The Quest For The Why Of Windows RT

In the beginning, Microsoft released the Surface RT. This made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.

Hitchhikers references aside, The Surface RT along with Windows 8 seem to be the biggest Microsoft failures in recent memory.

Windows 8 RT and the Surface RT were Microsoft's attempt at making a lightweight, low power, ARM processor based, media consumption tablet. If their Surface Pro models were intended to take on the likes of the MacBook Air and other ultraportables, the RT equivalent was almost certainly designed to take on the iPad and Android tablets. These were marketed as a "Get stuff done" tablet as an afterthought, but that idea was mainly used alongside the Pro models.

History shows that RT tablets sold poorly and nobody quite understood what the angle was with Microsoft and the OS spinoff. Why not just use atom processors and make low powered x86 netbook competitors? Why ARM, which breaks compatability with all existing Windows applications outside of the ones in the Windows Marketplace? Why Why Why?

To date, there's no clear cut explanation. RT just sounds like a bad move all together. Is it though? Could there be some nefarious ulterior motive? I think yes, and my jumping point for this topic is a strange one.

Who remembers the Ubuntu Edge concept? This was a crowd funding attempt by the open source Linux distribution to create a very unique phone. The device was said to come packing incredibly high specifications rivaling most laptop computers. The most intriguing part of the device was what it could do when it was tired of being a phone. This device could dock to a screen, mouse, and keyboard via USB and become a full fledged desktop computer. The phone would automatically boot in to a desktop mode which was literally a desktop operating system. Everything you could run on any other distribution of Ubuntu linux, you could run on this phone while docked. Alas, the crowdfund failed but it did spark some interest in the community for a device with those capabilities.

Fast forward back to present day. Microsoft just purchased Nokia and now has the ability to make their own Surface phone. As a rule of thumb, most phones (see: nearly all) are based on ARM processors, not x86.

Microsoft is keeping Windows RT around despite almost unanimous hatred from partners and consumers alike. I don't agree with many decisions made by Microsoft in recent years, but there has to be a method to the madness here. I've got my tinfoil hat on proudly, and I'm willing to bet that Microsoft is going to bring the Ubuntu Edge legacy to reality.

I figure they're going to load Windows 8 RT on to a separate memory chip inside the device. When the device is detected as being docked, the phone will switch over to "desktop mode" and load RT, which will offer users a full PC experience they are already extremely familiar with. Once Windows 8 / 8.1 start gaining more market share, more of the apps people use on a daily basis will become available through the Windows Market place (and thus, available on ARM and x86 devices alike). You will be able to take your entire computer with you wherever you go without any problems.

At the 2013 Microsoft Company Meeting, it was revealed that there are already plans to merge the Windows Phone and Windows 8 / RT App repositories in to one centralized "store". All of this seems to strongly point at my conclusion being correct.

Again, I'm not an industry insider. I have no idea if this is legit or not. As of right now, this is all just a nerd speculating on the internet. I must say this is an insanely cool idea. If something as "obscure" as linux could gather mainstream attention from the idea, I can only imagine what Microsoft could accomplish if they follow through with this.

Fragmentation is Evolution, Deal with it.

There has been a lot of talk about Android's "fragmentation" problem since the inception of the OS all those years ago. Initially it was just a negative buzzword used by certain fruit based companies to demerit Android in the eyes of consumers, and was later taken seriously by tech bloggers for the clickbait it provided.

Poor BugDroid

I'm a nerd, and a great big Android fanboy. Putting my loyalties aside, I can honestly say this fragmentation problem does exist, but it's not the consumer adverse malicious marketing tactic that the blogosphere is making it out to be. Instead, it ties right in to the technological evolution that has existed for hundreds of years. Crying about how it sucks is just people being entitled.

Lets clear up some of the background before moving on. Android is an open source mobile operating system produced by Google Inc. Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) such as HTC and Samsung are encouraged to take the Android source code and modify it to their liking (to a degree) for their own devices. Google encourages each OEM to be unique and innovative with their phone to promote beneficial competition in to the market. These phones are sold to the end users alongside a two year phone service contract in the United States.

So Google encourages companies to make their own unique versions of Android phones (software and hardware) with an effective shelf life of two years.

The term fragmentation comes from the fact that new phones and versions of the OS come out on a yearly basis or quicker. The new phones and OS versions come with new features and older models don't always get the newer version of the OS. People are rightfully upset when their phone that is barely a year old is "obsolete" after 6 months. It can get the majority of applications but because it lacks the newest of the new, it is considered obsolete. Journalists use this to throw a hissy fit online to attract more traffic.

This is stupid.

Consider the auto market. Ford releases a Fiesta. Months later they release a new Mustang. Were the Fiesta owner to complain about his car being overshadowed by the Mustang, he would be laughed at. Lets go further though. The next year a new fiesta is released with a new stereo system and a new engine technology boosting gas mileage. If the owner goes in to his dealer and demands that the new features be crammed in to his year old model for free, he would be laughed at. Also, he finds out that his fiesta doesn't have as good gas mileage as a Toyota Prius of the same year. He also can't get more than 120 horsepower out of his engine and he wants to race, so he yells at the dealer. Stupid right?

Look at all that fragmentation. 

A better example is the PC market. Microsoft releases a new version of Windows to many different manufacturers. The OEMs use that windows and install it on different computers with different specifications and different features, few of which are interchangeable past the OS level. If someone buys a low end computer, it might not be compatible with the next version of windows coming out in 4 years. All these different form factors and sizes make web development and game development a pain. Blame fragmentation right?

FRAGMENTATION! BURN IT WITH FIRE!

Here's the point for all the fragmented crybabies out there. You have choices provided by Android. You can buy a phone like a Nexus with a long upgrade path or you can take your chances with the other phones. You can buy a high end phone with a big standard screen size that will probably get an update, or you can buy a cheap no name brand with a weird screen size that will probably never see an update. THE CHOICE IS YOURS! The consequences of your purchase are also yours. As with anything, do your homework before making a purchase.

The Fragmentation complaint is people being completely entitled with their expectations. I DESERVE THIS THING WHICH WILL CAUSE A TON OF WORK FOR NO PROFIT. Companies like Samsung and HTC are only in the market to make a profit. They get no profit from upgrading your phone. They make money from selling devices. 

Crying makes no difference, because they don't care. Heck, most normal non-nerdy people don't even care. They just want to play angry birds on the toilet. It's the app developers responsibility to support the devices they want to support. It's the OEMs responsibility to make a phone with an OS. It's Google's responsibility to update their base OS for the market. It's the Carriers who keep you locked to one phone for 2 years.

Fragmentation is a sign that phones are getting better in hardware and software. If you don't like that, then don't buy in to it. iPhones, Windows Phones, and Blackberry phones have lower degrees of fragmentation, but it still exists. Buy one of those if you don't want to be obsolete soon. They're all very good choices and will offer you some of the same content from Android without the quick paced product life cycle. If you choose to buy in to Android, be prepared for the consequences.

TL;DR -  With great power comes great responsibility. Quit acting like an entitled child.