Timeline for How are we going to deal with Windows 8 on ARM?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 16, 2012 at 17:37 | comment | added | Nathan Moos | @killermist That makes sense and I believe that is why we are having this debate in the first place about WinRT tablets. | |
| Jun 17, 2012 at 20:26 | comment | added | killermist | I know this will sound condescending, but there's nothing to do for it, so here goes. A user that can't distinguish between a Windows RT tablet and a Windows 8 computer is NOT acting as a superuser. That being said if THEY don't know what they have, then their questions are likely to confuse those trying to give them answers, because responders will first have to decipher what the question is in the first place. I don't advocate leaving them out in the cold. But, this isn't the right place for those questions. | |
| Jun 10, 2012 at 22:28 | comment | added | Chris O | Disabling the Secure Boot... it's only a matter of time for this hack to arrive. Definitely not impossible. | |
| May 24, 2012 at 1:23 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek Mod | I do believe there was a consumer electronics SE that might have worked, but it never got past beta | |
| May 24, 2012 at 0:32 | comment | added | nhinkle Mod | @NathanMoos that's one possibility. I'm not sure how quickly we could push through a tablets.SE with the slow Area51 process, and I'm still worried about the split. But it's definitely something to consider. | |
| May 24, 2012 at 0:22 | comment | added | Nathan Moos | @nhinkle what about a Tablets.SE that would have iPad, Android, Windows RT tablets, etc? That would solve Daniel's concern of app-focused environments, and it would allow SuperUser to stay power-user oriented. | |
| May 23, 2012 at 21:46 | comment | added | nhinkle Mod | @DanielBeck personally (don't take this as a statement of policy) I wouldn't be totally against thinking about opening it up to tablet questions. | |
| May 23, 2012 at 21:34 | comment | added | Daniel Beck Mod |
@nhinkle If you have a better idea, that results in a consistent policy also for iOS and Android devices, please post it. I'm very much against "Windows RT tablets are on topic, the rest of them aren't", due to the reasons I brought forward here (essentially: all of the reasons not to allow iOS/Android apply to Windows RT as well), resulting in "No tablet devices are on topic". As indicated by both slhck and me in chat, "all tablet devices are on topic" might work as well, but the risk is that due to these platforms being very app-focused, it'll devolve into software-rec flood w/o substance.
|
|
| May 23, 2012 at 21:25 | comment | added | nhinkle Mod | The concern I have regarding Windows 8 on ARM vs. Windows 8 on desktop is that the line between then will blur, which will confuse users. There may be questions which apply to both. You can run Metro apps on either. I'm not saying that we necessarily should allow them because of this, but it's something to consider. | |
| May 23, 2012 at 18:33 | comment | added | slhck | +1 in any case. These are all valid issues I wasn't completely aware of up until now. Didn't think it would be such a restrictive ecosystem, but I never even mentioned Windows 8 for ARM specifically in my answer. For what it's worth, I personally wouldn't have a problem with opening up to all tablets and mobile OSes if it weren't for a missing user base. I'd be interested to see how this would evolve though. | |
| May 23, 2012 at 18:25 | history | edited | Daniel BeckMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 13 characters in body
|
| May 23, 2012 at 18:20 | history | answered | Daniel BeckMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |