That depends on what you mean by 'the tech'. They can totally make the screen, after all they could use the same parameter in terms of ppi as the full sized ones. So display wise, the tech is there.
Now if by 'the tech' you mean the total package with battery etc so as quality of use is more or less equal to previous standards, then no. It's not there. Which is my point. Apple could use said display but it would cost something more important. A rather than diminish use to say they have a spec they compromised and used less than a retina display.
They should've used a new resolution. Stop sticking to 4x resolution, the dev can handle it. Afterall, Android handled tens of different resolutions.
It's not stylus driven, it's multitouch driven like the iPad. The included Wacom powered digitizer is just another way you can interact with the device, and it's something I hope Apple will adopt at some point.
I wasn't talking about the tech... I meant the actual use of the stylus. Earlier tablet PCs had a stylus... but they didn't exactly take the world by storm.
Is the stylus really the reason the Surface Pro is so desirable?
It's funny, many of the earlier opinions that I read were along the lines of "Surface with Windows RT is useless. Wait for the Surface Pro." But, reading the specs of the Pro, I'd say the exact opposite. Surface Pro drags the Windows legacy behind it like a dog with cans tied to its tail, and because of that, it stinks as a mobile device. Who'd want this thing instead of a regular laptop? On the other hand, Surface with Windows RT made a clean break from the past, was much better in terms of power management and had a consistent touch-based GUI. The biggest problems were the price and the lack of apps. IMO what Microsoft should have done was ONLY release the RT model, but at a substantially lower price-point. This would have fueled many more 'curiosity' purchases and helped to create a market for apps that the platform needs. It also would have reduced market confusion and helped to focus developer energy. Also "Windows RT" is a bad name. It should have been something like "Metro OS." This is not a windowed operating system! (Or maybe to screw everyone up they could have called in "Command Line.")
This thing is DOA. MS can't even sell the RT model. The branding is confusing. A laptop trying to be a tablet trying to be a laptop.
The UI is beyond ugly.
Etc., etc.
I can think of virtually no criticism which can't be at least reasonably applied to this ill-conceived attempt at making MS somehow relevant in mobile.
I thought the Surface was released last year. Is this a new version already?
Totally moronic (Are you listening Walt) comparing the Surface Pro, running Windows, to an iPad. That's like comparing a Macbook running OSX to an iPad?
Walt is confused because Microsoft calls it a tablet, not a laptop with a removable keyboard. Which is exactly the intended effect.
Microsoft needed to make this amazing right off the bat. Instead, it's heavy, has no battery life and you have to deal with Windows 8. Maybe the 2nd or 3rd generation will be better but it's going to take Windows 9 for people to turn. Microsoft is in a whole heap of trouble right now.
Im actually really tempted by this device. I like the idea of a device i can keep in my bag (like i do with my ipad) to use in a break at work. Compared to a laptop its still a lot smaller, making this a possability. Unlike the crappy netbooks it also has a decent amount of power, not a huge amount but enough.
The battery life is rubbish but then your left with a question. Do you go RT and have the battery life and a device more like an ipad, or do you make some sacrifices and have full windows. Im a programmer so its a question of, do I want to be able to program on this device? My ipad is thoroughly annoying in that i cant write apps on it. Having a device that is light, can be kept in my bag, that i can actually do work on in my spare time is a huge selling point for me.
I'm wondering though, wouldn't you rather have something like a PC version of the MacBook Air for about the same price as the Surface Pro? With a proper laptop, you have an experience that is designed for keeping your hands on the keyboard, using the touch-pad, etc. With the Surface Pro, you have to switch between touch, stylus and optionally track-pad, and UIs that are designed for a mouse and for touch. It seems like a jumble. Plus, most portables in the MacBook Air category almost double the battery life of the Surface Pro. There's also very little disk space left after the OS has taken it's fill. And there's less expandability and connectivity than you get with a real laptop.
Battery life will be the death of this thing. Unbelievable that Microsoft would think it wouldn't be an issue. But the fanboys are predicting it will drive the iPad out of the enterprise tout suite.
I'm sure at Microsoft, HP, Dell, and others will be using Surface or Surface clones, because they all make those products, but I don't know if Microsoft is going to get much traction in the Enterprise. They haven't so far and these Surface products aren't that much different than the products that have already been on the market.
I guess time will tell, whether people want a separate tablet and notebook, or a converge device like this. My prediction is that the pure tablets will increase in power (e.g. the new 128GB iPad) and not give this type of in-betweener a chance to catch on.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
That depends on what you mean by 'the tech'. They can totally make the screen, after all they could use the same parameter in terms of ppi as the full sized ones. So display wise, the tech is there.
Now if by 'the tech' you mean the total package with battery etc so as quality of use is more or less equal to previous standards, then no. It's not there. Which is my point. Apple could use said display but it would cost something more important. A rather than diminish use to say they have a spec they compromised and used less than a retina display.
They should've used a new resolution. Stop sticking to 4x resolution, the dev can handle it. Afterall, Android handled tens of different resolutions.
I wasn't talking about the tech... I meant the actual use of the stylus. Earlier tablet PCs had a stylus... but they didn't exactly take the world by storm.
Is the stylus really the reason the Surface Pro is so desirable?
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
Not true. There are compromises left and right in the iPad. And Apple admits this.
Uh-oh. That means the iPad is the same as Surface. All about compromises.
Surface Pro drags the Windows legacy behind it like a dog with cans tied to its tail, and because of that, it stinks as a mobile device. Who'd want this thing instead of a regular laptop?
On the other hand, Surface with Windows RT made a clean break from the past, was much better in terms of power management and had a consistent touch-based GUI. The biggest problems were the price and the lack of apps.
IMO what Microsoft should have done was ONLY release the RT model, but at a substantially lower price-point. This would have fueled many more 'curiosity' purchases and helped to create a market for apps that the platform needs. It also would have reduced market confusion and helped to focus developer energy.
Also "Windows RT" is a bad name. It should have been something like "Metro OS." This is not a windowed operating system! (Or maybe to screw everyone up they could have called in "Command Line.")
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Zune.
This thing is DOA. MS can't even sell the RT model. The branding is confusing. A laptop trying to be a tablet trying to be a laptop.
The UI is beyond ugly.
Etc., etc.
I can think of virtually no criticism which can't be at least reasonably applied to this ill-conceived attempt at making MS somehow relevant in mobile.
I thought the Surface was released last year. Is this a new version already?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbsteph
Totally moronic (Are you listening Walt) comparing the Surface Pro, running Windows, to an iPad. That's like comparing a Macbook running OSX to an iPad?
Walt is confused because Microsoft calls it a tablet, not a laptop with a removable keyboard. Which is exactly the intended effect.
“If you see a stylus, they blew it.” - Steve Jobs
That thing is ridiculous.
It's not quite a laptop and it's not quite a tablet. It's worse in both areas, so who the hell would want one?
And who wants a horribly bloated Windows install?
That battery time is a total joke. Plus that thing is not that cheap either, so that leaves out the cheapskate Android people from the equation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
That battery time is a total joke. Plus that thing is not that cheap either, so that leaves out the cheapskate Android people from the equation.
Yes, but the lame battery life really speaks to those Android people.
Don't worry, folks. When the British wake up, they'll fill these forums with flowing praise for Surface, and Windows. They always do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
I thought the Surface was released last year. Is this a new version already?
Yes. This version runs on an Intel chip and runs legacy Windows software. The other tablet can't run the old Windows software.
The battery life is rubbish but then your left with a question. Do you go RT and have the battery life and a device more like an ipad, or do you make some sacrifices and have full windows. Im a programmer so its a question of, do I want to be able to program on this device? My ipad is thoroughly annoying in that i cant write apps on it. Having a device that is light, can be kept in my bag, that i can actually do work on in my spare time is a huge selling point for me.
Hi Tim,
I'm wondering though, wouldn't you rather have something like a PC version of the MacBook Air for about the same price as the Surface Pro? With a proper laptop, you have an experience that is designed for keeping your hands on the keyboard, using the touch-pad, etc. With the Surface Pro, you have to switch between touch, stylus and optionally track-pad, and UIs that are designed for a mouse and for touch. It seems like a jumble. Plus, most portables in the MacBook Air category almost double the battery life of the Surface Pro. There's also very little disk space left after the OS has taken it's fill. And there's less expandability and connectivity than you get with a real laptop.
As an example the Toshiba Portege:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2410357,00.asp
Costs less than the Surface Pro, and gives you 8 hours battery life.
Ah. So Windows, but not Windows Windows. Got it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp
Battery life will be the death of this thing. Unbelievable that Microsoft would think it wouldn't be an issue. But the fanboys are predicting it will drive the iPad out of the enterprise tout suite.
I'm sure at Microsoft, HP, Dell, and others will be using Surface or Surface clones, because they all make those products, but I don't know if Microsoft is going to get much traction in the Enterprise. They haven't so far and these Surface products aren't that much different than the products that have already been on the market.
I read that it has a fan?
I guess it has to have one for the Intel chip, but having a fan inside a tablet doesn't exactly sound like a great idea.
I guess time will tell, whether people want a separate tablet and notebook, or a converge device like this. My prediction is that the pure tablets will increase in power (e.g. the new 128GB iPad) and not give this type of in-betweener a chance to catch on.
Odd that it doesn't come with Office.