Really? It's not a dedicated laptop. It's not a dedicated tablet. It's a swiss army knife approach to design.
A jack-of-all-trades, but a master of none.
It worked for the smartphone
Really? It's not a dedicated laptop. It's not a dedicated tablet. It's a swiss army knife approach to design.
A jack-of-all-trades, but a master of none.
It worked for the smartphone
What's the tradeoff? Having to deal with:
2lb weight.
More than twice as thick as the iPad.
Probably 1/3 the battery life of the iPad.
Depends on what you are looking for.
I honesting think it's going to be a niche market. $899 is price out of the mass under $500 tablet market and the pc laptop market.
It worked for the smartphone
Exactly, it's in ultrabook territory, but with the advantage of having a tablet format and a wacom digitizer. I'm sure ultrabooks don't sell anywhere near as much as ipads so no the pro won't be a mass seller.
I'm curious if anyone has figures on what percentage ultrabooks make up of computers sold every year?
Time will tell if it works for this thing. Pronouncements by forum users like you and I won't assure its success or doom.
----------
If MS was smart, they'd have shipped it with Adobe Creative Suite, NOT Office, because those creative users who are all about CS and Wacom tablets might bite, despite the high price. I still don't see Enterprise biting.
If MS was smart, they'd have shipped it with Adobe Creative Suite, NOT Office, because those creative users who are all about CS and Wacom tablets might bite, despite the high price. I still don't see Enterprise biting.
Battery life estimates for the surface pro were in the region of 4 hours.
It misses the point. It's a crappy laptop and a crappy tablet.
Surface RT will be more useful as a tablet. They should have put an ATOM in the Pro.
Battery life estimates for the surface pro were in the region of 4 hours.
It misses the point. It's a crappy laptop and a crappy tablet.
Surface RT will be more useful as a tablet. They should have put an ATOM in the Pro.
Its 5 hours which is the same as the MBA11.
Yup.
But the MBA has a real keyboard and real keypad. It's not trying to be a tablet.
Yup.
But the MBA has a real keyboard and real keypad. It's not trying to be a tablet.
People's minds are so closed, "if its not a laptop OR a tablet then its a compromise". As if there can not be an in between because they haven't heard of it....very strange...
For some of us the surface represents a viable alternative. Disregard OS, once your in the application it looks and behaves the same as it does on a MAC.
Even the MBA despite claims of 5 hour battery life, realistically when running photoshop or painter 12 you only get 3.5-4 hours tops.
So yes it's niche, but I remember the MBA when it released and how much Vitriol and utter **** was written about it on these forums, and yet eventually it found it's niche and now represents the cheapest laptop you can get from Apple.
People need to stop being so ignorant all the time....
By that line of reasoning the macbook Air is also a "crappy laptop". Dunno, I loved my macbook Air and the only reason I'm upgrading to the surface is to get a digitizer and the option for a tablet form factor.
I don't fully disagree with you, the Atom CPU's are very nice in the windows tablets. IMO MS should have made the Atom CPU tablets the lower range surface, and the ivy bridge the higher end Pro and the RT should never have seen the light of day. The Pro where it's priced and the purpose it serves is right on IMO, it's the RT that is the glaring screw up.
"The RT Is the glarging screw up"- I've heard this statement made quite a few times and I completely disagree.
If anything, the RT is the true 1:1 competitor to the iPad.
I really see little value in all the x86 apps when they were never meant to run on a tablet. I am not complaining about all the ancient softare that I cannot run on my iPad.
-The RT has the battery life.
- It has true multi-tasking ability with the snap feature to run 2 apps at one time
- It has the unqiue 16:9 aspect ratio.
- It is sized appropriately- as thin as the iPad and about the same weight
- It has the live tiles. Makes IOS look ancient
-The desktop interface is perfect for file management (something that is not possible on the ipad).
-It has expandable storage
-It has the best tablet/hybrid keyboard (iPad cannot compete here)
-It has MS OFFICE for free!
Stop with the crap about how the RT is the screwed up device. Those that have the RT and have used it would strongly disagree.
I on the other hand see less value in the Surface Pro. I would run out right now and get a Macbook Air before I would get the pro. On the other hand, I think the Surface RT is a great companion to my personal macbook/pc, etc.
*My 2 cents and this is from someone who has bought every version of the iPad released to date. I actuall now used both my Surface RT and my iPad mini (for reading)
"The RT Is the glarging screw up"- I've heard this statement made quite a few times and I completely disagree.
If anything, the RT is the true 1:1 competitor to the iPad.
I really see little value in all the x86 apps when they were never meant to run on a tablet. I am not complaining about all the ancient softare that I cannot run on my iPad.
-The RT has the battery life.
- It has true multi-tasking ability with the snap feature to run 2 apps at one time
- It has the unqiue 16:9 aspect ratio.
- It is sized appropriately- as thin as the iPad and about the same weight
- It has the live tiles. Makes IOS look ancient
-The desktop interface is perfect for file management (something that is not possible on the ipad).
-It has expandable storage
-It has the best tablet/hybrid keyboard (iPad cannot compete here)
-It has MS OFFICE for free!
Stop with the crap about how the RT is the screwed up device. Those that have the RT and have used it would strongly disagree.
I on the other hand see less value in the Surface Pro. I would run out right now and get a Macbook Air before I would get the pro. On the other hand, I think the Surface RT is a great companion to my personal macbook/pc, etc.
*My 2 cents and this is from someone who has bought every version of the iPad released to date. I actuall now used both my Surface RT and my iPad mini (for reading)
While I also own the Surface RT, don't you think it would have been better off being an Atom device? There are benchmarks out there with Atom Windows 8 devices that have the same performance and the same battery life. I like my Surface RT but I would have been much happier with an Atom and full windows. At least then I would be able to bind it to AD and get GPOs enforced letting it replace my work laptop.
Thats exactly it. The RT would be fine IF Intel didnt have the Atom which matches it for power/battery pretty equally if not better. Makes me wonder why they went with ARM at all when there are benefits to going Atom such as running desktop apps. I would think there was at least some sort of analysis that went into the ARM decision.
If Intel didnt have the Atom, I would be behind RT all the way.
It worked for the smartphone
Exactly!
I have a surface RT and its already way more productive for me than my iPad in terms of replacing my laptop which I really only use when I need Visual Studio or some odd x86 app.
The surface pro can easily replace my laptop which I have docked to my 26inch monitor anyways. Its way more portable, has awesome pen support and can easily double as a couch tablet for consumption as much as a desk computer for work. Haters gonna hate.
Thats exactly it. The RT would be fine IF Intel didnt have the Atom which matches it for power/battery pretty equally if not better. Makes me wonder why they went with ARM at all when there are benefits to going Atom such as running desktop apps. I would think there was at least some sort of analysis that went into the ARM decision.
If Intel didnt have the Atom, I would be behind RT all the way.
No, the smartphone did not do the same thing. Which smartphone is in a slightly thicker/larger/heavier smartphone form factor but runs a full-featured desktop OS (i.e. Windows XP, 7, 8, Mac OS X, Linux)? That's right, NONE.
Smartphones were built from the ground up to be a different device in both form factor, instruction set/CPU architecture and operating system. The successful smartphones ALL use ARM RISC (reduced instruction set computing) versus x86 CISC (complex instruction set computing) of desktops and laptops. Form factor was also completely different from desktops and laptops. Not to mention primary input source (touch-based versus keyboard/mouse). Operating system? While iOS and Android both derive from UNIX/Linux kernel/core, everything else above that level was completely rebuilt for touch-based input. Smartphones did not try to merge two existing, completely different device categories.
Surface Pro? They are trying to merge two existing, completely different device categories. Tablets, which are ARM/RISC based devices with a slab form factor and mobile OS (iOS, Android, etc.) and laptops/desktops, which are x64/CISC based devices with a laptop/desktop form factor and full-featured OS (Windows, Mac OS X, Linux).
Surface Pro is a Frankenstein of post-PC computing (smartphones, tablets) and PC computing. It's trying to do EVERYTHING and sucking at EVERYTHING when individually compared to the best of that category. It's the jack of all trades and master of none.
In the PC category, it has a pretty terrible keyboard compared to what is available for conventional desktops/laptops. ThinkPad keyboard? MacBook keyboard? What about mechanical keyboard? They are all superior keyboards to the Surface Pro's touch cover or type cover. Mouse? That little Wedge thing was super uncomfortable and I have relatively small hands. Maybe a little kid half my age (I'm 19) may find it comfortable. But not people with adult-sized hands. Desktops/laptops also have better performance, especially desktops. The Surface Pro's CPU is a ULV part. Desktops/laptops all have better performing options available. Graphics? Desktops/laptops all have discrete GPUs if you want that. SSD/HD? 128GB top capacity is pretty small when you can have 768GB SSDs available as options or even larger ones. HD? SSD isn't for everyone. Some people need more storage capacity. Enough said. And for some people, 128GB SSD is too small as well. Battery life? It's battery lasts less than even mid-end ultrabooks that costs much less. So how is the Surface Pro any good in the PC category? It's basically a low-end ultrabook WITHOUT an acceptable keyboard/mouse and TERRIBLE battery life. Let's not forget it also makes major compromises for I/O ports that many ultrabooks that costs much less have.
In the tablet category, it is on the large/heavy/thick end of the spectrum. You have thin tablets like Sony Xperia Z, Apple iPad 4, Samsung Galaxy Note/Tab and others. The cameras on iPad 4 are much better than either of the POS ones found on the Surface Pro (or RT). The screen on iPad 4 and Nexus 10 all are better in almost every way (panel type, pixel density, etc.) than the Surface Pro. Sure it's got a Wacom pen, but so do Samsung's Galaxy Note tablets. The Galaxy Note also has 1024 levels of pressure, which beats the 512 on Surface Pro. Let's add in the fact that almost all of these tablets have better battery life than Surface Pro (or RT) except the Sony one since it hasn't been released yet (I think, I haven't really followed the news regarding it that much). It can't beat any of these Android/iOS tablets in any way (size, pen input, battery life, screen, etc.) except for the USB port it has which is a plus. So it's basically a POS tablet.
As you've probably noticed, I have yet to mention the software side of things. The Surface Pro can run any x86 application. That is a huge plus. But not many of them are optimized for touch input. You can bust out the pen but it's hardly ideal. You can bring your own keyboard/mouse since it's got Bluetooth (I'm assuming) and also a USB port for wireless receiver dongles (like Logitech nano receiver which works for multiple peripherals) but then again, you're trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. You can keep shoving but why not just get a round peg instead? On the tablet side of things, the Windows Store has a pretty anemic selection of apps. Most of them lack terribly in function and some in form. The Metro UI can't do many of the things the traditional UI can. It's also very inefficient in many/most scenarios. Apps on Android or iOS? Already very matured apps since they have existed for many years and developers have been continuously improving on them. Surface Pro (or RT) have a pretty terrible selection of apps as a whole. I did read about the Netflix app being really good and how it can resume a video feed faster while multitasking faster than iOS/Android Netflix app. But that is ONE app. There are 700K and counting apps on Android/iOS's respective app stores and for every one app that is better on Windows Store, there are 100X better ones on Android/iOS. Not to mention many major apps available for Android/iOS is not even available on Windows Store.
The best analogy to sum up my above argument is this:
Smartphone/tablets/post-PC devices are round peg in round hole.
PCs/desktops/laptops are square peg in square hole.
Surface Pro? round peg in square hole.
Surface RT? square peg in round hole.
You can keep shoving as hard as you can and eventually you will get the wrong-sized peg to fit in the wrong-sized hole BUT it's far easier to just match peg with said hole.
No, the smartphone did not do the same thing. Which smartphone is in a slightly thicker/larger/heavier smartphone form factor but runs a full-featured desktop OS (i.e. Windows XP, 7, 8, Mac OS X, Linux)? That's right, NONE.