General News

Verizon to put some limits on unlimited data

General News

Verizon's second quarter profits soar, highest recorded revenue in six quarters

General News

Smart Rewards program pays you in promotions for your loyalty to Verizon

Microsoft News

Microsoft 'betrayed' Finland, says Finnish finance minister of layoffs

Rumors

Microsoft's aiming for flagship Windows Phones, killing Nokia X but selling MixRadio

Apps

New Treasure Tag app update ditches the 'Nokia' brand

Windows Phone News

HTC 8X for Verizon picks up small update, no Windows Phone 8.1 yet

Microsoft News

Rumor claims 1,000 former Nokia employees in Finland could be laid off by Microsoft

General News

Verizon confirms adding support for LTE phones to ALLSET prepaid plans July 17

Apps

New Nokia MixRadio update ditches the 'Nokia' brand

Games

RED. is a badass universal game for Phone and Windows 8 that you should try

Windows Phones

Lumia 930 pre-orders begin in Norway Wednesday for July 10 launch

Windows Phones

Microsoft Store US site pulls pre-order listings for Nokia Lumia 635

Apps

Nokia Imaging SDK 1.2 released, Lumia SensorCore SDK out of private beta

Windows Phones

Nokia Lumia 635 for AT&T and T-Mobile available for pre-order at US Microsoft Store site

General News

Microsoft teases possible launch date of a green Lumia or successor to the X

General News

Microsoft partners with British designer to create wireless charging pants

Microsoft News

Beat Nokia by predicting world cup games in Sporting Mouth to win some awesome prizes

General News

Lumia 930 availability on Ireland's Meteor pushed back to mid-July

General News

Major Surface Pro 3 glitch fixed, but no release date yet.

240

Alleged photos of Nokia Windows 8.1 RT tablet in red for Verizon leaked

For well over a year now there have been murmurings and rumors that Nokia is working on a Windows 8 tablet with little to show for it. We have seen leaked images in the past and most recently, a late September date has been suggested as the announcement timeframe (Nokia is evidently planning an event in New York City).

Now, two images have come forth showing what is reportedly a Verizon-branded Nokia tablet with Windows 8.1 RT on board. The device appears to be labelled with “RT” suggesting that this is not a full Windows 8 Pro tablet, though there are too many caveats here to reach any firm conclusions. For instance, could Nokia have both RT and Pro devices both being tested as options for carriers and retail channels?


Earlier reported Nokia 8 RT Tablet prototype

Other reported specifications of the device include a blue or red color option, 10.1-inch 1080P display, 5-point multi-touch, 2.15GHz Snapdragon 800 processor, 32 GB of built-in storage, micro HDMI, USB 3.0.

The photos themselves reveal very little except a blurry red “device” of some sort and some labelling. The image quality though is too low to discern legitimacy or yield anything really interesting. Windows Phone Central has heard of sightings of a red Nokia tablet in the past and the specifications fall in line with what is expected by a company like Nokia.

Due to the inconclusiveness of these specific photos, we're rating them a "6" on our rumor meter but we would put the overall rumor of Nokia releasing a tablet soon at a "9".

Nokia is expected to reveal the tablet in September for a mid October release, along the same time as when Windows 8.1 RT is released. Later in November, Nokia's first "phablet" phone with a 1080P display of 5-inches or greater is expected to be announced in conjunction with Windows Phone 8 GDR3. Windows Phone Central has learned that Nokia plans to have at least one "major" release every quarter with smaller releases in between to keep attention on the struggling company. 

Source: Digi-wo; via: New Phones, WPCentral Forums; Thanks, et and chfhyh, for the tips!

10
loading...
100
loading...
67
loading...
0
loading...

Comments

There are 240 comments. Sign in to comment

A Red tablet? Here's Nokia's first foray into the tablet arena! :D

Acbuono5 says:

Daniel maybe you shouldn't put the leaked images as the main pictures for the articles to be considerate for those readers who want to be surprised on September 10. From all of the leaks for the 1020, the announcement didn't seem as exciting as it should have been since we knew literally every thing before hand.

Dave Bhullar says:

Lol, don't look at them if you don't want to spoil it. I'm sure there are as many people who want to get a look before the release. This is part of what wpcentral is all about. Your comment is just hilarious.

pookiewood says:

I don't think his request is bad at all. It would nice if these sites had spoiler filters. Kind of like how Phonearena lets you filter by OS. So if I wanted just Windows Phone news that's all I would get. Tag this article as spoiler, let us filter the site. ;)

Whodaboss says:

It's called a tease.  I would never go see a movie before seeing some type of trailer.  Nor would I read a book if it didn't provide some type of synopsis on the back cover.  The onus is on the viewer not the one providing the information.  :)

PaulKinslow1 says:

I just want to know if Office for RT 8.1 will support VBA. Those tablets would be perfect for me, but no macros is a deal breaker for my usage. Apparently this is not a common issue for people?

Barastyr says:

Well....this VBA is also a deal breaker for me...i was scouring the internet trying to find out whether Surface 2 has Macro support or not n your comment showed up on google..lol
I am glad to know that I am not the only one...the RT version would be perfect for me n I would buy either surface 2 or the nokia tablet in a heartbeat...only if they have VBA support....hoping for the best...though chances seem low. 

cjallan417 says:

I hear what you're saying. All these leaks kinda ruin announcements, but every site does this now.  If WPC didn't do it, 10 others would and eventually steal WPC's visitors. If I were gonna make a plea to anyone, it'd be all the idiots snapping the leak pics in the first place.

x I'm tc says:

Who cares?  It's the total waste of space known as "RT."  MS needs to put this dog down ASAP and focus on Real Windows.
 
Wake me up when they pack Real Windows into a phone.  That's when I'll get excited.

OMG55 says:

I have both an rt & a pro device and sure I can tell the difference in speed because one has an Intel i5 as opposed to a cell phones qualcom processor in it. Outside of that, there's really no difference as I use Remote Apps with both my RT & Pro, therefore, everything I do with my Pro, I can do with my RT; I'm sure Citrix will allow you to do the Same Thing.

rhodri22 says:

Exactly how I use my RT. Remote Desktop to my PC for heavy lifting and productivity, or as a content consumption device, especially with the full flash browser.

thetruth1960 says:

I see a lot of people who use the RT as a remote device and I can see how that would work well.
But, I would really like to know how that (remote desktop) would work on a plane. Or when I'm waiting for my doctor at a place where they don't have WIFI and no cell service. That's why I like my Surface Pro. I can do real work and don't need to be connected. 
Yes, the Pro is heavy as a plain media comsumption device IF you are going to use it for a long time. Even then, with the proper case, which I have, I can easily use the Pro on my lap. And if I really want a light machine for media comsumption, I have this thing called a Nokia L920 that works very well as such.
MS has indirectly paid my bills since 1988, yes 25 years. People call me an MS fanboy and I have to admit it, yes I am. But the RT to me doesn't make sense. An Atom device is much more versitile in my view. When Win 8 Prev first came out 2 years ago, I went out and bought an Acer W500. I still have it, and I still use it every once in a while. The W500 has an under powered CPU in comparison to the current Atom. But I used that thing for MS Office work. for media consumption, and I even had Visual Studio installed for light work. At one point I even loaded VMWare Player with a Windows XP machine. Oh, I could remote desktop to do really heavy lifting.
 

Isror says:

The RT is for the individual who wants the ultra portable device with a little extra. I fully see a market for the RT and understand its place in the overall food chain. I want something thats running lean for media consumption, internet browsing, document viewing/editing and has the ability to remote if I need to. ANYTHING that I need an x86 backbone for, I'll bring the ultra book with me. The Surface RT is so light and effective for me that its a part of my daily loadout, regardless of where or what I'm doing
 
I have my laptop for work, but within my man bag (yes, my MOAB manbag) I always have my tablet. I USE to carry my MSI Wind U100 for the longest time until Windows RT came along in the Surface RT.
 
Sure an Atom based processor can run the x86 programs but at what cost? Too many people want the ability for traditional applications but don't want to pay for the hardware that gives them the battery life to performance ratio...They say "I'll settle for an Atom" but the overall performance is a novelty.
 
The sooner the world can wrap their minds around the fact that the RT is a tablet...Nothing more, nothing less,  the sooner the sheep of the world will have the light bulb moment and see its value over the "competition."

thetruth1960 says:

So basically, you are saying different strokes for different folks. :)
 
My problem is that in my simple mind (yes, I’m a simpleton,) I don’t see what the “extra” thing is.
 
Media consumption, iPad and Android tablet can do.
 
Document editing, iPad and Android tablet can do. I can even log in to my Skydrive and do the editing online with an iPad or an Android tablet. I would need a connection if I wanted to do remote desktop, so the same applies to Skydrive.
 
Remote Desktop, iPad and Android tablet can do.
 
Store Apps, All 3 devices are pretty well covered. But even though I’ve not found anything I want missing in the Windows Store, there might be people out there who need apps that only iOS or Android have.
 
Light with long battery life, iPad and Android tablet can do. Shoot, not too long ago, getting 5 hours of battery was excellent. My Surface Pro can do that with the 3rd gen CPU it has.
 
And bringing an Ultrabook for anything x86 makes sense. But now you are not as light since you have your RT and your Ultrabook. I have just the 2.4lb Pro that does both the job of the RT and the Ultrabook.
 
The Pro makes sense for me. It is light (I used to have a Compaq Portable at a point in my life. And not too long ago, I had a 3.5lb laptop that was considered super light in comparison to what was available.) It has decent battery life (not the same as an RT, but like you said, at what cost?) And it can do everything that I need on the road.
 
Back to the first sentence, different strokes… The problem as I see it, and the market sees it as the sales indicate, the RT doesn’t seem to have too much advantage over an iPad or Android tablet. Like you said, "the RT is a tablet, Nothing more, nothing less."

dukrem says:

It still has the advantage over ipad/android of being able to run 2 apps side by side, and that is one huge advantage. I now find it very difficult to get anything done on a tablet without that functionality. Situations like typing out a research article on word whilst having IE pinned with some journal articles, or quickly opening email attachments in photos or PDF reader without having to keep switching back to the email, or having 2 browsing windows side by side, or a browser and a video. There are endless ways in which the RT provides increased productivity over other tablets.

Most of us on this site are in the (vocal) minority as far as needing x86 apps on the go. For 90% of consumers there is no need for non-touch x86 apps on a small 8-10" touch screen. Most of these people can do everything they need to do on an RT tablet: email, tv/movies/music, flash enabled web browsing, web video, microsoft office, etc. Having talked to several non-techie family members about this, they only want the things I listed above, and they want to be able to run 2 apps side by side (one family member was looking at getting a tablet, and was shocked that the ipad couldnt do this, she is not set on a surface RT).

If there is no technical disadvantage to an x86 tablet then microsoft should get rid of RT to avoid confusion, however there are currently no 1080P atom tablets. Either atom is not powerful enough to run some store apps at this resolution, or it is but would consume too much battery life to go in a slim 8-10" device. Either way x86 chips arent yet at the point that they can provide the advantage of x86 with zero compromise.

Just looking at the reviews of current windows 8 tablets, one of the big criticisms was the screen res/DPI. Microsoft needs to be able to compete in this area to be recommended by reviewers. Until the majority of reviewers stop saying the ipad is still the best tablet (an opinion largely based on its excellent hardware) windows 8 market share won't increase at any great rate.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to be able to run x86 apps on a 1080P 8-10" tablet that is slim and light with 12hr+ battery life (and I think within 2 years that will be a reality), but currently RT does have a place, and will certainly power my next tablet. For x86 I currently have a powerful desktop, and a laptop (that I never use). Almost every tablet user out there still has an x86 machine for the odd thing they can't do on their tablet. Most of the stuff I do on my desktop wouldnt run fast enough on a tablet anyway.

Tyradius says:

I understand the IOS and android line of thinking. But some people (like me) want a streamlined arm based os for consumption that is within the windows ecosystem. I would rather have an RT device for doing my light work and play than an IOS or android device, because of the layout and design and compatibility with other windows devices. I don't want a desktop at all on my tablet. I don't want to install x86 apps on my tablet, nor do I want all the extra bloat an x86 os brings to have those features. So while IOS and android exist for light work and media consumption so too should RT.

westex74 says:

Agreed. I always thought it would be cool if, to differentiate between RT and Pro, MSFT simply did away with the desktop mode on the RT. I feel desktop mode is pretty crummy on a small tablet anyway, and it would enhance the touch experience on the RT. Desktop mode simply never made sense on tablets,

kullkid92x says:

THIS. HERE. THIS. ^^^^ THIS.

Dude that was worded so perfectly lol. That's what this damn tech world needs to understand. Windows RT is JUST a tablet OS. Oh it can run office? GREAT but its still a tablet OS that Microsoft obviously optimized office to run on it to COMPETE with Apples iOS (which hellooo its a TABLET OS)

Damn man if people only understood this. All I read on the world wide web is how this OEM and that OEM is dropping RT production and bla bla cause Atom tablets offer full windows 8 and good battery life so why RT? well why the eff are you still buying iPads... its not like those run full Mac OSX -__- see how frustrating this can be lol.

MikadoWu says:

Plese add to yor signature, posted frm my iCrap, i hav never used an RT.
Does RT need more apps?  Sure , hell I would like an i7 in my Pro.
Does RT need a little more Power? Sure.
Does RT Suck?  HELL NO..

I'm perfectly happy with my Surface RT. People just don't understand the differences. I see many people with full PCs and an iPad, what's the difference between having a full PC and RT?

Sumit8 says:

oh god are you serious...? Don't read rumors if you want to be suprised...
wow i still can't believe how stupid your comment is...

Andre Blonde says:

Here's why I thin it is crap and hope it's not gonna come out. At least for this time. Right... the first thing it's 10 inches. Egronomy factor says these days that the smaller tablets are easier to sell. due to mobility issues. 2nd it's RT, RT is dead, well actually never been alive. And I do still like RT but can't admit the truth. What Ms Said that the apps are easy to port from tablet to phone and vice versa (due to common kernel) in practice is not as it is. the apps mostly either on phone or on the Tablet. The only positive point is Office, but even it is limited by the memory size of 32 GB.
I wouldn't mind le 7-8 inches tablet with RT, for afordable price and god damn it with the 4G or any type of celular. 10 in ches? Nah.

Jesus Christ. RT is far from dead. We just keep getting the same few if you that don't want it, complaining non-stop about it. We get it. You don't want a RT model. Some of us do though.

umovies says:

wow some one who has a working brain, and ccan think for them selves. 

donebrasko says:

For rt to live, it must also run windows phone 8 apps. Give me a reason to keep my next one. Also idk about a red tablet. Verizon you can't release a red 928 but a red tablet?

So much Branding on the back of that thing... 4 logos? With that much branding you start to lose the simplicity of the design language.

icyrock1 says:

That's by far the minority, though.

I'm of the opinion that, Microsoft would have a much easier time selling Windows RT if they merged it with Windows Phone (has, that way developers would have a easier time making apps across the whole ecosystem, both run on ARM chips, both share the same Kernel, etc). The way they marketed here (in the microsoft store) was has a laptop and tablet replacement. It wasn't at the point where it could survive without x86 compatibility, due to most Windows Programs being designed for that, and for the desktop instead of the metro interface. Sure, over time it will grow, but people want the here and now, and normally don't look towards the future and it's potential growth (not to mention there was likely some confusion among sellers, who mistakenly told customers it could run x86 programs).

a5cent says:

It isn't necessary to merge WRT and WP. The only things that needs to be merged are the WinRT and WinPRT APIs. MS is working on that as we speak. We will get 100% app compatibility between the two OS' at some point, but it probably won't be achieved with WP8.1.

Yangstax says:

Once the Common API becomes a reality, it probably would make sense for Nokia to release a combo tablet like the ASUS Padfone so the WP phone and the RT tablet can share one contract.  I do expect the WP OS and RT OS will be merged at some point.  Most of the WP apps can be optimized to support the tablet.

chucky78 says:

Yep nothing wrong with RT. So many people here hate on it. I have no need to install programs so why do I need a Pro? It's not like I want to pony up more money just for Office nor do I believe in a subscription model for Office. I still believe a Pro is needed (maybe) but my old HP Laptop serves me just fine for now but the poor thing is collecting dust.

Plus battery life is outstanding on the RT, much better than the pro.

RT is fine in theory, a "lite" windows that does 90% of what 90% of people do with a computing device: surf the net, e-mails, Office, music, Kindle or Nook books, Netflix. However, the last 10% is important too. I've used Quicken to manage my bank accounts for at least 20 years, TurboTax to file my taxes for just as long. Experimented with Dragon Dictate for writing. If these came to RT or the web/cloud, I would replace my 2006 convertible tablet with an RT. Instead I will probably bite on a Bay Trail tablet.

rhodri22 says:

I don't think that RT is dead, but the only way it can be a success at this point is if Microsoft allow Windows Phone apps to be run on the platform, whether through an emulator or what I don't know, but it would give it a huge ecosystem almost instantly and make only one platform for developers to have to code for at a time.
And personally I prefer the 10 inch form factor for a tablet in a 16/9 aspect ratio, and the above tablet looks really thin too, so let's see.

jasonxz says:

WP apps were not allowed on RT by design.  MS made a conscious decision not to allow that b/c they were shooting for quality over quantity in terms of apps.  Whether or not that was a mistake is a matter of opinion.
Have you seen the iphone apps running on an ipad?  It's painful to look at.  Now, maybe with the advent of the 7" tablet, that should change but on a 10" tablet most apps written for a phone provide a horrible experience.

rhodri22 says:

You really can't compare iOS apps to Windows Phone 8 apps, especially as to how they'll look on a tablet because of the screen resolutions and aspect ratios used. The iPhone 5 has a 1136 x 640 screen resolution at a 16:9 aspect ratio compared to the original iPad's (and 2) screen resolution of 1024 x 768 at a 4:3 aspect ratio. The newer iPad's have even higher screen resolutions, so all the apps are squeezed into the aspect ratio and then scaled to the resolution making them look like crap.
By comparison, 720p WP8 devices are 1280 x 720 at a 16:9 aspect ratio, and WXGA WP8 devices are 1280 x 768. Windows RT devices can be forced into using the WXGA resolution in the display control area (but do get the black bar effect as a consequence of the 15:9 aspect ratio), or are natively using the 1366 x 768 resolution at a 16:9 aspect ratio. The scaling so going to be really small and the aspect ratio is going to be the same.
Also, look at how the Metro apps can scale on both WP and W8. On WP an app looks roughly the same on the 620 at 3.8" as on the 625 at 4.7", both at the same resolution. But on W8, an app looks the same on my desktop connected to a 32" display as on my Surface RT with a 10.6" display. I still maintain that apps would work fine. Games could be more of an issue with scaling admittedly, but apps would be fine.

jainer123 says:

That's not true.  WP apps will eventually merge with RT.  That's the goal of the continued development of blue, and why currently it is relatively easy to port WP apps to the MS store.
MS has always said that it ended on merging the app ecosystems as much as possible, so i'm not sure where you're coming from here.

OMG55 says:

That's what I was thinking from the image, "That thing is thin". It looks thinner than both the 920 & 1020

mrcraggle says:

Why is everyone so into dumping on MS's first attempts? It's been less than a year for W8 and people want RT to die rather than see it improve and grow. However when Google do something, the internet tech nerds will defend the shit out of it. Androids first year was awful so they should've just given up right? How about Honeycomb tablets like the Moto Xoom, total garbage so I guess no one else made any more Android tablets? Google+ is plastered everywhere and Google force it on their users even if they don't want it yet no one was using it within its first year either. Even the iPad when it first came out was severely lacking and if it were a tablet by any other company, no one would've bought it.

txDrum says:

The issue I have with RT isn't that its as dead as people make out - after all, android launched with fewer tablet apps (literally like fifty) than we did.

RT was created to force Intel to step up their game. They did. You can have a 1080p bay trail tablet with the EXACT same performance *and* price as windows RT, that ALSO runs full windows 8.1. A sipvermont SoC is not that much more expensive if at all over a snapdragon 800. So why on earth push RT?

I don't know a single person in the world that would rather have an RT tablet for $300 than the exact same tablet with W8.1 and a bay trail SoC instead of snapdragon 800 for $300.

Rug says:

I have both RT and Pro and if the price was right I would get 3 more RT (one for each kid and one for me) and leave the Pro permanently hooked up to a monitor. They are perfect for kids/students, way better value than iPad imo. I just wish Publisher was available. The Pro is too heavy to be comfortable tablet and too small to be a laptop replacement. I actually find the RT display to be a better match for its size. Although I do like Fresh Paint on the Pro better with the pen. RT + Type Pad FTW.

umovies says:

intel never will be cheap, and if it is it wont be as fast as it would be an atom don't worry amd is next in line from both nokia and ms.

OMG55 says:

You hit the nail on the head talking about AMD,even though I prefer intel

umovies says:

cant comment on haswell but intel stuff was to high and couldnt even really do 1080p and cant do 1080p gaming, both amd and snapdragon 800 can. when the haswell's come well see if it priced right, rt will be the biggest seller.

Aaron M says:

Exactly.  Whenever a RT vs W8 debate takes place, it seems the pro RT people automatically assume that you have to choose big, expensive, low battery life devices if you wan't Intel.  And that simply isn't the case anymore.  The fact that the first Windows mini tablet uses Intel, and is only $330 MSRP, ought to make people realize this.

stephen_az says:

Please point out one Windows 8 tablet with performance and a long battery life and do not spew haswell or Bay Trail BS since there are NO HASWELL OR BAY TRAIL TABLETS YET! Comparing real devices to vaporware and alleged specs is an asinine pursuit. As far as existing tablets running Windows.8 and the current generation of Atom processors, they have no better performance than RT  and not enough storage to run anything anyway - pretty much netbooks in tablet form. The i series tablets offer performance but lesser battery life. This remains a fact of life until new products are actually released.

Aaron M says:

I'm sorry, was I ever talking about future "vaporware" devices?  I base my entire assessment on the current devices on the market.  Now I only have a Surface RT and not an Intel Atom tablet, so I can't provide you my own benchmarks.  So instead I can only provide assessments from others.
 
http://winsupersite.com/windows-8/windows-8-architecture-wars-part-1-clover-trail-vs-arm
 
I generall trust Thurrott more than most tech bloggers because he is actually knowledgable.  And here he is pretty clear that performance wise, Clovertrail beats out the RT, or at least the Tegra 3 in Surface RT.  And when it comes to battery life, he calls it a toss up, even though he says he was getting 8 hours from the ATIV running on Atom as opposed to the 6 hours from Surface RT.  So there you go.

dukrem says:

The problem is that anything and everything is better than the tegra 3 chip that paul used in that comparison. If you look at the benchmarks here http://notesofgenius.com/nvidia-tegra-vs-qualcomm-snapdragon-soc-cold-war/ it shows that on the cpu side the tegra 4 (roughly equivalent to the SD800) is ~4X faster and on the graphics side it is vastly superior (running the same content at the same speed in 1080P vs standard res for the tegra 3). I'd take a SD 800 over the current atom performance wise, especially given the optimisations that are present in windows RT.

a5cent says:

Nothing MS has done is forcing Intel in one direction or another. ARM, Qualcomm and the drive towards mobile is what is pushing Intel to respond... slowly but surely. MS is just a very small part of that massive push.

Agree with everything else though. WRT is a no-future OS, not because it is bad, but because it is only a stop gap measure until ultra low power x86 CPUs become available that can run full Windows at the same price and power budget as an ARM CPU. MS will dump WRT shortly thereafter.

Aaron M says:

I wouldn't even call it a stop gap anymore since by the time WinRT came out, Intel Clover Trail was already available to provide similar battery life / costs. So essentially I feel like WinRT was a massive was of time, resources, and money by MS. In the end the only thing RT has accomplished was to totally f*** up the launch story of Windows 8. Windows 8 should have been the "No Compromise" hybrid OS that MS originally touted it as. Instead, I had to endlessly explain to people asking about Windows tablets what the difference between RT and W8 was. So Windows 8 became the "No Compromise. Except that..." OS. Heck, I still have to explain it to people to this day, even ones that are software programmers and are generally knowledgable.

Hooksie says:

I know it seems to make some people feel more comfortable but I just don't get the need. It's like insisting on old style steering instead of power steering. It does take a bit to get used to but the Start Screen is brilliant. I find the search to be miles better and the whole OS is just snappy and fun. I have a RT tablet so I have experience of the touch interface but I also have it on my work laptop. It isn't touchscreen but I hardly see the Start Screen, I'm in the desktop most of the time. When I do need to find an app it's either on the taskbar, a shortcut on the desktop or a windows key and three letters away. Having Windows 8 on a touchscreen device does really make it stand out but even on a desktop the keyboard shortcuts and under the hood improvements make it more than enough reason to upgrade from any other OS. Not to mention that the Windows apps for the Modern UI are usually very nice looking and work slickly.

R0bR says:

Go to surfaceforums.net and you'll find plenty of people, myself included, that prefer RT over full blown Windows in a tablet.

Aaron M says:

Please explain. If we consdier all things to be equal (cost, battery, etc), then W8 is clearly supperior to RT because it offers a massive superset of what RT does. Of coarse your counter will probably be that all things are not equal, and that RT tablets have better battery life, are lighter, and cost significantly less. And thats certainly what I would have assumed a year ago. Except that Intel Atom tablets turned out to be just as light, almost as good battery life, and even cost about the same, all while offering much better overall performance. Maybe things will be different in the next generation, but what I just laid out is exactly how the first generation played out. So I can't understand why anyone would make the claim you are making.

stephen_az says:

You have obviously never touched an Atom tablet if you think they offer better performance. One can just as readily ask why someone would stick an anemic Atom processor and insufficient storage in a tablet, such that running legacy apps is painful and/or kills all of your available space, and then add Windows 8 and claim you are getting some full Windows experience. The only full Windows experience you get with current Atom tablets is a reminder of what it was like to use a netbook.

Aaron M says:

I responded to you in another comment.  But basically, please refer to http://winsupersite.com/windows-8/windows-8-architecture-wars-part-1-clover-trail-vs-arm.  I might not have an Atom tablet to play with, but I'll take this objective analysis over random anecdotes about Atom sucking, probably based on the Atoms from 2007.

dukrem says:

Yep, all things equal I would definitely take pro. But while tegra 3 was slightly worse than atom, it is not even comparable to the vastly better performance that the SD800 offers, so I'd debate the point that everything is equal (I'm sure Nokia would have looked at performance before making their choice). Also none of the tests done previously compare graphic ability of the 2 chips. There are currently no 1080P atom tablets. Atom could not power a 1080P screen with all day battery life in a slim 8-10" device. SD800 could achieve that with ease.

With a slight battery life/screen resolution improvement favouring arm I (and most adequately informed consumers) would definitely go RT. The people discussing this point on here are in the minority. We like to be able to run x86 apps, for example visual studio, on the go. The majority of people could do everything they do on a x86 machine on windows RT. Email, Microsoft office, full html5/flash web browsing, watching tv/movies, music, etc. Even if there was that one little thing they couldn't run (someone on here mentioned quicken), everyone that has a tablet still has a regular PC that they can use somewhere for that thing. And who honestly wants to do their tax on the go using a tiny 10" touchscreen on a desktop app that certainly wasn't designed for touch? I have a powerful desktop, a laptop and a surface RT. I haven't used the laptop in 6 months. I still use the other 2 extensively because they fit my usage better. I don't need to be able to do the things I do on my desktop on my tablet, and neither do most people.

umovies says:

bigger is better ask my girl friend

pookiewood says:

I prefer an RT tablet because I want a cheap pick up and go device that does more than play Subway surfer but is light in weight like an Android tablet. RT allows this. I have my laptop for higher powered programs.

Aaron M says:

Again, here I see the assumption that RT tablets are cheaper and lighter weight.  The cheapest and lightest weight Windows tablet right now is that 8inch Acer tablet for $330 and it runs Intel Atom and FULL Windows 8.

ecjoseandres says:

Actually is 250$ at my local staples

I agree. Use both RT and Pro laptop and much prefer the RT as the go-to device for all the reasons you mentioned, and I love the 9 hour battery life. I have also found that I prefer to stay in the metro ui and rarely use the desktop. It travels with me and I can do the things I need from a tablet.

I would however prefer an 8in form factor.

inteller says:

STFU you clueless sandy twat

txDrum says:

@umovies, the new atom core is a HUGE improvement over previous atoms. It is straight up competitive, at the same price as the snapdragon 800. Intel knows they can't overprice SoCs in the mobile world. The potential performance of the new atom has received great reviews at plenty of sites like anandtech. If you don't believe me look it up, but Intel is not "weaker, more expensive, and less power efficient" or whatever you said.

inteller says:

atom in no way comes close to the power of an 800 nor the battery life. 

Aaron M says:

Instead of trying to compare potential SoC's for the next gen devices, I just look back at what played out in the last generation. And what played out is that the general assumptions of ARM vs Intel were bull shit. Intel Atom tablets running full Windows 8 were just as light, just as good battery life, better performance, and about as cheap as the ARM based WinRT tablets. Maybe that will change in the next gen, but I'm tired of seeing people here still assume that RT devices are automatically lighter and cheaper than W8 devices. Right now at this very moment, the cheapest and lightest Windows tablet is the 8inch Acer device for $330 and runs Intel Atom and full W8.

inteller says:

no fucking way.  atoms barely get a day out of the same usage scenarios that ARM will give two.  its not even close.
 
you know why the acer is cheapest?  because it is plastic cheaply made rubbish!

Aaron M says:

Yes fucking way.  I'll admit that I don't have two tablets right next to me to compare, so I can only go by advertised battery life.  So from what I have seen, Intel Atom tablets claim up to 8 hours, while RT tablets claim up to 9 or 10.  I frankly don't give a shit about a 1-2 hour difference when we are already talking about all day battery life.
 
But I'm glad you agree with my other two points that size and cost are not an advantage for RT, at least not in this gen.

umovies says:

im just comment on whats out now, not what coming, if the price is the same and performance is the same then never mind however current atoms are a joke

Aaron M says:

Current Atoms are a joke? Compared to what? The current Tegra 3 CPU's that power the current RT tablets? I love the build quality of my Surface RT but it runs like shit.

OMG55 says:

Funny, because my Dell XPS 10 runs fine

Aaron M says:

After looking it up, I see the Dell runs on a Snapdragon.  So maybe that makes a big difference over Tegra 3.  That or we just have a difference of opinion on what "runs like shit" means.  I'm probably being to harsh when I use that phrase.  I'm just overall displeased at the general performance of RT.  Apps take considerably longer to load, and it struggles on some websites.  My wife was watching an episode of The Office from NBC website on her laptop.  When her battery died, I said "dont worry! I have my awesome Surface tablet here that is perfect for this scenario."  After 10 minutes of it slowly struggling to load the website, I finally got the episode playing.  It stuttered horribly and the experience was generally aweful.  That left me with a bad impression of the performance of RT tablets.

umovies says:

I wouldn't mind le 7-8 inches tablet with RT, for afordable price and god damn it with the 4G or any type of celular. 10 in ches? Nah. Man you just came up with my new commercial for the nokia rt tablet, (grow 2 inch's or more over night with the new nokia rt tablet).

Andre Blonde says:

With another addition that ipad don't have an instagram client and windows RT does. Instapic as I recall. For everybody else: I do support microsoft and trully want it to sucseed. The timing is very wrong and they had to launch this windows 8 thing like 2-3 years ago, when Android just started to become big. Android took on iOS because they had lower end affordable phones so they sucseeded coz iPhones were too expensive to buy for most of us. Windows Phone is doing rather good and showing a nice growth at the time when it seems like already impossible. + updates and everything else. RT on the other hand had this uncertainty when it was released it was confusing a lots of people who unlike us hanging out here thought that it's just like Home Premium for Windows 7. Ask anybody outside the states (where's there's not much tv comercials for microsoft) what is Windows RT? I bet 90% wont even know that it's exist.
This confusion costed MS a lots of money and producers of hardwear as well. Acer did the tablet on full windows 8 and it's cheaper than surface RT,(I can't recall the name of that tablet).
RT have to cease because the very same hardware is capable of running windows 8 and Acer did proved it. although most of you will say that Aces is low quality, but it is a step up.
I will wait for a propper tablet on a propper windows 8. and I sure hope that it is coming soon. fingers crosed.

sco0by1 says:

About a windows tablet made its way to Verizon, I want one.

Sarang68 says:

This will match with my red Nokia 920!

mayur89 says:

Windows 8 and Nokia's Hardware > My Favorite Combination!! :) :) Hell Yeah!! Waiting for this device ;)

x I'm tc says:

This isn't Windows 8.  This is the POC known as "RT."

Cooommmooon...... VLC people this the only reason to hold off on rt for me.

HD media player sucks. It starts falling apart after about 5 minutes of watching any MKV. PowerDVD works far better, but cost and arm and a leg.

Wtf is VLC even doing? The phone and tablet beta should've been out by now.

Alphageek_UK says:

There was an update posted to Kickstarter backers in the past couple of weeks. They are working on VLC for RT but still have some technical issues. They don't sound too far away from what I could gather from the update.
I do agree that mobile.HD Media Player is a fine substitute while we wait and should hopefully push the VLC guys to make a great RT app.
I have also been using the trial version of PowerDVD for RT and that's nice too although expensive.

sri_tech says:

Price it at $399 and you have my money.
Though I wish they make 8 inch RT tablet and 10 inch full Windows 8 tablet with Bay trail atom processors.

deadwrong03 says:

thats too high for a RT tablet and i think thats what they're problem is anyway i think it needs to be cheaper than other RT tablets which has been what nokia has been doing with the phones generally 100-200 bucks cheaper full retail than other products
i hope they have a Pro tablet in the works i'd much rather get a pro tablet from Nokia than the RT

Rod Hull says:

If it's cellular enabled I can't see it costing less than $499. To sell it cheaper than a Lumia 925 seems a bit daft, superior camera and smaller size notwithstanding.

Rug says:

I think right now that's expensive as they have to prove their value against other more developed ecosystems but eventually they can be at same price ad iPad. For me RT > iPad, but the rest of the world needs to climb aboard the RT train before price can be that high.

With phones being more or less fully saturated, carrier subsidized tablets would make sense.

$299 maybe, in order for RT to gain traction is needs to be cheaper than an iPad and more comparable to the popular Android tablets, heck maybe for the next year it should be under-cutting the Nexus 10 too...
 
Microsoft need to build up the RT install base, just like they need to build up the Windows Phone install base, and the way to do that is low cost devices like the Lumia 520 and 620. Hopefully Nokia can produce low, mid, and high end tablets to achieve the same as they're doing in the WP arena.
 
I'm particularly excited to see the Nokia suite of apps come to their RT tablets too.
 
Q4 is looking pretty interesting...

inteller says:

I find it dumbfounding that people think something that does MORE than an iPad should cost less.

I agree with you that Windows RT, with the full desktop, Office suite, and file management capability has amazing advantages over iPads and Android tablets.
 
But here's the rub, most consumers don't care. If they did Surface RT would have been flying off the shelves the past nine months. Instead Microsoft didn't even sell one million of the things.
 
Windows RT does not have the cache of the iPad, no devices running Windows do maybe except for the ThinkPad and even then that's only in the business world. In the consumer mindset, Apple is at the top whether they own one or not and if Joe Average is going to walk into his local store and drop $500 on a tablet and he's faced with something running Windows RT or getting the new iPad, he's probably going to leave the store with an iPad, because if you're going to spend that much, why not go for the best tablet out there?
 
And as much as it pains me to admit it, for most consumers, the iPad is the best tablet out there. It has all the apps your friends are using, and all the ones you see in the news and on TV, it has a capable browser and email client. Heck, if you're in the Microsoft ecosystem you've got Office 365, SkyDrive, and Outlook.com apps available too.
 
RT may have a lot of technical advantages to an iPad (and aesthetic ones too, imo) but until it has everything, it's in the same position as Windows Phone, and we all know how well that did trying to compete with the iPhone and Galaxy S, don't we?
 
It wasn't until Nokia came along and started competing at the lower end that the platform gained traction and our market share started increasing. The same applies to RT. It's not competing with the iPad, it's competing with the hoardes of Android tablets out there and it needs to be priced accordingly to build up the user base. More users means more developers will take an interest which means more apps which means more people will want one. It's simple, really.
 
But if Microsoft and Nokia want to play dumb (which Microsoft most certainly did with RT 1.0 last October) then they could end up facing another warehouse full of un-sold RT devices this time next year.
 
Once a market is developed and nutured, it's easier to go the high-end route. There are millions of people out there with Lumia 520 and 620 devices, assuming they've had a good experience they'll want a new version of the same phone next time they upgrade and maybe they'll be willing to pay a little more next time for a 750 or 850. With the RT 2.0 tablets, they should be priced to sell for the first year (maybe with one high end device there to compete with the iPad just they they have one) and if that builds up the install base dramatically then maybe they don't have to be so cut throat with the pricing with RT 3.0 comes out.

nmercy says:

I pretty much agree that it's a price thing with the Surface. For Apple an iOS tablet works because they have no portable computers that compete at that price. The lowest macbook starts at $999, so a $500 tablet that doesn't do what a Mac does works because of a lack of competition.
Microsoft, on the other hand, has a much more diverse ecosystem to compete with so a $499 RT tablet doesn't make sense. An RT tablet at $499 is competing with touch screen laptops that will run faster and feature a full version of Windows. 
If the Surface RT had launched at $349 it probably would have done well, but now it's seen as a price drop, along with being seen as some sort of indicator that the next version is coming out meaning people won't buy it. To sell the original Surface RT, in any substantial amount they need to lower the price to $199, like they did for educational institutions.
Now if they keep the price at $349, the Surface 2 RT will sell substantially better than the original. If they have a price of $299 that would probably be almost ideal. They also need to release a Surface Pro with an i3 at the $500... they could step up to current Surface Pro prices with variations.
In all cases the touch keyboard should come as the standard cover in the package. When it launched it cost $16 to make and feels like too substantial a selling point to be sold separately... leave the type cover as an optional upgrade, but lower the price on it.

OMG55 says:

I agree with everything you said, but I also think lack of exposure is a major concern and improper marketing. For example. I began installing windows 8 Dell Latitude AIO touch screen desktops in the organization last year; I showed users once how to operate win 8, and I've not had one helpdesk call since, this is about training users properly, because as much MS haters would like consumers to think win 8 is confusing, its not. I tell users the start screen is you filing cabinet organized into categories per your liking. I also tell them don't worry about where the desktop is because if the application is designed to run in the desktop, when launched it will open their. MS needs a real advertising firm, highlighting the fact that you no longer need to purchase two or more computers plus a phone, you only need a phone & a hybrid, showing that these device merge work, play (app store), and social into one package. "Meaning work doesn't have to be business as usual anymore". Senario, show an employee hard at work using office, a toast notification pops up in the corner in win 8 as it does, employee clicks it and responds or views the images his/her social contact want them to see with it in the snapped view where you still see your corporate work on the screen. He/ she looks at the time an notices its lunch hour, then simply goes to the store or the previously created games section on the start screen and launches Angry Birds or some other popular app. Commercial ends saying. "One device for every part of you life, Work Hard, Play Hard".....with the Windows 8 logo closing the show. No need to display the word Microsoft. This type of commercial doesn't have to be long.

Sounds simple and effective. Hope MS is reading this.

sayonical says:

If its true it needs to have a 7-8 inch brother.

I might get this tablet!

Eas195 says:

yeah, me too, sometimes.

Kram Devil says:

Me three!!  I might buy this if it's $200 - $250.  Acer and Dell have already had a go with my wallet.  Dell as recently as yesterday.   The poor thing doesn't have much left but for Nokia I can stretch it ;)
I love you Nokia, you had me at 3310.  That thing was iconic!  My unit is still alive somewhere.  Nokia does not know the meaning of planned obsolescence. 

OMG55 says:

What did you buy from Dell? My client users love the Dell XPS 12 hybrid running win 8 Pro, as do I.

Kram Devil says:

I got a dell latitude 10e.  The $300 off coupon just reeled me in!   I like the acer w510 I bought last year but at $250, dell  was begging me to buy their tablet.  One can never have enough tablets around.  I was thinking considering the $299 asus vivotab but since they publicly declared that  they're no longer supporting RT I was kinda concerned with the  aftersales support.&nbsp and decided on the dell promo; The coupon promo should have ended by now.  I'm glad my order pushed thru.  I'll either do a car mod or prop it on the fridge.

Rich White says:

A Red 10" RT tablet? Red for fire sale?

Ebay has Surface and touch cover running around $300 lightly used.

Nokia stock will tank if this is all they got.

Nik Rolls says:

Uh, why will one additional product make stock drop so significantly?

bbqrooster says:

because Rich said so. \sarcasm

MikeSo says:

Not to mention: what does the price of a used Surface RT on eBay have to do with it?

ldp247 says:

Nothing, just a Nokia hater!!!!
 

Rich White says:

Entirely wrong there. I have. A 920 and 521. What I'd like to see is an 8" or smaller tablet like the W3 done right with an IPS HD screen. Something Between the Nexus 7 and Apple mini.

Photos look to small for a 10" .

ade333 says:

A lot of people do not understand that Nokia is the enemy to the hedge funds that earn lots of people lots and lots of money. Apple's stock is fragile and a surge from Nokia will not break it, but it will add weight to the overvalued questions. Because of this, analysts will forever post negatively about NOK and use every shot they can. Going into tablets will be spun as another attempt being made in a market that already has a "next-to-zero" profit margin in a war that cannot be won, by a struggling company, running an OS no one likes. Disagree all you want, that is what is said, and it is said because of the underlying fears of those who are heavily invested in Apple. As someone who is heavily invested in Nokia, I believe the negative slant will change, but it is going to take a few years along with an unfailing chain of disruptive features and advertising.

Nik Rolls says:

No matter what the detractors say about RT, it really is a powerful system for its price with the 8.1 upgrade. Before that it was stuck in no man's land for a while, but the improvements really make a largely touch-only Windows OS work really well.

Ian Too says:

+1. WinRT is really good as long as you're aware it's not a full PC and not intended as one.

Alphageek_UK says:

Agreed. Best tablet I've had (and I have a lot of Andriod variations), perfect for it's intended use.

inteller says:

Apparently the majority of people are stupid illiterates though.

 . . . and being backed by the fastest growing app ecosystem currently on the planet, having spawned over 100,000 apps  in the app store in the first eight months of availability, does not hurt either.  
 
A lot of people are still behind the curve on this, but RT is quickly turning into a force to be reconed with.  Right now the only things holding it back, are price and availability of RT devices.  Both problems hopefully will be remedied this fall with the release of 2nd generation RT product, powered by RT 8.1. 

Dreyer Smit says:

It's 113000 now, so jumped about 10% since then.

Kram Devil says:

I have to agree. Got both my windows 8 tablets from the U.S., they're non-existent here in the PH or they cost 2x as much. No one here will buy a windows 8 tablet if they can't find any or if there are $50 android tablets for sale.
I bet they'll buy one for $200 -$300.

Nik Rolls says:

Especially after they experience that crappy $80 Android tablet ... ;-)

Graven Pshya says:

I can't wait to see what Nokia has to offer in a tablet market!

AlexanderJJJ says:

I hope the Nokia phablet won't be anything above 5 inches. It just gets to big then! :/

xaeryan says:

That's what she.... oh nevermind.

All I heard was mumbling

lubbalots says:

No rear facing camera? That's not like Nokia. No thanks.

Eas195 says:

Not all tablets have the rear camera, if you want to know that, to reduce production cost.

lubbalots says:

Nokia would not let the camera slide on this baby.

lubbalots says:

I think it showed enough to know no camera on rear.

Top right corner is not visible, so it may be there.

Tbonium says:

The lack of a rear facing camera is a feature, not a bug. Why would you ever use it?

No, just throw a better than average front facing camera for video calls, that's something you might actually do.

mondokjm says:

Yes, lets kill this whole "people taking pictures with their tablet" phase of technology. Nothing looks more ridiculous.

lubbalots says:

Today, we live in a "social" world. Everywhere you go, somebody has a camera. A tablet such as the RT fits into that social world. Therefore a camera would be useful. Snap and upload that perfect moment right into FB just with your tablet.

R0bR says:

Or, just pull out your phone from your pocket with a better camera and do the same and not look like a fool.

Tips_y says:

LOL I agree people look ridiculous taking pictures with their tablets... and you're right, we all have our phones with very good cameras so we can use that. But the front camera is indispensable for video chats.

Eas195 says:

Welcome to the tablet war, Nokia, here I come to support you!

PureView tablet, anyone?

mprice86 says:

Absolutely not. People taking photographs with tablets are nothing more than mistakes of nature.

If they made a 7" RT tablet then actually a PureView 41MP camera wouldn't be a bad idea. Not as silly looking as people walking around snapping shots with 10" devices and the camera bump could actually be hidden as there'd be more free space inside the case...

Still, that would be one expensive camera...

mprice86 says:

I love Nokia and Windows 8, but if this is real and it is an RT device it's going to be an unmitigated disaster unless it costs ~$200. Which it won't.

Eas195 says:

I think it will be at 200-400 dollars, but if they want, they can make the Bay Trail one on 8" device for just 200.

bbqrooster says:

It should worth more than $200 without Google's spyware on it.

Why only Windows RT? Make it Pro! I switched to Windows Phone from iOS and Android becuase of Nokia Lumia series then I would probably switch from iPad to Windows tab if this Nokia tablet runs Windows Pro.

procen says:

Nokia might offer both RT and Pro, and I want both. If Nokia will produce an 8" RT it will be great

A RT-tablet would make more sense for Nokia since they are no pc-manufacturer. RT is the natural counterpart for Apple- and Android-tablets. Let's hope RT will attract more app-developers and the user experience will be better with second generation machines. I definetely would buy one.
We still might see a takeover by Microsoft making Redmond the only company producing windows phones and rt-tablets. Others seem to lose interest and could concentrate on the "real" windows.
But knowing Microsoft and its bad understanding of the non-business market this could mean the end of mobile windows ;-)  

rohitsingh says:

By the looks of it, this 'could' be a low budget 199 dollar competition to nexus 7. Probably wrong, but could be.

Kram Devil says:

Oh Gawd, Please let it be so.

Bloobed says:

Looks like 10" from the pics.

gandhule says:

Red Tablet Retaliation!

blackhawk556 says:

If the final version of 8.1 RT fixes a lot of bugs and they use a powerful processor I'll think about this. My Surface RT greatly disappointed me. :(

I partially blame Nvidia for Surface RT's woes. Hell, I even have an Android tab with Tegra 3 inside, and experience some of the same problems with it, as with Surface RT, and Tegra 3 was supposed to have been optimized with Android in mind.

If Nokia is smart, and they are making an RT tablet, hopefully they will stick with Qualcomm as their chip provider of choice.

For my money, I am hoping to get both a Pro and a RT variants out of Nokia. Nokia may not be a PC company, but it would still be nice to see them get out of their comfort zone a little, and try their hand at the PC market. There is always the chance they may wind up designing a device that puts a lot of the PC incumbent OEMs to shame. And that type of shakeup, is the kind driving force sometimes needed to drive innovation in the market. Which will be a good thing in the long term for the Windows 8 ecosystem.

uopjo6 says:

I threw my wallet at the screen.

varanus261 says:

I wouldn't be too concerned, this looks more like a low end strategy, If Nokia are entering tablets they NEED to undercut really low to male them a viable option to consumers. This looks like the tablet worlds 5/620, I expect 3 devices, 2 tabs at 10" and a phablet at 6.3" running wp8. If any one can find and create a mainstream market for RT, its Nokia, they did it in WP, they'll do it in RT.

Tafsern says:

Not so keen on RT...maybe they got a Pro up their sleeve to :) 

A Nokia tabket? Bad idea nokia.

Glrm Master says:

I agree! also, at this point, it really needs to come with something that will differentiate it from the others otherwise it will just be one of the many "also ran" out there... we will see I guess!

Fndlumia says:

Remember those alloy bodied nokias with 41mp size camera hole? Still wanting that beast.

paulheu says:

Windows Phone wasn't really going anywhere untill Nokia got involved, same will happen to RT. Once Nokia starts pumping out their apps like Here suite on RT it'll take off like nothing else.. Perfect unit for car navigation.. for starters..

Now I can start considering an RT Tablet! Hit us with a good price and I'm all yours!

sip1995 says:

If the rumour is true..Nokia will create exclusive apps even for the tablets.

Aleksi says:

naah...the phablet is more interesting. I'm wondering wheter Nokia is planning some unique software additions specially for it. I think the added screen size isn't enough.

eyesoreM says:

I think from now on, leaked images should be snapped on a 1020... unless they're trying to hide something.

Sicarius123 says:

Give us a GPS antenna, FM Radio and Nokia Drive + on this and not only do you have my money, but it'll be replacing my headunit in the car!

bb_gonzo says:

So the pictures were not taken with a 1020?
I would love a Nokia Win8 tablet. Even if it's Win RT, butt why 10.1 inches? I never liked tablets of this size. Make it 8 inches and sell it for, let's say $329 and i could see myslef buying one.

GTA 5 coming out, Nokia tablet/phones, xbox one/ps3 all around the same time. your kiling me (erm my parents lol)

cgk says:

Is it likely it was designed and then cancelled after RT bombed?

Sam Sabri says:

I don't get why people think RT is dead. It's barely getting started. 

Agreed, Sam. I work at a university and people here are gobbling up the RT tablets at the EDU discounted price ($199 for 32GB RT, $249 with Touch Cover, $289 with Type Cover). I've got six co-workers that have bought one, I'm buying another for a family friend and the university bookstore said they've sold "around 250" since the discount offer was made available.
Here's some good reads for those that are on the fence about RT (those that already have their minds made up or just need to spew anti-RT venom need not bother):
http://surfacertreview.blogspot.com/2013/07/please-tell-me-why-windows-rt-tablet.html
http://www.zdnet.com/omg-theyre-using-windows-rt-7000018596/
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/microsoft-surface-really-failure-053054886.html
 
Also, don't forget, MS has the cash reserves to make this a success...they don't need other OEMs to mfr it in order to make it a success...the XBox and Kinect have proven that.

cgk says:

I also work at a university - even with the massive discount, nobody here has purchased one. 

jlzimmerman says:

Bombed?  I remember reading the same thing in 2001 when M$ made the "mistake" of putting their hat in the game arena with that thing called the Xbox.

Alphageek_UK says:

"5-point multi-touch" - isn't 10-point mandatory?

Alphageek_UK says:

"5-point multi-touch" - isn't 10-point mandatory?

nimatra says:

That's not 8.1
It might be the same that was cancelled last year

Ian Too says:

I do wonder why people are inststing on Windows Pro.
Do you really want to have another Norton/MacAffee license to take up valuable processor power.
Surely the point of a tablet is to keep it light and use it to keep in touch, create Word documents etc? You wouldn't want to use it for heavy work, so why do you need Pro?

Why not use the built in Windows Defender? Its really good and native to the OS.

zacman says:

Because Windows Defender isn't the best option when it comes to Day-0 exploits. Plus programs like Norton or BitDefender don't use more resources nowadays than Windows Defender.

You just outlined the exact reason why Windows RT exists. Kudos!!

Kram Devil says:

Now I feel bad about buying a latitude 10e yesterday.  Why oh why did I have to see this NOW?  If only I knew, I would have waited longer *sigh*
I'll get a Nokia tablet next year.

The most intriguing part about this is the type of Windows software that Nokia could write. Especially for x86 if they make one.

saltellezjr says:

So, is this, like, a tablet, or a race car??

dtails says:

If it is an RT tablet, I wish they would make it 7- or 8 inch at the most. This would better allow for undercutting in price, plus the form factor would make more sense. Pro, on the other hand, would work great on a 10-12 inch device. I really want to support Nokia, but an RT and 10 inch combo would make that hard.

brianchau says:

I think Win RT should be for 8" tablet. For 10", it should be Win 8 Pro running Bay Trail. And for 12" tablet, I would like to see it running Haswell.

DJCBS says:

Sorry Pro fans, but I think it makes a lot more sense to release tablets running RT. Nokia isn't looking into entering the PC business so the Pro would be an unnecessary waste of money. Not to mention it would put them in competition with stronger brands in the area such as Asus.
So the RT seems the best option. The only thing needed are Apps... Nokia so far hasn't any. But we all know what happens when they get behind something.

enzom09 says:

What happened to cyan :(. Nokia seems to have abandoned it after the 620 :/.

can we stop calling the a "struggling company"?  They are on the rise, especially when it comes to smartphones. Geez

pkvillager says:

Do not want an RT tablet from anyone unless its $150-200. Acer has set the standard with a full w8 tablet for $299. But I am very interested in the build quality from Nokia on this but I will wait for a full w8.

Nakazul says:

The knights around the round tablet. :P

egperez says:

"The image quality though is too low to discern legitimacy or yield anything really interesting."

I'm not sure what you would consider interesting, but the prospect of a 4G tablet hitting Verizon BEFORE AT&T is interesting to me. Also, consider the carrier's tendency to release red models of phones at launch, such as the Lumia 822. Personally, that adds a slight degree of legitimacy in my own mind. However, I must unfortunately concede that, if the tablet is in fact running RT,it may just be an ill-fated concept. Perhaps this project was the reason Nokia felt so uninspired by the OS and vowed only to release a Windows tablet when RT 8.1 was ready.

theefman says:

No one apart from MS fanboys will buy an RT tablet. Its already been proven that consumers don't want it, its competing in an app world with no apps and Office isn't the draw people would like to think it is. Did they not notice that even Microsoft can't sell the bloody things to the tune of a $900 million loss? Worst decision ever.

enzom09 says:

They also priced it to fail at 499, 599 if you wanted the necessary touch cover. Had they come in at todays 349 and bundled the cover with it....it would have been a different story.

DaiaX says:

AKA Red Comet, Sinanju, FULL FRONTAL.

jfivieght says:

Obviously a pureview was not used to snap these...

cookgoose says:

Another reason why a Nokia Surface clone would be a bad idea is that Nokia has reportedly decided to use Windows RT instead of Windows 8 as the operating system. Microsoft won’t admit it, but Windows RT is a dead platform walking that consumers have avoided and that vendors such as Acer, Asus and HTC have all been fleeing. There are several reasons why releasing a high-end Surface-like tablet would be a huge mistake but the biggest one is that Apple is the only company that has really had success selling tablets in the $500 range. Just think of all the failed $500-plus tablets that companies have launched over the past few years, from the Motorola Xoom to the BlackBerry PlayBook to the HP TouchPad to, yes, Microsoft’s own Surface RT. The only way that new market entrants have made a dent in Apple’s once-dominant tablet market share has been by releasing cheaper, smaller tablets that sell in the $200 to $300 range. Please Nokia stick to the awesomeness of building those high quality Lumia phones.

Pages