By the time is gets to you, Android is no longer Open. It has Open components but so does iOS and these show no discernible benefit to the customer. In fact the ‘Openness’ of Android is the reason for its poor design & integrity.
Since the Surface Pro can function as a switch hitter -- either as a tablet or a laptop, then shouldn't the cost comparison been against the total cost of both the iPad Pro + the MacBook? $1,600 vs $2,950?
But, hopefully Apple fixes that with iOS 13 by opening up the cursor/mouse function to let the iPad switch hit too.
The portmanteau of “switch hitter” is “shitter” and nobody wants one of those. It would be an unfair comparison too; two products which ace their respective categories vs one which addresses neither well.
I think you've imbibed too much Apple marketing. Those two products you say ace their categories are IMHO extremely limited. The iPad is crippled by iOS and the MacBook is, we'll, just an expensive crippled laptop.
The surface runs a full desktop OS and is compatible with the user's professional software suite but in tablet from. This is actually what we want not a Fisher Price OS running pseudo professional apps.
iPads are superb for casual use cases and consumption of media but if you're in the business of creating media then the Surface is a much better choice. iOS/iPadOS is years away from being a suitable replacement for desktop level applications. Look at all the garbage in the App store after all these years you can count the number of quality desktop level Apps on one hand.
I honestly don’t understand why on an Apple website we all too often get reviews of and comparisons to Windows or Android. I read Apple news for Apple news. There are plenty of blogs and reviews sites for the other products. If I want to learn about those products I know where to look.
It’s hard to evaluate any system or device in isolation. As a part-time historian I liken it to trying to evaluate US tanks from WW2 without comparing it to tanks from other countries like Germany and the USSR. It’s not possible to understand how good or bad the Sherman is without comparing its strengths and weaknesses to a Panzer IV or T-34.
There are actually a couple of good links that I recommend;
"Why the Sherman is as it was"
The essence of the first link is that every single tank built in the West had to be shipped to the combat zone. With the exception of North Africa, Germany had the benefit of rail transport for moving its tanks into battle, as did Russia, and Japan essentially had the same problem as the West, having to ship every armored vehicle to the combat zone.
The essence of the second link, is that the U.S. created a highly efficient production system for a very small number of armored vehicles types, albeit there were many variations produced. Interestingly enough, many of the Russian tank factories were designed by a depression era architect from the U.S, and hence, Russia also had a relatively small number of armor vehicle types as well. Russia was most concerned with reducing cost to field as many armored vehicles as fast as possible, given the short lifespan of armored vehicles in the field.
The Germans, on the other hand, had a number of armor vehicle types, built in a less efficient production system, and with many variations, with generally poor reliability in the field. Tank on tank, Panthers and Tigers had a huge advantage (including the Stug), but combined arms from other artillery, anti-tank guns, and specialized anti-tank armored vehicles for the most part gave the West the advantage late in the North African Campaign, which they would carry through to the end of the war, excepting a few periods during the Italian Campaign, and the first weeks of the Normandy invasion, when Allied tank losses were quite high.
I should note that the West were almost 100% mechanized, and had plentiful supplies of fuel, and oil production, while Germany always had to rely on rail transport or horse drawn wagons for its logistics, primarily due to its limited stores of fuel beginning even at the time Operation Barbarossa. Germany's failure to capture the Caucasus oil fields in 1942 doomed them.
Since the Surface Pro can function as a switch hitter -- either as a tablet or a laptop, then shouldn't the cost comparison been against the total cost of both the iPad Pro + the MacBook? $1,600 vs $2,950?
But, hopefully Apple fixes that with iOS 13 by opening up the cursor/mouse function to let the iPad switch hit too.
The portmanteau of “switch hitter” is “shitter” and nobody wants one of those. It would be an unfair comparison too; two products which ace their respective categories vs one which addresses neither well.
I think you've imbibed too much Apple marketing. Those two products you say ace their categories are IMHO extremely limited. The iPad is crippled by iOS and the MacBook is, we'll, just an expensive crippled laptop.
The surface runs a full desktop OS and is compatible with the user's professional software suite but in tablet from. This is actually what we want not a Fisher Price OS running pseudo professional apps.
iPads are superb for casual use cases and consumption of media but if you're in the business of creating media then the Surface is a much better choice. iOS/iPadOS is years away from being a suitable replacement for desktop level applications. Look at all the garbage in the App store after all these years you can count the number of quality desktop level Apps on one hand.
Wish I had your drugs.
Despite the “full OS” you give Surface credit for but not MacBook, what serious work will be done on a rinkydink Windows laptop? “Uhhh Excel”...“Uhhh Photoshop”...
iOS is awesome iPadOS is even better. I run iWork, Office, email, and have run the admin side of my business on iPads just fine. For actual development I use my 27” 2011 iMac, or my MBP. Trotting out the old “But but but it’s just for CONSUMPTION!” troll trope just means you’re either ignorant or inexperienced on the tools. Likely both.
Windows kills it. It takes too many clicks to do something. Too logical and boring. This adds up in the long run. Creates more stress for humans working in office.
Since the Surface Pro can function as a switch hitter -- either as a tablet or a laptop, then shouldn't the cost comparison been against the total cost of both the iPad Pro + the MacBook? $1,600 vs $2,950?
But, hopefully Apple fixes that with iOS 13 by opening up the cursor/mouse function to let the iPad switch hit too.
The portmanteau of “switch hitter” is “shitter” and nobody wants one of those. It would be an unfair comparison too; two products which ace their respective categories vs one which addresses neither well.
I think you've imbibed too much Apple marketing. Those two products you say ace their categories are IMHO extremely limited. The iPad is crippled by iOS and the MacBook is, we'll, just an expensive crippled laptop.
The surface runs a full desktop OS and is compatible with the user's professional software suite but in tablet from. This is actually what we want not a Fisher Price OS running pseudo professional apps.
iPads are superb for casual use cases and consumption of media but if you're in the business of creating media then the Surface is a much better choice. iOS/iPadOS is years away from being a suitable replacement for desktop level applications. Look at all the garbage in the App store after all these years you can count the number of quality desktop level Apps on one hand.
In your Humble ill-informed Opinion apparently. IMHO (of using the above professionally) you should trade your reading for using then form an opinion. As a daily Windows 10 & MacOS user myself, you give the former far too much credit. If you want a Fisher Price OS, look no further than the ‘mighty’ Win10 which still draws critical dialog boxes behind active Windows (a real OS like macOS solved this nearly two decades ago) and using an emailto: link sends the system modal. iOS/macOS never made that mistake. Windows also requires gobs of resources just to respond let alone do anything, Surface is a slug. We’re an MS365 shop and iPad Pro makes a fully functioning client with far less hassle than any Win10 PC and it has real TouchUI which, if you can break away from Windows practices, provides few info mgt compromises. Wrong blog buddy.
Since the Surface Pro can function as a switch hitter -- either as a tablet or a laptop, then shouldn't the cost comparison been against the total cost of both the iPad Pro + the MacBook? $1,600 vs $2,950?
But, hopefully Apple fixes that with iOS 13 by opening up the cursor/mouse function to let the iPad switch hit too.
iPadOS 13 opens up cursor/mouse functions. It is currently rudimentary, but should be enough to ease the problem of using a keyboard for writing without having to lift your fingers up to the screen, which should finally make word processing on an iPad actually work well enough. I doubt it will allow for keyboard/mouse interactions in game play anytime soon, as the iPad is still very much a touch-oriented device with mouse/touchpad interaction added for limited uses.
Windows kills it. It takes too many clicks to do something. Too logical and boring. This adds up in the long run. Creates more stress for humans working in office.
Windows is better in one aspect: sensible use of the right mouse (context) button.
Comments
The surface runs a full desktop OS and is compatible with the user's professional software suite but in tablet from. This is actually what we want not a Fisher Price OS running pseudo professional apps.
iPads are superb for casual use cases and consumption of media but if you're in the business of creating media then the Surface is a much better choice. iOS/iPadOS is years away from being a suitable replacement for desktop level applications. Look at all the garbage in the App store after all these years you can count the number of quality desktop level Apps on one hand.
"Why the Sherman is as it was"
The essence of the first link is that every single tank built in the West had to be shipped to the combat zone. With the exception of North Africa, Germany had the benefit of rail transport for moving its tanks into battle, as did Russia, and Japan essentially had the same problem as the West, having to ship every armored vehicle to the combat zone.
The essence of the second link, is that the U.S. created a highly efficient production system for a very small number of armored vehicles types, albeit there were many variations produced. Interestingly enough, many of the Russian tank factories were designed by a depression era architect from the U.S, and hence, Russia also had a relatively small number of armor vehicle types as well. Russia was most concerned with reducing cost to field as many armored vehicles as fast as possible, given the short lifespan of armored vehicles in the field.
The Germans, on the other hand, had a number of armor vehicle types, built in a less efficient production system, and with many variations, with generally poor reliability in the field. Tank on tank, Panthers and Tigers had a huge advantage (including the Stug), but combined arms from other artillery, anti-tank guns, and specialized anti-tank armored vehicles for the most part gave the West the advantage late in the North African Campaign, which they would carry through to the end of the war, excepting a few periods during the Italian Campaign, and the first weeks of the Normandy invasion, when Allied tank losses were quite high.
I should note that the West were almost 100% mechanized, and had plentiful supplies of fuel, and oil production, while Germany always had to rely on rail transport or horse drawn wagons for its logistics, primarily due to its limited stores of fuel beginning even at the time Operation Barbarossa. Germany's failure to capture the Caucasus oil fields in 1942 doomed them.
Despite the “full OS” you give Surface credit for but not MacBook, what serious work will be done on a rinkydink Windows laptop? “Uhhh Excel”...“Uhhh Photoshop”...
iOS is awesome iPadOS is even better. I run iWork, Office, email, and have run the admin side of my business on iPads just fine. For actual development I use my 27” 2011 iMac, or my MBP. Trotting out the old “But but but it’s just for CONSUMPTION!” troll trope just means you’re either ignorant or inexperienced on the tools. Likely both.
If you want a Fisher Price OS, look no further than the ‘mighty’ Win10 which still draws critical dialog boxes behind active Windows (a real OS like macOS solved this nearly two decades ago) and using an emailto: link sends the system modal. iOS/macOS never made that mistake. Windows also requires gobs of resources just to respond let alone do anything, Surface is a slug. We’re an MS365 shop and iPad Pro makes a fully functioning client with far less hassle than any Win10 PC and it has real TouchUI which, if you can break away from Windows practices, provides few info mgt compromises.
Wrong blog buddy.