Life with Microsoft Surface: Day 6

from LittleTinyFrogs Forums

Yesterday I mentioned that there's no Metro version of the Windows essentials utilities. This remains a baffling issue as a Live Movie Maker and a Live Writer would be very nice to haven.

I will say that the Metro version of Skype is nice.  Which brings me to today's observation:  Microsoft has got to come up with a distinct classification for WinRT apps because it's impossible to do a decent search on the terms Modern and UI.  As in, what is the best Modern UI Facebook client.

The nice thing about the term Metro is that it's distinct.  Like iOS or Android, it lends itself to being easily searchable and instantly recognizeable as being different from a normal Windows app.  Modern UI won't cut it.  We need a term or else we'll end up stuck with something like WinRT which in itself is problematic.  I think Microsoft should have just bit the bullet and paid whatever they had to pay to keep referring to these apps as Metro apps. 

Surface isn't competing against my iPad for use right now.  Instead, it is competing for use with my MacBook Air.  It's ironic that Surface shines the most as a notebook rather than as a tablet.  I can, and have, used it as a tablet but I find it most useful in using the upgraded keyboard with it.  Frankly, if it didn't have so many rough edges (not the hardware, but the software) I'd be tempted to recommend it over any ultra portable out there. It's that good.

 

44,907 views 21 replies
Reply #1 from WinCustomize Forums Top

I think Microsoft should have just bit the bullet and paid whatever they had to pay to keep referring to these apps as Metro apps.
End of quote

....or take a leaf out of Jobs' book and simply 'take' the name.....like Apple....then make the agreement NOT to overstep into the music genre with the name....then break/ignore that too....iTunes.

The hypocritical company who is always hell-bent on THEIR IP..... one rule for them....one for the rest...;)

Reply #2 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Damned Apple... getting a mention just about everywhere these days.

Geez, have they got a lot to answer for. :-"

On a serious note, I really hope that MS irons out these issues with Surface by the time I'm ready to purchase one.  I currently have a 10.1" Android pad with a protective leather case/come keyboard and find it quite useful, but I'd rather have a Surface with Win 8 Pro on it, me thinks.  I figure it would allow me to achieve more on the actual device itself plus I could sync it with my Win 8 PC to open up ever greater posibilities.

Elemental: Reforged
Reply #3 from WinCustomize Forums Top

For the price, I'd probably go with a laptop-tablet hybrid... Dell's looks cool, Toshiba's and Sony's look good too.

Reply #4 from Stardock Forums Top

There's been reports of audio corruption and teh keyboard splitting.  Seen that yet?

Reply #5 from LittleTinyFrogs Forums Top

Can you run Linux on it? >:)

Reply #6 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting Kazriko, reply 5
Can you run Linux on it? >
End of Kazriko's quote

Why would you want to ruin it?

 

Reply #7 from Elemental Forums Top

Ruin freedom of the ability to freely tweak?

Reply #8 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Wrote about that and UEFI, WhiteElk... 

Reply #9 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Then buy a Linux tablet.....

:grin:

Reply #10 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting Island, reply 9
Then buy a Linux tablet.....

End of Island's quote

 

you mean Android (Linux-Kernel)?

there's a chance that you will be able to run a desktop-Linux on the Surface, if the Surface get's popular enough to among hackers.

would be the about the same ux-horror as a desktop-Windows on a tablet though, not sure why anybody would want that.

 

Reply #11 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting Island, reply 6
Why would you want to ruin it?
End of Island's quote

Running Linux on it would not ruin it. It would enhance it. Using an OS that is immune to spyware, malware, and viruses has some advantages.

Reply #12 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting kona0197, reply 12

Quoting Island Dog, reply 6Why would you want to ruin it?

Running Linux on it would not ruin it. It would enhance it. Using an OS that is immune to spyware, malware, and viruses has some advantages.
End of kona0197's quote
You've got a funny definition of "immune". Is Linux also immune to decent Nvidia drivers?

Reply #13 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Driver support for Linux has gotten better. I've never had any issues installing or running Nvidia or ATI drivers.

Reply #14 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting kona0197, reply 11

Using an OS that is immune to spyware, malware, and viruses has some advantages.
End of kona0197's quote

Say what? You must be on some special edition, if you're talking about Linux.

A history of viruses on Linux

Meet Linux viruses

Linux Malware

Linux virus in 5 easy steps

From the last link:

Do not underestimate user ignorance – even on Linux
End of quote

Shall I continue?

Don't be daft. No OS with a connection to the interweb is immune to vira or spyware.

Reply #15 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Well let me restate my opinion. Linux is more secure than Windows ever will be. It is harder to infect a Linux machine versus infecting a Windows machine. Not that it matters. I'm back to using XP until Linux gets better support for games. May be a long time.

Reply #16 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting kona0197, reply 11
Using an OS that is immune to spyware, malware, and viruses has some advantages.
End of kona0197's quote

When are people going to actually "get it". It isn't immune, it just isn't as big of a target and that is the ONLY reason it is attacked less. 

Reply #17 from Stardock Forums Top

Quoting kona0197, reply 16
Well let me restate my opinion. Linux is more secure than Windows ever will be. It is harder to infect a Linux machine versus infecting a Windows machine. Not that it matters. I'm back to using XP until Linux gets better support for games. May be a long time.
End of kona0197's quote

 

It is not harder to infect a linux-based machine, it is only easier to infect a windows-based machine (mostly due to user ignorance).  Most linux users have at least dabbled in user-priviledge and wouldn't run things using ADMIN credentials, while on the flipside most windows users have no idea what user priviledge even is.  Windows with the advent of 95 was tailored for user-ease-of-use.  User-ease-of-use and the indiscriminate use of things like UPnP makes for an inherently insecure operating system.  Once MS turned that around and began leaning towards "least-priviledge", things changed drastically.  Of course if every user disables the UAC, runs everything from the browser to their smiley-downloader with ADMIN credentials who is really to blame?  The OS I suppose?  O:)

 

Also, XP?  You're talking about the world's most attacked OS platform there........you sure you wanna stick with your choice?  I mean, after MS retires it you're going to be "in the wild" on your own!  No more patches....Get ready to feel really really naked.......

 

 

@ Phoon

 

I couldn't agree more.

Reply #18 from WinCustomize Forums Top

The continuity of Brad's thread went south at an early stage....around response #1 [yes, my fault]... but somehow has become Linux-is-better-than-windows-because....

It isn't, really.  It's just mainly because no-one in the Virus-making game can be bothered ruining the computer experience of the three users of it when there are millions of Windows users to torment instead.

There are idiots using BOTH platforms [or all three to be closer to the mark]....the difference is ONLY that the idiots using Linux actually look the part with their propeller hats....;)

Kona....you tend to change your opinions of what-OS-is-best-for-me-now more frequently than you change your undies.

It'd be a safe bet that the LEAST 'secure' OS currently in use is XP, and the LEAST 'practical' OS currently in use is Linux [so much stuff people will 'want' to run is windows-specific].

Give up....go out and smell the roses.... and save up for the time/chance to run a system with Win7  [or 8, once Stardock has fixed it]...;)

Reply #19 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting Jafo, reply 18
[or 8, once Stardock has fixed it].
End of Jafo's quote

Win 8 is quite good already... once Stardock has lent its embellishing touch it will be superb. :)

Reply #20 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Quoting the_Monk, reply 17
Also, XP? You're talking about the world's most attacked OS platform there........you sure you wanna stick with your choice? I mean, after MS retires it you're going to be "in the wild" on your own! No more patches....Get ready to feel really really naked.......
End of the_Monk's quote

I don't really have a choice. No funds for a new machine and this one would not run Windows 8 or 7, let alone Vista.

Quoting Jafo, reply 18
Give up....go out and smell the roses.... and save up for the time/chance to run a system with Win7 [or 8, once Stardock has fixed it]...
End of Jafo's quote

Kinda hard when you have ZERO income. And yes I have been looking for work for years now.

Quoting Jafo, reply 18
chance to run a system with Win7 [or 8, once Stardock has fixed it]...
End of Jafo's quote

Why would I need to run Stardock software to fix Windows 8?

Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top

I have really been enjoying my Surface, and as I learn more about it the more I like it. Today I realized that by plugging my printer into the USB port the drivers would automatically download. I can now print either via USB or wirelessly straight from the tablet.

Neither my iPad or Android tablets that can do that (at least not with my Canon A-I-O printer).

I didn't go with the upgraded keyboard, I kind of like the Touch Cover and can type on it quite well.

I'm not looking at the Surface as a laptop replacement, but rather as a much better tablet. And that full width kickstand rocks.