Lumia 2520: Our Vulture gets his claws on Nokia's first Windows RT slab Nokia's first Windows RT tablet – the 10.1in 2520 – was unveiled today, showing how wise the company was to bide its time. The Finnish firm has watched while first-generation Surface RT tablets and convertible laptop-slabs crashed and burned, and today's offering shows what it learned. The Lumia 2520 stands out on both price …
An iPad costs more than many laptops - as do top-end smartphones. In fact an iPhone5S or top-end Android cost nearly the same as an ultrabook, let alone "a" laptop.
If you don't feel a very portable device suits you, then it isn't for you. But the tablet phenomenon shows clearly that many many people DO want it.
I can see a nice niche for this device here. I'm already working up remote application support here based around various 7-10" Android/iOS devices (perhaps phones) and what I consider big iron here. This would be a dead easy device to support on the hardware and software (both ends), that I'd have to be an idiot not to consider them. Not just for Windows on the infrastructure end either. Nice.
Good price point except for the cost of a device specific keyboard. Much rather go Bluetooth even at the cost of four hours estimated battery life (and I can already tackle that anyway).
On the other hand, battery life of 11 hours (Nokia's claim is 11 hours of HD video) is hard to find in a £500 laptop, and as those laptops aren't as smooth and responsive in use as the Surface 2, I can't see them being better than this tablet which is arguably running a higher-spec System-on-chip than Microsoft's new tablet.
Yes, they're not "Full x86 Windows", but at the price points we're talking about, you cannot make a good quality x86 tablet system with good battery life and good performance - look at the price difference between the Surface and Surface Pro. That's how much it costs to make x86 Windows run well on a tablet. Anything around the same price as the ARM tablets is just another Netbook - an underpowered, and ultimately disappointing, Windows laptop.
Microsoft shouldn't have called this "Windows RT". Had they called it "Microsoft Surface OS", and then touted Windows 8 (x86) as being able to run both "Windows" and "Surface" apps, they would have spared themselves a lot of abuse from the tech-blog-superstars.
But the fact that RT isn't x86 Windows isn't a disadvantage, any more than not being Win32 is to iOS or Android. WindowsRT is a tablet OS, and as such it has a lot of very nice features that its competitors lack, but features only go so far:
If you want a solid, rational argument against RT tablets, then here it is: RT devices have access to far fewer good apps than an iPads, or even Android tablets do. That's all (but it is a big "all" for users who really NEED a particular app)
"They" aren't. _Nokia_ (not yet owned by MS) are evolving their product line up from WinPho to an RT device. Irrespective of your opinion of the merits of RT and WinPho, it's a logical choice for Nokia at this point.
For them it makes a lot of sense: Got a Lumia? Want a tablet to go with that? Here you go...
Because the hardware to run full Windows is either too expensive or too battery hungry to pack into a tablet form factor at a price point competitive with iOS/Android.
You might as well ask why anyone is still bothering with iOS and Android when OSX and Ubuntu are so much more feature-rich.
@JDX the Atom tablets offer the same weight and battery life and performance was better than ARM tablets, but I will give you price, the previous generation were on average a tonne more expensive than the ARM tablets, but you generally also got double the storage.
The new Baytrail are supposed to be twice as fast as the last generation, so I'm looking forward to seeing some in the flesh.
The RT tablets are great if you don't need any legacy applications, but I never saw the appeal, compared to a Windows 8 tablet with Atom.
Windows RT is to iOS as Windows is to Mac OS - with one very important difference - BRANDING.
The "Windows" brand is associated with desktops and a large block of existing software, something with the same brand but no compatibility results in angry users who can't run their existing apps. iOS may be based on the same kernel as OSX but it never did anything to imply any level of compatibility between the two.
Similarly, the "Windows" brand is toxic, it's not popular its simply ubiquitous, people are stuck with it and aren't aware of competitors in its core market, once you take a toxic brand to a market where it does have visible competition people will try to avoid it.
Lower power consumption than x86, and relative immunity from malware make it rather attractive IMHO.
I've got an original Surface RT, and it's got steadily snappier with the release of updates over the past few months, something that the original reviews will never be revised to acknowledge.
It gives me a tablet that is actually useful for creating business documents as well as watching media on in a hotel room for much less cost/weight than a laptop with comparable build quality.
It's weird: iOS and Android upscaled from a phone OS which meant apps from day 1. Microsoft targetted the iPad while the market moved to smaller tablets; Windows RT has so many battles to win. Basically, the devices are too big and there is no software. Meanwhile, Windows Phone will be ready in the next 12 months for larger screens. Then RT is going to be very confused. I think this is why people see no future for it. While on the one hand Microsoft appears to believe in hybrid hardware (like the Surface Pro), it offers very specific and incompatible OS solutions: a user with a Windows Phone, an RT Tablet, and a Surface Pro would use four different operating systems (assuming Microsoft's dream scenario where the Surface Pro is used in both desktop and tablet mode).
These will be converged but it sounds like it's 18 months away.
But it runs Office. Sort of. That's it. The existence of RT is based around this differentiator: if you want Office (crippled) on an ARM device, you need RT.
Windows RT seems like a bad decision. If Microsoft really had become more nimble, it would not have been so slow getting Windows Phone onto larger screens.
In a few months MS is going to have two RT products. What are the odds they are going to keep both going and what are the odds that is the Surface that will win out? Unless Elop cares enough about this to fight its corner, can't see it surviving long.
It's the inability to run things like sigil that would prevent me from buying RT which is a pity as it's in this end of the market we are seeing the most innovation.
"In addition, unless you have a volume licence, you can only use Office RT in a non-profit business environment. Redmond is expected to detail a roadmap for Office, including Office RT, in the next few days."
"In the 2520, Nokia has actually developed a grown-up computer that makes RT viable in business for the first time "
XOR. Without any doubt.
Not entirely sure you are correct here. I believe companies with Office 365 subscriptions can also use Office on RT for business - so it's a pretty nice package for mobile productivity then. Nice though an iPad is you can do more from business point of view on RT & especially now have Outlook in 8.1
There is a LOT wrong with RT.
Anything desktop from it's big plus office to accessing anything in the control panel are crap without using the keyboard or at least a mouse.
They will not let anyone write any desktop software.
And the surface...
You need a desk as it's too top heavy and floppy with the keyboard to use on your lap.
It's too heavy to use for long as a tablet.
To do actual work, my netbook is better (and a laptop that cost the same as the surface would be better).
As a tablet, my Nexus 7 kicks its ass.
That's why the Nexus 7 is with me right now, and the surface is sitting at home.
Apple never did anything to make people believe that the ipad would ever be capable of running OSX software, it was always a standalone product with its own identity.
Anything branded as "windows" will cause people to believe that it's compatible with other products using the same branding, which causes disappointment and/or anger when users find out thats not the case.
"Nothing wrong with RT... nobody complains that iPads can't run OSX "
If you would bother to reign in your rampant fanboyism for a few seconds you might understand that the reason nobody expects iOS to run their mac applications is because apple deliberately marketed it as a seperate OS to avoid unecessary market confusion, which is something that MS has failed to do with inevitably spectacular results.
Also, I recall that when the ipad was first announced there were plenty of numbskulls predicting epic levels of fail precisely because the ipad did not run full fat OSX. The levels of scoffing at the time were enormous.
Those dingbats have all shut up about that now of course.
People don't want Windows RT devices. They want Windows, or they want a mobile OS with lots of apps on it. Not something which offers neither.
Given that netbooks used to sell for £200-250 I really don't understand why it's so hard to flog an Atom based tablet that runs genuine Windows 8 for the price this thing is retailing for.
Netbooks had 1000*600 screens with low brightness and poor viewing angles, the battery life wasn't that good, the trackpads were poor and the construction was usually pretty basic. This Nokia product has vastly superior specifications, and no fan. Not surprisingly, it costs more.
But - and listen carefully here - it still costs FOUR HUNDRED POUNDS. For a consumer who wants to use this for web browsing, games and writing the odd letter, how is it £80 better than a Nexus 10? Or £100 better than a Galaxy Tab 3 10.1? Or £280 better than a Hudl?
This thing is not aimed at the business market - for any organisation with less than about 5,000 employees and therefore a volume agreement you can't use Office for business - and yet Microsoft, sorry Nokia, are still pricing it hundreds of pounds above the consumer market. Who thinks this is clever?
There are 5 or 6 version of office for Android, running some sort of Windows with no desktop software and no apps is hardly any kind of selling point.
Most adults use Android because it does the job and is cheap, only snobbish tweens avoid it because they are so grown up and important ;-)
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
