Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You could say the same for a 4.3 inch phone vs. a 10 inch 2.5k, and, soon, 12 inch 4k Android tablet. And if you want radically different capabilities, phones have SIMs that are assumed to be single-owner while most Android tablets are multi-user. Processors range from 800Mhz single-processor with mediocre bus performance, to quad-core 2.3 Ghz. There really isn't any interactive software you wouldn't run on a mobile device, and if you grok Fragment on Android, you can write for any device geometry from a single code-base.

The true boundary between mobile and desktop computing is numeric computation. You don't want to mine bitcoin or your stock market rocket science on a mobile device, mainly due to burning through the battery in a trice.

It never made sense for things called Windows not to have a unified pool of apps. This is a significant improvement.



What about things like Keyboard and Mouse vs. Touch? Network Quality (Persistent highspeed connection vs. intermittent limited quality)? Available storage space (You can consider most desktop machines (1/4 terrabyte or better) unlimited in comparison to mobile devices? Multiple Large displays (not on all I know) vs. single small display? There's alot more there than numeric computation abilities alone to take into consideration.


There are reasons to sit in front of a couple large non-touch displays attached to an uncompromising $5000+ computer. But that's for the <5% that need that and they know who they are.

The other 95% will benefit from being freed from their veal cubicles and looking up at human faces while walking around.

As for mouse vs touch etc. I agree, I think. Microsoft should have made a touch OS that isn't Windows. They might get Windows fully evolved to span that gap about the time Android takes away the enterprise business.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: