PC makers hint at feelings of 'betrayal' over Microsoft's Surface tablet - Page 2

Contrary to some people here who think their own needs in some way represent everyone's needs, I do see a place for a netbook + tablet hybrid, even an ARM-based version of it, especially one with Microsoft Office installed.

An iPad is a content delivery platform, and not always an optimal one at that, as the lack of physical controls makes it unsuitable for most kinds of hardcore handheld gaming, and even simpler tasks such as chatting online can be quite unpleasant on the iPad.  It's good to deliver media, but unsuitable for anything else.  Those are areas where netbooks shine, except netbooks usually don't come with UMTS/LTE connectivity, decent cameras, high-definition displays, or GPSes, whereas tablets do.

As a developer with both kinds of needs, I have to carry both an iPad and a MaBook Pro whenever I leave home for extended periods of time (not to mention an iPhone, but I carry that everywhere) when a proper netbook + tablet solution would suit me perfectly.  Unfortunately I've tried many OEM solutions in the past and they all sucked in more than one way such as by lacking mobile connectivity, GPS functionality, using TN screens in devices that are expected to rotate, and relying on crappy resistive touch screens.  Assuming that Microsoft does it right, the Ivy Bridge version of Surface will suit my needs perfectly!

The need for a general-purpose netbook + tablet solution is not restricted to my kind of profile, however.  For example: how many of you use Pages, Numbers, or Keynote on the iPad?  How many of you use Office on the iPad?  I doubt that many of you do, because it's impractical without a keyboard clam shell case.  And what do you get when you stuff an iPad into a keyboard clam shell case?  A netbook + tablet hybrid with a huge battery life!  Problem is, the iPad is not designed to be a netbook; it is very far from behind a general purpose computer; you can't connect a mouse or any kind of game controller to it even if you want to (because the bluetooth HID profile on it is restricted to keyboards); you can't attach external drives to it, so you are always limited to its own storage (and no, the cloud is no replacement, you won't be downloading gigabytes of data through your mobile connection only to watch a movie).  These are all needs that the ARM version of Surface can address!

I'm glad that, for the first time, Microsoft is actually coming out to (at least try to) show OEMs how they expect it to be done.  Will they succeed?  Only time will tell!  I'm not too hopeful, since Microsoft doesn't seem to have what it takes to pull this kind of stunt, but I am not one to underestimate anyone, and I truly wish that they come up with something great for a change, because I need a proper netbook + tablet hybrid and Apple won't be doing it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by digitalclips 


That was my thought too. Google must be now thinking a free OS for PCs would be just the ticket. All they have to do is rip of Windows 7 and give it away for free. Dell et al would be all over it as an option at first then their main OS. Heck if Google can rip off iOS that fast they can probably make a pretty decent copy of 7 and in fact probably make it far better. I suggest 7 as the most likely OS to succeed as a copy since it is really a working XP and what most PC users feel most comfortable with.

There is a big difference there tho.  The phone market had the benefit of not having tons and tons of legacy software.  Let's say Google creates their own non-Chrome OS or even just decides to buy a chunk of Ubuntu and pushes it forward in some major ways.  You would still have the problem that all that Windows software doesn't work and Wine is only so good.  Breaking into the desktop OS market is difficult and likely suicide.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IQatEdo 

My advice to PC makers (because they care about what I think lol) is - stay the course, you'll have the last laugh on Microsoft.  You'll pick up the wreckage that the surface will become and hopefully learn from mistakes made.

That is very good advice!

I posted this on another thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum 

What MS should have done:

 

1) Wait until they had a fully-baked (speced) and demonstrable solution before announcing anything (then announce everything: including price, battery, availability)

 

2) Build minimum "reference" designs to be manufactured (equaled or exceeded) by their OEM Partners

 

3) Offer incentives to their OEM Partners -- such as special advertising $, marketing/distribution $, Windows/Office Software price tiers for these products, sell through MS online and physical stores

 

4) Demonstrate to pundits, observers, consumers, enterprise customers, OEM partners, alike -- that MS and its OEM Partners offer and support the best solutions available.

 

 

...showing everyone that MS has your back and offers the portal to the future

 

....remembering that:  "it takes two -- to Tango"

 

 

...Yeah, that's the way an astute and agile company would parlay their strengths!

 

I'd say in about 3-6 months, lack of pre-orders (pricing, manufacturing, supply chain) will force MS to talk it back and say:  "Heh, heh -- just kidding guys".

Of course, MS will tout this as a positive... something like:

"We've had such extraordinary interest from our customers and partners that we've  decided make the Surface a "reference design" that our partners can implement to satisfy the amazing demand for Windows RT and Windows 8 in the mobile space."™

Then, they'll do what they should have done in the first place.

Soooo...In summary:  Change is uncomfortable.

Ah, if I were a PC manufacturer I wouldn't be too worried about it.  This tablet is okay, but not innovative or threatening in any significant way.  Like Asus or Acer can't make a skinny keyboard cover for their own tablets?  Like Apple or one of it's accessory providers can't or won't have a similar accessory for iPad within six months?

Y'know, when the first iPhone and iPad came out, people were blown away.  Their approach and interface was so novel that the things seemed almost magical.  But a tablet with a keyboard cover?  Really Microsoft?  Really?  Do even you really think that constitutes innovation?
 

My question is this.  Apple created and owns the smart phone and tablet concepts we have today.  Fine.  But what's next?  What's the next Apple product that when I see someone use it, I crane my neck to look on in disbelief?

Time will tell.  I hope.

I bet the hardware manufacturers can be comforted by the fact that their tablets will be covered under the MSFT Plays For Sure system.

Oh, wait, that was for music players with protected files.  And nobody got burned by that.

hammered shit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hexor 

Anybody can wow people with a new tablet when you don't give them the price. I've also already seen confusion in the media between the two tablets. The pro model should have used a completely different name.

I don't understand all the hate for "the Surface" tablets. Honestly, the RT model is lackluster, but the Pro version is a welcome addition to the slate world with its dimensions and full OS(not the usual mobile one which pretends to be full). When Apple releases an OSX tablet then look out Microsoft, but for now all these slates like the iPad(and mini iPad), Fire, and Playbook are still only companions to a PC.

I also find it ridiculous that journalists are using mere rumors to say OEM partners feel betrayed by Microsoft with monday's announcement. It's a niche product reveal that I highly doubt will damper the other hardware manufacturers bottom lines. Might even get some of them to improve their wares, hopefully.

Quote:

Originally Posted by digitalclips 


That was my thought too. Google must be now thinking a free OS for PCs would be just the ticket. All they have to do is rip of Windows 7 and give it away for free. Dell et al would be all over it as an option at first then their main OS. Heck if Google can rip off iOS that fast they can probably make a pretty decent copy of 7 and in fact probably make it far better. I suggest 7 as the most likely OS to succeed as a copy since it is really a working XP and what most PC users feel most comfortable with.

If I remember correctly, Apple has certain rights to Windows XP...  AIR, this was part of a lawsuit settlement or a cross-licensing agreement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maecvs 

I watched the keynote video. It was incredibly sad, and pathetic. There were constant veiled references to the iPad, I laughed when Ballmer talked about the innovation Microsloth has done in the past few years. There was virtually no actual demonstrations of the surface itself. They spent almost all the time talking about the physical characteristics of the unit. "It is only _____ mm wide!" "It has a professionally designed kick stand that goes away." "Look at this venting." ...

It's not sad - it's just another version of the Zune - meaning "soon to be dead" iPad knockoff ... Better MS should take money and burn it in the middle of their parking lot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rmm21 

I don't understand all the hate for "the Surface" tablets. Honestly, the RT model is lackluster, but the Pro version is a welcome addition to the slate world with its dimensions and full OS(not the usual mobile one which pretends to be full). 

The problem is, it'll probably cost the same as an Asus ultrabook, which is a very usable pastiche of a macbook air.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccherry 

That surface has fail written all over it. The well paid reviewers giving that non-demonstrate product high praise are pathetic.

Steve Ballmer can wipe his butt after a number two, show the pro MS trolls his doo doo and they'd write about how goddamn innovative and game changing  that blood and feces soaked piece of toilet paper is.

And how is that any different than what the pro Apple trolls do?

Surface to Air

IMO, one is a firecracker, the other an interplanetary missile.

But according to others, e.g., as opined by our allies at Gizmodo. "Microsoft Surface Just Made the MacBook Air and the iPad Look Obsolete."

Fortunately, (or unfortunately, depending on which side you are on), leave it to Microsoft to build it by the lowest bidders. Something that I wouldn't want my crew to depend their livelihoods on.

I don't think so.  iOS cannot make use of a trackpad.  There are already plenty of keyboards for the iPad.  but there are no trackpads, which makes the combined device VERY different.

They can feel betrayal all they want...its not like they have a viable choice. They're still going to make tablets and PCs. Instead of being pissed off over it, why not go out and create something better than the Surface Tablet. I think its Microsoft who is fed up with these companies trying to create knock-offs at cheaper prices thinking people will buy it instead of designing their own, with better technology and better features. 

/sigh.

Microsoft designs by committee.  Most big companies do.  Or they will actually outsource the design to some high priced design group that is going to get paid regardless of whether the product succeeds or fails.

Apple is the exception.  Jonathan Ives holds the keys to that kingdom.

MS has the opportunity to have a competitive offering here - tablet ids are functionally screens - but that ship is getting ready to sail...

   1.  Naming designation between ARM / nonARM isn't clear.  Nor is the fact that the ARM version will seriously handicap what you think you can do (everyone say 'legacy pc applications' please).  Even if the ARM only ran ONE legacy app at a time, it would be better than the current gig.

   2.  They need to do a better job of motivating the app community to develop something that makes their device interesting.  

As for the PC makers?  Well, MS just threw themselves to the bleeding edge of a market dominated by a behemoth you can't even begin to compete with.  Your days were numbered anyhow.  Focus on displays.  Everything else will just bolt on to the back of that anyhow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by macxpress 

They can feel betrayal all they want...its not like they have a viable choice. They're still going to make tablets and PCs. Instead of being pissed off over it, why not go out and create something better than the Surface Tablet. I think its Microsoft who is fed up with these companies trying to create knock-offs at cheaper prices thinking people will buy it instead of designing their own, with better technology and better features. 

They already do.

... but that's not the point.

ok, odd and all as this might sound, this could be a VERY smart move by MS, in strategy terms, not actual product.

Up to now, MS could never do an 'Apple' on it and produce all the SW and HW themselves. Would cause war. So they had to do the SW only and move into other markets with integrated systems like the Xbox.

Now, they start thinking that maybe Jobs was right and we are starting in the PostPC era, so they see an opening. So they do this. All the other HW guys cry. They can respond with "Well you did try it yourselves and all failed, and remeber most of you tried it with our COMPETITORS product (android) so &^% off and dont take the moral high ground on us."

So they carry this for a few years, watching each desktop maker shrink and buy eachother up until there are one or 2 main ones left who sell Windows... HP will have their own OS and who knows who else will be there. 

So MS will have the entire windows tablet market to themselves for HW and SW, like Apple does. They will sell Windows Licences direct and through the one or 2 big guys left and Windows Mobile through Nokia (effectively making these companies all but subsidarys, to avoid anti trust maybe) Maybe even in 10-15 years, simply buy out the last big guys and make MS a company like Apple.

By then we will have a market made up of Apple, MS, Samsung, HP, Google and a few other tryers. All with their own phone, tablet, desktop (minimal),  cloud, apps and OS's

Your OS of choice will be largely irrelevant, like mobile phones of old. You just decide what one like and suits you. then you are in their ecosystem, but it wont be such a big deal to change due to cloud apps.

The few games and odd apps on your tablet/phone can just be repurchased from the new devices app store. €50 -100 to change SW, unlike years ago, where it would be €500-1000 , if you could actually find the SW on an different platform.

I guess my point is that MS have a legit opportunity now to jump in and control the HW and SW and are taking it. They never had that before.

Call me in 10 years and see if I was completely out. If I was then I qualify for a job in Wall Street ;-)

Quote:

Originally Posted by kustardking 

Why is MS releasing it with two architectures? 

Because they believe that there are two markets. The 'consumer' which is looking for something similar to an iPad. And the 'professional' who thinks the iPad is a toy and wants a real computer. time will tell if they are right or if things are more as you suggest. 

As for the OEMs, I doubt Microsoft ever promised they would never never get into the hardware space, or that if they did they would tell the OEMs ahead of time. In fact I'll bet money they didn't do either. Especially the latter because why tip off the real competition.

As long as they don't do something in some anti-trust way etc Microsoft can do as they want. As for the OEMs all that is left to say to them is 

"Would you like some 

with your 

I think there's no way the Surface will have a battery life comparable to that of the iPad, and when we find out what the battery life is it will make the Surface look like a poor iPad competitor. It's amazing that the M$ presentation didn't once mention battery life. What do they take us for? Journalists?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vaelian 

Contrary to some people here who think their own needs in some way represent everyone's needs, I do see a place for a netbook + tablet hybrid, even an ARM-based version of it, especially one with Microsoft Office installed.

 

An iPad is a content delivery platform, and not always an optimal one at that, as the lack of physical controls makes it unsuitable for most kinds of hardcore handheld gaming, and even simpler tasks such as chatting online can be quite unpleasant on the iPad.  It's good to deliver media, but unsuitable for anything else.  Those are areas where netbooks shine, except netbooks usually don't come with UMTS/LTE connectivity, decent cameras, high-definition displays, or GPSes, whereas tablets do.

 

As a developer with both kinds of needs, I have to carry both an iPad and a MaBook Pro whenever I leave home for extended periods of time (not to mention an iPhone, but I carry that everywhere) when a proper netbook + tablet solution would suit me perfectly.  Unfortunately I've tried many OEM solutions in the past and they all sucked in more than one way such as by lacking mobile connectivity, GPS functionality, using TN screens in devices that are expected to rotate, and relying on crappy resistive touch screens.  Assuming that Microsoft does it right, the Ivy Bridge version of Surface will suit my needs perfectly!

 

The need for a general-purpose netbook + tablet solution is not restricted to my kind of profile, however.  For example: how many of you use Pages, Numbers, or Keynote on the iPad?  How many of you use Office on the iPad?  I doubt that many of you do, because it's impractical without a keyboard clam shell case.  And what do you get when you stuff an iPad into a keyboard clam shell case?  A netbook + tablet hybrid with a huge battery life!  Problem is, the iPad is not designed to be a netbook; it is very far from behind a general purpose computer; you can't connect a mouse or any kind of game controller to it even if you want to (because the bluetooth HID profile on it is restricted to keyboards); you can't attach external drives to it, so you are always limited to its own storage (and no, the cloud is no replacement, you won't be downloading gigabytes of data through your mobile connection only to watch a movie).  These are all needs that the ARM version of Surface can address!

 

I'm glad that, for the first time, Microsoft is actually coming out to (at least try to) show OEMs how they expect it to be done.  Will they succeed?  Only time will tell!  I'm not too hopeful, since Microsoft doesn't seem to have what it takes to pull this kind of stunt, but I am not one to underestimate anyone, and I truly wish that they come up with something great for a change, because I need a proper netbook + tablet hybrid and Apple won't be doing it.

Look at Acer Iconia sales. That'll give you some idea of how the "netbook + tablet hybrid" concept is doing. 

You'll note that it isn't really blowing away consumers. I doubt a clever Smart Cover-with-keyboard will make much of a difference. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum 

 

That is very good advice!

 

I posted this on another thread...

Yes, the partners in all likelihood would have produced excellent products based on a reference specification, probably exceeding it.  I do not understand what MS is playing at by offending their partners.

Lots of very valid, reasonable opinions about how MSFT is going about this and about the product itself. No matter what, at least at this time, it has had the intended effect. Lots of chatter on the street. As much as some may like or dislike the product as we know it right now, we are all still talking about it. That is a positive for MSFT. The question is whether the buzz will continue. Some of this will depend on when more information is forthcoming from MSFT.

I also think one of the reasons for this announcement was to keep consumers/business from going with an iPad or an Android tablet. From a consumer standpoint, I am not sure that will be a success. I think when people want a tablet and have the money or reason to purchase a tablet, they will go ahead and do it. Business/enterprise might be another story. There might be enough in this announcement to freeze some plans to go with an iPad or Android tablet. The IT infrastructure may still have enough sway to try to force at least a consideration of a MSFT tablet with the promise of interactivity with the desktop not available on an iPad. This may also be a bit of a stretch because it will probably take a while for corporate infrastructure to cozy up to Windows 8 or will this be a bit of a carrot to get them to upgrade? Still lots of questions but not a lot of answers because of the vagueness of the MSFT offering at this time.

I am also of the camp that MSFT felt they had to do things this way. The questions I would have is did they try to sit down with Dell and HP and come up with some minimal specs and were rebuffed? Did MSFT let HP and Dell come up with plans of their own and decided they didn't like them and went their own way? Or did MSFT want to do this from the start, thinking they could do the best job and put their best foot forward with this tablet, realizing that if they don't hit a home run with this, it puts them deeper in the hole in their battle with Apple and Google? My guess is the last scenario. The feeling I get from the announcement is that there is a hint of desperation at MSFT right now. Maybe it is because Ballmer has a lot riding on this. If this fails, then I think he will be gone.

HP, Dell and the other PC makers were hung out to dry by this tablet. No doubt about it. I think they were all hoping to come up with the Windows tablet holy grail that would increase corporate profits, pride and visibility. But there is still a way for them to profit from this. If they can come up with a system that interacts with the tablet in a novel way that adds some unforeseen functionality that catches on, that could be a winner. Of course, it wouldn't take long for the copy machines at the other manufacturers to ramp up so the window of opportunity would be somewhat short lived. 

Without a tablet to help drive increased profits for the PC makers, does that mean we will see a round of consolidations in the pc arena? Does Dell cozy up to someone that has their own operating system that they can call their own? Does HP quietly develop for WebOS? Does it make sense for HP and Dell to get together and try to drive WebOS as a secondary system and come up with an ecosystem that is outside of windows? I am invested in Apple and I want them to continue to succeed but I would like to see a company like HP get back to their roots and innovate something nice. My first programmable calculator was one of those HP handhelds many years ago in college and I do have a soft spot for them and would like to see them rise up again.

As always time will tell what will happen but until we see what unfolds, it is fun to speculate(or is it gossiping) around the old server rack.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum 

Then, they'll do what they should have done in the first place.

Fire Ballmer?

This wreaks of the whole Zune debacle.

Zune is introduced leaving PFS partners in the toilet.

Zune has some interesting features but nothing terribly exciting or anything that hasn't been done before.

Zune cannot displace the iPod lineup no matter how superior it might have been considered next to the iPod lineup.

Microsoft basically calls it a night on the Zune focusing on integrating technologies and UI/UX from Zune into WP7.

Surface is introduced leaving W8/Metro tablet/ultra-book partners making their way to the toilet.

Surface has some interesting features but nothing terribly exciting or anything that hasn't been done before. (yes the keyboard cover is interesting but the technology to make a keyboard that thin has been around for a while)

Surface doesn't exist outside of a demonstration and is likely right now still in the bespoke one-off stages of development even though the demonstration model(s) looked quite finished and polished.

Microsoft will market it to consumers but nobody will do a "Surface Release Party". The product will likely sell to Microsoft enthusiasts and techies that abhor Apple because its Apple and are tired of the garbage coming from the Android camp. This assumes that it actually gets produced in sufficient numbers and avoids Microsoft's love of turning interesting ideas into vaporware and never producing anything beyond mock-ups.

Seriously. This is desperation. When Apple reveals a new device or a new OS, they show you all the amazing things said device/OS can do and hint at and show what some developers/accessory makers already have in the pipeline. They already have production pretty much ramped up to full-steam-ahead and everything will be ready in a week or two. Even amidst criticism about the device in those two or so weeks, the sales numbers tell the story. When Microsoft reveals a new device, the demonstration model crashes and everyone on stage ends up with a bit of egg on their face. There's no real timeline in place for production. There's no price range. There's no idea as to what it can really do beyond mobile office/Internet browsing. Nobody gets to really see what this thing is capable of as there's really nothing to show beyond a few tappable items and some text fields. Where are the apps? Where are the games? What will this thing do that Apple's iPad can't do? Or rather, what will this thing do that Apple's iPad can't do that people will actually want to do? This thing has no defined eco-system. It has no defined level of developer interest. If Microsoft can pull all of this together before the Surface comes out, they may have a shot at cutting deep into Android tablet sales. I just don't see it doing anything but maybe a mere dent in iPad sales. If even.

HDMI and USB are nice but the lack of those built-in ports hasn't stopped millions from buying iPads (myself included). So while technically, this thing maybe considered superior to the iPad in terms of specs and hardware...will it displace the iPad? I'm not convinced. A lot of Apple critics are...but they'll buy into anything (even vaporware) that could potentially destroy Apple's lead. So far the only real way Apple has lost ground is when Android does BOGOs up the wazoo. In other words, Microsoft is gonna have to give one Surface away per every unit sold. Profits be damned.

Cue Balmer feverish, sweat-induced-chair-throwing in 3...2...1.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vaelian 

Contrary to some people here who think their own needs in some way represent everyone's needs, I do see a place for a netbook + tablet hybrid, even an ARM-based version of it, especially one with Microsoft Office installed....

Unfortunately, although a "netbook + tablet hybrid" may not be entirely a solution in search of a problem, buying one will be like buying a Crescent wrench to maintain your car: you'll end up with a lot of stripped nuts, skinned knuckles and it just won't work at all for you in some cases.

Quote:

Originally Posted by enzos 

Chrome OS is still an infant (and web-only at present) but, say what you like about their scruples, Google is much, much smarter than MS. If it's in their interests to develop a full PC OS they can and will. Remember Netscape Constellation? It was headed off and killed by MS but Mr Gates was in charge of things then.  

IMO, Chrome OS just shows Google's blinders in the same way as this new Surface hardware illuminates the blinders Microsoft is wearing.  

To Google, everything is a web page, (just as everything looks like a nail if you are a hammer), and let's face it, Chrome OS is at root, just a browser.  Google thinks the web is all there is, and that no more innovation is necessary other than getting more people connected to more web pages.  They don't understand why anyone would see the web any other way.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by island hermit 

 

Fire Ballmer?

The trouble with firing Balmer is that like many corporations in their situation, Microsoft's executives have been purged so many times there isn't any likely person hanging around that can step in and take the CEO's place.  Also, as much as we love to hate him, Balmer actually represents both hope, as well as the days of past glory for Microsoft's board and shareholders.  It's hard to decide to give that up.  

The rational thing to do would be to fire Balmer and do a basic re-organisation of the company as is always done in cases like this, paring off the less profitable areas of the company and the bloat and re-focussing on their core strengths.  To do that however, they have to get rid of all the cool stuff like X-Box etc. and turn back into the most boring software company on earth just making regular old windows (updated each year though) and Office.  They could get a bit of pizzaz back by making Office actually compatible, and by extending it's reach into all the other OS's that they previously eschewed, but that's about it.  

So ... to get rid of Balmer, they have to basically give up on all their dreams of conquering Apple and the greater PC market. 

Not only that, the price of software, especially OS's and productivity software is falling through the floor.  Even if they get back into their core market of software production, they'd have to reduce costs by multiple orders of magnitude just to stay profitable.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by philipm 

I don't understand why the media have been so conned into reporting this as the product that will knock down the iPad. That story has been done so often it's become ridiculous. The only thing Microsoft adds to the game is some hardware innovation that no one really wants.

Clearly you weren't around during the iPod-killer era! I think there was a new "killer" every few months. Unfortunately for every one else, it was the iPhone that ended up killing the iPod.

And then of course came the iPhone-killers. The only phone that has come close to iPhone like sales are the Galaxy phones, which look a lot like the iPhone... go figure.

And naturally, now we have the iPad-killers.

It's not a difficult hack.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by markbyrn 

What's amazing to me is how desperate the general tech media pundits are to tout this PC with a detachable keyboard as new, innovative, and competitive with Apple. Of course the articles typically have Apple in the title and mention Apple in every sentence to ensure they get more hits. The keyboard is a necessity when you're running that metro UI/desktop kluge known as Win 8. No ship date, no price, and the tech pundits are calling it an iPad killer and the Apple loathing goons at Gizmodo think it's a MacBook Air killer too. I'd actually like to see Microsoft come up with a great tablet but this isn't it.

Not to mention that the keyboard doesn't actually work, given that Microsoft wouldn't let anyone type on it.

The reality is that the "surface tablet" Microsoft announced doesn't actually exist. It's an open question whether it ever will exist in the exact form they presented.

PC manufacturers should have banned together long ago to get out of the Microsoft monopolistic funk. Surely, the likes of Dell, HP, Sony, and Acer could have commissioned a new OS that all of them could take part in, and throw MS to the curb. Linux could have also been a project that they could have bought into, and done the same thing. Just a couple of years ago it was reported that the PC manufacturers met with Microsoft to tell them how to make Windows 7, as they knew things that MS did not. Either way, they didn't plot their own course, and stayed the course with MS, so now they are going to pay for it in a variety of ways. 

I like how MS cites peripheral innovations such as the 'mouse'. Wasn't that stolen from Xerox eons ago? DOS was also basically ripped off. This company is the antithesis of innovation, and has a whole host of execution problems. The rubber will meet the road when a real copy of the Surface can be reviewed, and I don't have any confidence in ball sack to launch this thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fishstick_kitty 

Soooo...In summary:  Change is uncomfortable.

Soooo....In summary:  Microsoft 'betraying' its own hardware partners is uncomfortable.

They only have themselves to blame for being a "partner" of Micro$oft.  Micro$oft _always_ stabs their "partners" in the back. Always.  Do these idiot clone makers not keep track of history?  I never understood why the Dells, HPs, Nokia, etc... would ever be a slave to Micro$oft but there are clueless CEOs all over the place.  After the cloners pay the Micro$oft tax, they have pennies left over.  What is the difference between the cloner machines?  there is none.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gazoobee 

 

The trouble with firing Balmer is that like many corporations in their situation, Microsoft's executives have been purged so many times there isn't any likely person hanging around that can step in and take the CEO's place.  Also, as much as we love to hate him, Balmer actually represents both hope, as well as the days of past glory for Microsoft's board and shareholders.  It's hard to decide to give that up.  

 

The rational thing to do would be to fire Balmer and do a basic re-organisation of the company as is always done in cases like this, paring off the less profitable areas of the company and the bloat and re-focussing on their core strengths.  To do that however, they have to get rid of all the cool stuff like X-Box etc. and turn back into the most boring software company on earth just making regular old windows (updated each year though) and Office.  They could get a bit of pizzaz back by making Office actually compatible, and by extending it's reach into all the other OS's that they previously eschewed, but that's about it.  

 

So ... to get rid of Balmer, they have to basically give up on all their dreams of conquering Apple and the greater PC market. 

 

Not only that, the price of software, especially OS's and productivity software is falling through the floor.  Even if they get back into their core market of software production, they'd have to reduce costs by multiple orders of magnitude just to stay profitable.  

I agree... basically, Ballmer is a symptom, he's not the disease.

Just a few days ago Apple had their WWDC keynote, where it was duly noted and complained about, that the 15" Retina MBP is now the sole "Pro" machine offered by Apple, and the 17" would no longer be available.

Here at AI and on some other boards I frequent.... it was stated numerous times how "pros"... to get "real work" done mind you... need all of that real estate and power that only a 17" can deliver. They threatened and vowed many times to leave Apple devices and move on to "????".

So now the "pros" are all going to go out and buy a 10", 16:9 device with lower resolution instead? For north of 1k? Just because of the keyboard/clickpad, mouse... and a battery-powered stylis? Do people really think that they are going to get responsive performance from the Surface Pro?

I'm reading how everyone is taking Angiula at his word, and looking forward to playing Crysis, loading AutoCad, Photoshop, etc. Well I have a problem with the presentation that maybe some others have noticed.

I think the Lightroom demo was faked and a video.

1) LR was opened after an impressive fast USB3 copy of 1 gb worth of pictures, and made to look like it was they that were being ingested into LR. Well anyone that knows LR, also knows there is a dialog field; or at the very least... if the entire desktop is auto-synced, the grid-view would be the first you would see.

2) The LR opening progress-bar never made it past 1/4. While this does happen sometimes with all Adobe software, in this case when the picture came into view, there was a nasty flicker of the screen, and an odd resizing of the window. Just the projector?

3) When Angiula was playing with the trackpad (or mouse) which we couldn't see, and explaining how he was going to adjust something.... nothing happened. In fact the curser never moved.

I've downloaded the entire presentation for posterity sake, and have watched just that passage a few times now because it's so important to a number of my photo clients. Curious if anyone else noticed that.

While I want to believe MS.... and I have potential clients that would love to believe this device is better than an iPad for what they do... why do I have a funny feeling that this could be delayed... and may never even make it to market. Just like the Courier.

No doubt whatsoever...and it was painfully obvious, that those devices on display were only prototypes. No one... whether Sinofski, Angiulo or Panay... who all held it like a platter of fish... and later including the invited guests.... no one really "played" with the devices or were allowed to.

I'm not pointing to some conspiracy... this was all on display... or not as you may have it... for everyone to see.

Last shred of "Amateur-Hour Presented by Microsoft" evidence: it has been noted that on the Surface.com website, there is the disclaimer at the bottom that the actual pictures are RENDERINGS, not photos.

Because MS has done this before... AND has stuck themselves in hot water with their OEMS over this... and that Surface Pro is supposed to launch 3-4 months AFTER the launch of Surface RT.... hmmmm....?!?!

What if the little Lipstick-Piggy never makes it to market? What then? Or even delayed and scheduled to arrive just about the same time as the next gen iPad? Will they push it out unfinished? Wait until after Apple?

Just some, "Get the popcorn... this might be entertaining" guessing :)

We know MS can spin **it with the best of 'em... so what's your thoughts?

That is if anyone is still here....  or... anyone still care????

Quote:

Originally Posted by markbyrn 

What's amazing to me is how desperate the general tech media pundits are to tout this PC with a detachable keyboard as new, innovative, and competitive with Apple. Of course the articles typically have Apple in the title and mention Apple in every sentence to ensure they get more hits. The keyboard is a necessity when you're running that metro UI/desktop kluge known as Win 8. No ship date, no price, and the tech pundits are calling it an iPad killer and the Apple loathing goons at Gizmodo think it's a MacBook Air killer too. I'd actually like to see Microsoft come up with a great tablet but this isn't it.

Actually, when it comes to the press, they always find a narrative context, because it gives meaning to the 'story' they're trying to tell. However, this ends up amping minor conflicts and mistakes into 'stories of the week' which has really started to make me wonder: how much of what we think is going on is spun by the press. Instead of: here are the facts: "Surface specs, no prices, no date, Windows 8, you decide" we get "Microsoft wants to out-Apple Apple and betrayed hardware partners to get it!" Is that what's really going on, or are the press writing another episode of a reality TV show called Microsoft vs. Apple: The Epic Miniseries? I really don't care for the press to tell me what it means, just give me the facts, and let me think for myself. And it doesn't matter whether it's AppleInsider or Wall Street Journal. I mean, the only difference between them is one pays better and spell-checks their content.