Store. Sure MS is collecting royalties, but MS is also ensuring the apps meet certain guidelines so that you have the best experience with the Windows Store Apps. I think this is no different than them setting required specs for Windows Phone devices, right?

And again, you say you just can't live off of store apps, the Surface Pro which will run both store apps & LEGACY (x86) apps. So why are you so upset? There's a device that does what you want coming! And there's also versions from OEM's coming.

Requiring store apps makes it a tablet, not a PC...the Surface RT is not meant to be a PC.
 
And its also stupidly overpriced coming. I disapprove of MS requiring app developers to get apps approved by them, because the same thing happens that happens with apple, if if might take a chunk out of some MS software's business, they dont have to allow it in.
 
Back