Microsoft's Surface Book 'tries too hard,' Tim Cook says
Apple chief Tim Cook had some harsh words for Microsoft during a stop in Ireland on Wednesday, saying that the Redmond firm's latest Surface Book -- which competes with both the iPad and the MacBook lineup -- "really succeeds at being neither" a tablet nor notebook.
![](http://photos.appleinsidercdn.com/gallery/14498-10091-en-INTL-L-Atlas-Devices-CR9-00001-RM5-mnco-l.jpg)
"It's a product that tries too hard to do too much," Cook said, according to the Independent. "It's trying to be a tablet and a notebook and it really succeeds at being neither. It's sort of deluded."
Microsoft unveiled the Surface Book, a tablet-laptop hybrid device running Windows 10, early last month. The $1,499 device functions like an ultraportable with the technical specifications of a laptop.
The Surface Book ships with Intel's Core i5 and i7 line of processors, for instance, the same found in Apple's MacBook Pro lineup. It's also available with a discrete GPU in its 13.5-inch form factor, something Apple's smaller Pro does not offer.
Most of that hardware is packed into the display, which can be removed from the keyboard base and used as a standalone tablet.
Apple has repeatedly bashed the idea of touchscreen computers and hybrids, throwing the company wholesale behind the idea that mobile devices should be treated distinctly from PCs. Microsoft has taken the opposite approach, championing a convergence strategy which says that mobile devices are merely a different form factor of traditional personal computers.
This split manifests itself primarily in the companies' approaches to software. Apple maintains separate mobile and desktop operating systems with unique design and interaction paradigms, while Microsoft is attempting to make Windows adapt itself to the device it runs on.
![](http://photos.appleinsidercdn.com/gallery/14498-10091-en-INTL-L-Atlas-Devices-CR9-00001-RM5-mnco-l.jpg)
"It's a product that tries too hard to do too much," Cook said, according to the Independent. "It's trying to be a tablet and a notebook and it really succeeds at being neither. It's sort of deluded."
Microsoft unveiled the Surface Book, a tablet-laptop hybrid device running Windows 10, early last month. The $1,499 device functions like an ultraportable with the technical specifications of a laptop.
The Surface Book ships with Intel's Core i5 and i7 line of processors, for instance, the same found in Apple's MacBook Pro lineup. It's also available with a discrete GPU in its 13.5-inch form factor, something Apple's smaller Pro does not offer.
Most of that hardware is packed into the display, which can be removed from the keyboard base and used as a standalone tablet.
Apple has repeatedly bashed the idea of touchscreen computers and hybrids, throwing the company wholesale behind the idea that mobile devices should be treated distinctly from PCs. Microsoft has taken the opposite approach, championing a convergence strategy which says that mobile devices are merely a different form factor of traditional personal computers.
This split manifests itself primarily in the companies' approaches to software. Apple maintains separate mobile and desktop operating systems with unique design and interaction paradigms, while Microsoft is attempting to make Windows adapt itself to the device it runs on.
Comments
It's not for me, and not for most people--but it has a niche, and I'm not at all sorry to see that niche filled.
For most people, the frankenOS and frankenTablet are not the way to go. Awkward compromises that make a worse laptop coupled with a worse tablet. Weight, battery life, thickness, performance, and UI are all compromised with one another, bound up in the legacy of the past that iOS managed to shake.
BUT... for some subset of the (still large) Windows market, that set of compromises is acceptable and even useful--or they'll just enjoy the novelty for a while and then accept the drawbacks. As a gadget freak, I know that novelty IS fun! (Look at people who drive less practical cars but love the fun of them all the same.) And if the thing turns out to be well-built, it gets some respect from me. Not recommendations to buy it, just appreciation that MS made the experiment and it exists.
There's a lot of features of the SB that just don't make sense. The hinge is a mess, the dGPU option is largely pointless (it's not like Windows is good with OpenCL), and it just keeps coming back to "why didn't they just make the keyboard dock for the SP4?" I know there are some technical reasons, but the Surface Book seems even more niche than people claim the iPad Pro is.
I have a few friends who's company bought them one, they're buggy as hell and crashing constantly. No ports on the tablet portion either, have ti use the keyboard to connect to anything.
I'm gonna assume that those issues can probably be fixed, mostly through software updates
Yeah, MS really missed the boat on the SW for these. I mean, the iPad Pro isn't perfect but the 'issues' are something you fix in iOS X.
Of coarse he did.
I think it's that "tries too hard" that wil get a large enough portion of the MS base that still wants to prove that you can have booth at the same time (read: customers that are "trying to hard" to prove Apple sucks).
Sure he didn't say "diluted"?
Sure he didn't say "diluted"?
Yes. Pretty sure AI heard that wrong. (i.e., heard what they wanted to hear)
I do think it is a bad sign when Apple gives Microsoft free ad space like this, they must be at least a little concerned.
I want a tablet with a touch screen that runs OS X. As has been pointed out in another article at this site, the potential of the iPad Pro is limited by iOS. The iPad Pro looks great. But I think it didn't try hard enough.
When I see the Launchpad on a MacBook Pro screen, I feel like swiping the icons with my finger.
When I see the OS X Dock at the bottom of the laptop screen, I feel like tapping an icon with my finger.
When I am sitting with a MacBook Pro in my lap while reading and holding the lower edges of the screen with my hands, I feel like swiping my thumbs on the screen to scroll the page.
When I see 20 inch or larger touchscreen displays used as POS terminals, library self-checkout, customer registration systems, or company directories in lobbies, the thought of replacing those screens with a 10 inch iPad on a stand looks ridiculous. Even more ridiculous when some of those large multitouch displays are being run by Mac Minis with Boot Camp rather than native OS X. Perhaps people really do see Macs as just empty shells for running Windows.
If Apple implemented Cocoa Touch API and supported external multitouch displays on OS X, developers could create full screen touch applications running on OS X so companies would not have to use PCs or emasculate Macs by running Boot Camp. And they would be able to choose from a greater selection of screen sizes. Makes more sense than asking Apple to make a 40 inch iPad. But I guess it's easier just to blame people for not having better eyesight.