Full story at cnet, here.
The head of Dell's PC business told Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer that Windows RT should've been named something else since it doesn't run traditional Windows applications.
Microsoft reportedly has had to change its return policies for people who buy Surface RT only to find out that they can't run standard Windows applications on it.
What do you think? Is RT too different of an OS from prior Windows incarnations to be classified in the Windows line of operating systems? :8
Page 1 / 1
It's completely Windows, it's the exact same OS down to the code.
But it requires EXEs to be signed by Microsoft, which means it doesn't do things even Windows 3.1 could do. It's not worthy of being called Windows.
SMART:
Should have been called Windows Metro.
But it requires EXEs to be signed by Microsoft, which means it doesn't do things even Windows 3.1 could do. It's not worthy of being called Windows.
SMART:
Should have been called Windows Metro.
Yeah, they probably should have named it a little different so that it could more easily be differentiated from the normal windows line.
Reply
Login to the community
No account yet? Create an account
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.