danvm

volcan said:

rbonner said:

I think it is funny that they use the branding when describing the failure. Thinking since they are sponsors they would not use the term "Microsoft Surface" and "Fail" in the same sentence.

Microsoft apparently failed to verify that the NFL technicians were providing adequate redundancy as part of the sponsorship contract. The MS solution failed regardless of who, what or why.

A system this important, that could actually affect the outcome of the game, should have multiple layers of redundancy.

Microsoft apparently also failed to pay off CBS in order to make sure that any potential failure was not shown or reported on TV.

liquidmark said:

danvm said:

I suggest you go to Apple forums, and you'll see the long list of problems users have with Apple devices.

So far, the list of problems on the iPad are a trickle compared to the torrent of complaints concerning the surface line. Especially when you consider that the iPad has an install base of over 200 million units.

rogifan_old said:

tmay said:

I'm thinking that Apple waited until they had a processor developed that could give them the performance that they needed to created a larger "Pro" iPad, which had likely been on Apple's roadmap for the last 5 years.. But you should stick with your story.

Sadly, MS fucked up the Surface rollout so badly that they likely lost the mobile tablet market. But hey, look at our hybrids! Sure, we're cannibalizing laptops, but it's not like it's zero sum for us! We're making billions!

Check out the forums on windowscentral.com. Both Surface Pro 4 and Surface Book are mired with issues. 

foggyhill said:

cash907censored said:

Just as embarrassing as the meltdown and ensuing scandal that was the big iPads in every classroom push with LA Unified, except those were children and this was a bunch of millionaires running into each other. Funny how things work out sometimes, huh?

Did Apple pay for that? No.

The embarrassment was for the people who made the decision in the LA schools district; not Apple. 
They sold more than a 100 million tablets after than happen? IT will take 10 years for MS to sell that many laptops, maybe more now... 

You do know also that this happen on live TV before tens of millions of spectators? That's a big higher profile don't you think.

larryjw said:

Well, I don't know anything about what software was being used on the surface, nor anything about the servers, nor who is responsible for running the software, the servers, or the networks. And I don't know what components of this system failed. But it doesn't seem anyone on this thread knows either because everyone was taking in general terms not specific, and there seems to have been a lot of assumptions made about the sources of the failure. But anyway you cut it, it's a black eye for the Surface and Microsoft and a dumb move on their part regardless. For example, it would be highly unlikely Rogers would throw a computer he found valuable to the ground in disgust. Even though it was disgust in himself and the Surface had nothing to do with it, it showed how little the Surface meant to him. He didn't care. He and the team and the league forced him to use it when it may, and it likely was not the choice of sideline computer he or his team would have made. My guess is the team would be using iPads (why else would MS have to pay the league to force them to use the Surface in the first place). My guess also is Rogers would have not pitched an iPad which he and the team had chosen to use -- they would take ownership of that device and treat it with some respect. The image of an MVP throwing your product to the ground like common trash is an awful image.