Windows 8 VS Apple

Windows 8 with the full Windows desktop will never be an iPad rival. But a version of Windows 8 with nothing but Metro looks like an excellent design for an iPad rival.As Microsoft wraps up its Windows 8 conference in Anaheim, these two sentences provide an excellent starting point for understanding where Apple and Microsoft came from, where they are now and where they are going. .

The new Microsoft operating system announced at the conference is possibly a year away and, with it that far out, there might be no credible rival for the iPad from Microsoft deep into the third generation of the iPad. But the story of Windows 8 isn't about just tablets and touch-screens though. That's just a part of the overall picture. To Microsoft, Windows 8 is about the future of all computers.

How Microsoft chooses to compete with Apple's blockbuster iPad, though, will be key in deciding the future of computers.

Why a Windows 8 tablet wouldn't compete with an iPad

In Windows 8, Microsoft looks to bring a new kind of interface called Metro across all devices. As Gruber points out, Metro is like iOS in that it is a complete rethink of the way people interact with computers. It's a simpler interface designed with touch-screens in mind and developers, whose apps will be sold through Microsoft's version of an app store, will be forced to optimize their apps for Metro in Windows 8 or build new ones from scratch just like on Apple.

The difference is that with Apple you won't see an older app built for Mac OS X running on the iPad while Microsoft is making the decision to provide backward compatibility in Windows 8 for existing apps. With Windows 8, you should be able to install apps you already have, including apps that aren't easily operated by touch, might slow performance or drain battery life because they run in the background all the time.

Those poor experiences is what Apple won't allow but Microsoft might.

To Gruber, it's the Flash debate all over again. Apple restricts content made in Flash because it decreases performance and the apps aren't optimized for Apple gadgets. If Apple allowed Flash apps on iPad when Apple first launched the App Store developers would have been overjoyed because, with Flash, a developer can write one app a single time and it will run on a wide swath of gadgets. For instance, if it costs $200,000 for a company to build a quality app just for iPad that same $200,000 could be spent on a single Flash app that could run everywhere. The upside is a far larger potential audience for the same cost while the downside is significantly decreased battery life and performance on some machines because the app wasn't optimized specifically for particular gadgets.

If Apple had allowed Flash many useful and powerful iPhone and iPad apps would never have been developed. They likely would have been built in the cost-saving Flash language instead, resulting in lower battery life and some poor user experiences.

With Windows 8, Microsoft appears to be joining Apple in restricting Flash.

The reason all of this matters is it relates to whether Microsoft is able to produce a rival to the iPad that can match or beat its price point, app quality, ease of use and battery life.

Gruber, a fan of the way Apple does things, is guessing that a tablet capable of running older Windows apps in that classic desktop interface (the one you've probably used a keyboard and mouse to interact with for decades) will ultimately fail to match the appeal of the iPad. Yes, it might afford a user the ability to bring over software they already use but including that functionality could also cut hours off the battery life of a tablet which should get 10 hours.

At least, that's the theory. It's possible Microsoft could disallow these classic apps on tablets or just on certain tablets.

One Windows 8 tablet might carry USB ports for a keyboard and mouse, connect to a secondary monitor over HDMI, use a fan to cool off the gadget, weigh far more than an iPad and run classic apps.

A different category of Windows 8 tablet might toss the classic app compatibility and the USB ports, just like the iPad, and it would only run the newer Metro apps. Such a gadget could be, in theory, just as light and get just as good battery life as an iPad.

Would a Metro-only tablet version of Windows coexist on store shelves with a Windows 8 tablet that can run classic apps? How would Microsoft market that? Remember also that Microsoft is competing with not just Apple but Google as well and the latter is giving its software away for free.

Why would a tablet manufacturer pay Microsoft to license its Metro version of the operating system when it can use Android for free? Microsoft, which is already promising developers a potential audience of hundreds of millions, needs to corral more and better apps into its Windows Store than Google has made available on its Android Market.

Microsoft could always start building its own machines, like Apple. How would Microsoft's hardware partners feel about Microsoft getting into the hardware business? Then again, the only other choice for software is Google and Google is getting into the hardware business itself by buying Motorola.

Will Windows 8 kill Apple?

Of course not, but that's not to say it isn't possible the upcoming software upgrade could slow, halt or reverse the progress of Apple and Google in threatening to take away Microsoft's supremacy in computer software.

Google, Apple and Microsoft are in the process of building out competing platforms to deliver apps, movies, television shows, games, books, and music across smartphones, televisions, laptops, desktops and tablets.

Meanwhile, ubiquitous Internet connections lead people to use these devices in entirely new ways that demand completely rethinking the way a computer should function.

My punditry: I think it makes a lot of sense for Microsoft to offer a tablet without legacy app support to compete directly with the iPad sooner rather than later. In fact, I think it makes sense for Microsoft to build this tablet itself rather than have a partner do it.

I know I'd be tempted by a tablet that would function as an extension of the Xbox 360 entertainment system, for instance.

But, in the big picture, Microsoft still has to be flexible. The company cannot innovate like Apple – choosing technologies to kill that don't have a future – because it has too many users and developers to transition. Anything too new and innovative from Microsoft runs the risk of sending customers and developers into the waiting arms of Apple and Google.