Yeah, that's why you want official apps from the providers themselves and not third party apps. In a new eco-system weeding out the good and bad in a flooded market isn't easy.

It's sad because frankly I think Microsoft really has the right idea at the high level. They often do. Mixing a desktop and tablet is the right way to go. I totally would love to a single machine that is touch and carry, or even better a truly hybrid device that's a laptop with a detachable tablet that maybe has its own processor and can only run WinRT but is essentially synced to act as the same machine. Even having RT and Desktop as 'seperate yet integrated' on one machine type interface is a reasonable idea.

But as is usually the case Microsoft lacks the ability to execute properly on their conceptual ideas. I realize this is a big task especially given Windows' legacy support, but nevertheless I can't help but think how much better the Windows 8 launch and experience would have been if only a little more time and planning would have gone into the final bits of the tablet UI, the desktop, the transition between the two and a much better effort to coordinate hardware vendors into providing top quality hardware at launch. I'm not in immediate need of a new main machine but I would have bought a new machine if there were some hardware out there with touch that lived up to my spec.

I'm guessing the hardware will eventually come in the 2nd or 3rd wave of devices, but it's pathetic that it takes that long given that hardware vendors have had access to specs since the earliest announcements. Same as with Windows 8 - Microsoft might get it right by the time Windows 9 rolls around. Windows 8 in the meantime is just a throwaway even numbered version - business as usual I guess.

> From what I've been reading in the media, at least part of the problem with touch devices is a shortage of LCD panels.

Not sure if I buy that - sounds like an excuse. Way more cheapo tablets sell than laptops and there are actually quite a few large screen all in one touch machines out there. Surely laptop production wouldn't cut into that market too much either especially at the high end were the cost could be easily recovered in the higher price of the machine.


+++ Rick ---

>I pretty much agree with everything you said. I have a Surface RT and fully recognize it's a consumer device.
>
>But the issue with apps is not necessarily not having an official app for something, but too many apps. I just went to the app store and typed in Twitter. It came back with 509 hits. Facebook had 738.
>
>From what I've been reading in the media, at least part of the problem with touch devices is a shortage of LCD panels. The stories I read said that was expected to be worked out the first part of this year. But I think a bigger problem is one that Microsoft finally recognized and did something about, albeit it could have been done better. That is, controlling the device from beginning to end. Apple doesn't seem to have issues with that (most of the time). By controlling the hardware, Apple can make sure the experience is great for the user. Microsoft has to fix this part. It can either continue to develop its own hardware or push the OEMs to get things right. I'm not sure the current Surface is the answer to the first part and I don't think MSFT can push the hardware manufacturers much more. Really, about the only thing Surface has the others don't is Office and I don't see that as a huge driver.
>
>As for perception, I think Microsoft needs to fire everyone in marketing including their outside PR and marketing contractors and start over with a clean slate. Their marketing has stunk for years.
>
>>The Surface RT is a consumer device, not a device meant for techies. So look at it from a consumer perspective. if you can't VERY EASILY find the apps you're interested in you're not going to get them installed. Simple as that. App Stores are the currently expected way to do this.
>>
>>Browsing is admittedly an option but knowing from my own experience browsing for a site vs. starting an app on a phone especially is more effort. Some sites like FaceBook for example seem to actually work better with the browser sites on tablets than the official Facebook apps do (even the new iPad app which suposedly is so much better) but I still use the app because it's easier to get there and usually a bit snappier. But most people that are non-tech users don't even think that way - they want to click on a top level icon and have an easy way to browse and find the applications they are currently using whether on the Web or on the desktop.
>>
>>The reviewer reflects a simple reality which is: What makes a Surface RT device desirable over other devices? Answer: Not much if anything at all. There's nothing compelling beyond marketing for that device.
>>
>>And I say that as somebody that's rooting for Microsoft to actually produce something that is a clear winner and really gives Apple some competition. I'm using Apple mobile products grudgingly, because they are simply better - but I hate giving money to Apple.
>>
>>The story is similar for Windows 8 in general. Win8 has been out for 3 months officially and a half year since RTM. Where are the decent higher end Windows touch devices? There are a handful of decent laptops (there are a fair number of cheapo throwaway ones, but no decent higher end machines at all). Where are the touch monitors? It's a similar situation. It used to be when Microsoft put something new out the hardware and software would be flocking to it.
>>
>>That's no longer the case.
>>
>>This isn't Microsoft's fault per se, but Microsoft needs to work on its perception problem as a company that's stuck in the past and go beyond just throwing shit against a wall and seeing what sticks. Windows 8 was designed in a vacuum with Microsoft doing what they think was best and clearly with little mind to what consumers/customers actually want (at least when it comes to UI). Overall I think Win 8 is good and I even think combining touch and desktop is a good idea, but the execution reeks of 'We know better' arrogance and
>>all the UI blundering is a clear sign how detached the MS folks are from the average consumer to the point of intentionally pissing off a large percentage of their customer base: Forced into WinRt, no start button, the insane way the Windows Charms and touch menus work - imagine how much better the Win8 launch would have gone with configurable options for desktop mode and Start menu alone - 90% of Win8 negative reviews focused on that).
>>
>>It's almost like Microsoft has a suicide wish to run itself into the ground with the bad decisions made by the Windows team.
>>
>>That said I'm running Windows 8 on my desktop and I like it reasonably well. But I merely put up with the fact that I have to deal with a Windows RT shell in front of everything. I hate that Aero is gone and we're back to a circa 1998 desktop UI in 2013.
>>
>>Personally I would LOVE to have a fully powered Windows 8 touch laptop convertible - a 1 size fits all machine. Nothing for that market is even out yet. The closest thing today is the Lenovo Yoga but even that's woefully under-powered. You would think that Microsoft would have partnered with some of the OEM vendors to make sure that the spectrum of computing hardware was addressed for Windows 8 specifically, but no... Microsoft is not even making an effort anymore to woo its OEMs. Microsoft even pulled out of CES - at the time when there is a new MS OS out there to push and focus is on Windows 8. Talk about misguided marketing decisions.
>>
>>+++ Rick ---