Weighing in on Surface Pro Pricing

Surface Pro looks solid, but it may be too expensive for what it is

I’ll say this much for Microsoft: For a company that couldn’t get any attention at all for several years there, its Surface devices have generated an unprecedented amount of attention, buzz, and controversy. We’ve been debating various aspects of both Surface models since their June introduction, and this week’s pricing announcement for the Surface Pro has triggered yet another round.

There’s a lot of debate and discussion when it comes to the Surface. Today, I’d like to just address pricing.

Microsoft revealed yesterday that Surface with Windows 8 Pro, which will ship in late January via the Microsoft Store as well as third party retailers, will cost $899 or $999, depending on the version. (You can read more in Microsoft Reveals Surface Pro Pricing.) These new devices are the high-end complement to the Surface with Windows RT, which costs $499 to $699 depending on the version.

I previously described Surface RT pricing as too high, arguing that these machines should undercut iPad pricing in order to be competitive. (Apple’s iPad runs from $499 to $829 depending on the version.) My rationale there was simple: The iPad was too expensive to begin with, as proven by competing tablets like the Amazon Kindle Fire HD 8.9 ($299) and Google Nexus 10 ($399). Plus, Microsoft’s device is a big risk for consumers, as it runs an unknown and unproven OS (Windows RT), and is backed by a new and unproven content ecosystem that may or may not ever be truly competitive.

Those who disagreed with this assessment argued that the Surface RT’s higher pricing was justified by its inclusion of Microsoft Office and, on two of the three versions, a Touch Cover, which sells separately for $119. These are fair points, but again, I feel like these two features are just baseline arguments for getting a Surface rather than an iPad or Android tablet and that the newness of the Surface OS and ecosystem demand lower pricing.

Surface Pro is, of course, a different animal.

Microsoft hinted back in June that Surface Pro would cost about as much as an Ultrabook. And on the face of things, it does: The high-end version, with its 128 GB of solid state storage, hits what is currently the high-end pricing of $999 for the typical Ultrabook.

It’s too expensive.

Neither of the two Surface Pro tablets come with a Type or Touch Cover. So the actual minimum prices of these devices is at least $1029/$1129. Ultrabooks come with real keyboards, so you could argue that the actual price is $10 higher in each case (for the Touch Cover), but whatever.

Ultrabooks also come with larger screens. 13-inches is standard, and the machine I currently use has a larger 15-inch display. While preferences are indeed personal, my attempts to use an 11-inch Ultrabook-like machine a few years back were disastrous. I can’t imagine returning to such a tiny screen, like the one that is used by Surface. And with its high resolution (1920 x 1080), onscreen items in desktop mode are going to be tiny.

Ultrabooks typically get great battery life. According to Laptop Magazine, the average battery life for ultraportable computers today is 6 hours and 20 minutes. But Microsoft admitted this week that Surface Pro would only get “half” the battery life of Surface RT. According to that same publication, Surface RT gets 7 hours and 43 minutes of battery life. So Surface Pro could come in at under 4 hours of battery life. That’s not just bad, it’s unacceptable, especially when you consider that the battery is not user replaceable. (That 15 inch Ultrabook I use gets well over 7 hours of battery life too, by the way.)

It’s too expensive.

Discuss this Article 64

mmaestro
on Nov 30, 2012

Disagree. I think it's competitive. What I don't think it is is mainstream: this is something only a small number of people are going to want. It's about the same range as convertible Ultrabooks in price, which tend to be a few hundred dollars more expensive, and I quite like 1080p small screens (I'm currently using an XPS 12 as my daily driver, and I like it a lot even with a small 1080p screen). The pen's included which isn't the case with most tablets (I'm looking at you, Thinkpad Tablet 2 and Latitude 10) which is a nice bonus, too. The battery life is unfortunate, to be sure, but apart from that I think it remains a great product.

plantagenet
on Nov 30, 2012

The battery life point I think is the most important one you make. The advantage of tablets is there high battery life vs a vie ultrabooks and computers. You are willing to put up with the limitations of screen size etc because compared to your phone it is better in all those areas and compared to an ultra book you get the battery life. Hence tablet devices occupy a nice middle territory that makes the device very appealing.
I held out a lot of hope for Surface RT as a potential business device on launch but as soon as I saw limitations not being able to get our SSL vpn client to work on it and not being able to add to a domain I had to dismiss for our company as a possible solution. The hope was in the pro but now hearing it has extremely poor battery life we are again back to an impasse....
What makes this all the worse to comprehend is why apple in this one area is so much farther ahead. A 15 inch MacBook with retina display is getting just over 8 hours of battery life and the same on its smaller 13 inch sibling. If you have no power these devices are just paper weights. This is all the more painful for me as I have top level execs that are pushing for Macbooks just for a device that will cover them on there flights from US to Europe. I had hoped this was going to be the surface pro :(

AnOldAmigaUser
on Nov 30, 2012

You might want to look at the Lenovo IdeaTab Lynx (http://www.lenovo.com/products/us/tablet/ideatab/lynx-k3011/)...when it is released.

I think it is a Clover Trail based (certainly ATOM based) and is rated at eight hours as a tablet, and sixteen hours with the battery in the keyboard. Being a Lenovo, the keyboard should be decent.

SteveCr48
on Dec 1, 2012

Thanks, @AnOldAmigaUser! It's hard to keep up with everything that Lenovo has in the pipeline. I've been looking at the Thinkpad Tablet 2. The Lynx looks pretty cool.

Sothryn
on Dec 2, 2012

I like what Lenovo is doing with the tablets/laptops, but be careful to check the full specs: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows/compare

As you can see from this URL, the Lynx only runs the basic Windows 8, not Pro.

Checking the Windows specs show that, in order to join a domain as specified by the previous user, you need to have Windows 8 Pro: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows/compare

Important rule: make sure you know what you're getting and make sure you're getting what you need.

AnOldAmigaUser
on Dec 3, 2012

Good point, I had missed that.
On the other hand, if @plantaganet wants to use these for execs, then my guess is that they can be purchased with pro for and additional price, or he can install pro on them. We always rebuild machines with our own image here.

Nine54
on Dec 2, 2012

100% agree. What MS apparently can't get its head around is how mobility drives the tablet space. Battery technology still isn't where it needs to be for us to be completely untethered, which is why any battery life variance between products draws so much attention. What value is a tablet that, at best, gets comparable battery life to an ultrabook? MS must've done some research and learned that people typically use their tablets in the same one or two places--not far from power--and, on average, don't need their tablet to last longer than 4 or 5 hours. The problem is, there's a mindset battle here that Apple keeps winning with its "no compromises" approach to display tech, battery life, and ecosystem--qualities users prioritize. If MS were marketing these devices for business/enterprise use, it'd be one thing; but, it keeps targeting consumers with products that get close but miss the mark in a couple key areas.

IMO, MS's missed opportunity continues to be Xbox (same goes for Sony and Playstation). I think it's an installed user base and ecosystem that MS fails to prioritize and target in its products and marketing. MS's tablets, and to some extent WP8, should include some cool, *meaningful* Xbox integration so that they are *the* devices for gamers or anyone with an Xbox investment.

richfrantz
on Nov 30, 2012

899 and 999 + 119 = 1018 and 1118

I agree it is a bit overpriced, but not too much. They should include the Touch Cover at least at these prices.

Also, isn't it MS stated position that the Surface devices are halo devices and not necessarily supposed to be successful sellers? I don't really agree with that, why go through all the development/test/build effort and then tell people you don't care if they don't sell in volume. But it works for Ferrari, so what do I know.

G48
on Nov 30, 2012

Maybe. The MacBook Air gets four hours of battery life and costs 200 more than the Surface Pro - and lacks the tablet capabilites.

I get about 8-9 hours out of my Surface RT, and with the desktop at 125% scale the 10.6" screen is extremely usable. In fact I just finished writing a 100 page technical manual containing lots of diagrams and images while on the road.

I've even been experimenting with connecting a 24" screen via a microHDMI to HDMI cable , and using a four port mini USB hub for mouse, keyboard, and wired Ethernet adaptor. With remote desktop running the RT turns into a great low cost thin client with awesome pick up and go ergonomics. I can't see how a dock is much faster than connecting two cables to the side of the device.

Only thing missing is vpn support and support for something other than those horrible capacitive sausages. Surface Pro has those things out of the box. If it can hit five hours I'm sure it has a bright future in the business world.

ShameerMulji
on Nov 30, 2012

"The MacBook Air gets four hours of battery life and costs 200 more than the Surface Pro - and lacks the tablet capabilites."

The only thing correct about this statement is that the MB Air lacks tablet capabilities. The rest is wrong. You can pick up a 13.3" MBA with 4GB of RAM and 128GB HD (including keyboard) for $1,199. The battery life on this is rated at up to 7 hours. And Apple is generally good about their battery life estimates so you can definitely expect to get close to that.

saqrkh
on Nov 30, 2012

I think it's too expensive, but for a different reason... It's beyond most people's budget, and will only cater to the market capable of affording it. And with that market, they may settle with - as you've stated - other options that either offer more performance, better styling, more established branding (Apple) and mature eco-systems (especially those already tied into Apple).

Having the best product possible isn't always the best way to take market-share. Sometimes, being good isn't good enough, and Microsoft needs to learn that again. I said it again because in the past Microsoft succeeded by not necessarily being the best (in design and performance), but by being the best option for most people.

I'll still get a Pro... It fits my requirements, and I can afford it. However, most interested consumers will probably be put-off by the price, and that goes against offering the best option to most people.

At the very least Microsoft should consider a Core i3-powered Surface, and price it at $499 - whilst pulling Surface-RT to $349.99 or even $299.99. Sure, these are tight margins, but if one thought about it, MS could potentially make its revenue off unnecessary but "must have" accessories, e.g. Surface branded desk docks, styli, USB keys and micro-SD cards, sleeves, etc.

sportflier
on Nov 30, 2012

I get the impression all of the manufacturers have hedged the value proposition of new Windows 8 devices a bit on the high side.

dave
on Nov 30, 2012

I do sometimes wonder what Microsoft are smoking when they cough up prices like this.

We were debating the pricing this morning in the office, and came to the same conclusions - simply too expensive for what you're getting.

I have a £600 ultrabook with a 6 hour battery and keyboard. Why would I want to pay more for less? Apple can do it, but MS are. not. Apple!

G48
on Nov 30, 2012

One thing you failed to mention is that a Surface Pro with Type Cover weighs 2.5 lbs. That's a full pound or more lighter than the competition, and it has pen and tablet capabilities to boot.

Surface Pro looks like it blows away the MacBook Air on price, specs and features. At $1000.00 including type cover in my opinion it's priced to become a winner.

Jim
on Dec 5, 2012

MBA weighs 2.38 lbs

bdegrande
on Nov 30, 2012

Actually, you are $100 low on the prices with covers, it should be $1029 or $1129 (or optionallly $10 higher), I also think I read that the Pro, unlike the RT tablets, doesn't include Microsoft Office.

I don't get it. I think almost anybody would be better off with an ultrabook or a MacBook Air in the same price range - they are not even much heavier, but have better keyboards, screens, etc. Maybe if there were a 3G/LTE version, that would be a compelling reason to buy a tablet, but unless you are really in love with a particular touch-based application, I don't think this makes a lot of sense at this price point.

kjblank
on Nov 30, 2012

Luckily the only x86 applications I'll need when traveling will likely be something in the office suite are some of the other standard legacy apps (like notepad) that are included in the Surface RT.

I'm loving the RT, and the app ecosystem is proving to be more than adequate for me. All-in-all, I'm happy with my Surface RT.

The big bonus that I don't think is getting much play is the idea of buy once and install everywhere. This works cross platform from Windows 8 on a desktop to the Surface RT. For example, I bought Angry Birds Star Wars on my Surface RT. When I went to my Desktop (which I have a touchscreen monitor), I could download the same game without paying for it again. I decided to test this further and went on my Windows 8 HTPC and try it out. I could download it again.

I don't know if there is a restriction on this. But it is a nice feature. You can't buy iPad apps and then use them on your MacBook? This feature also allow me to have a close to the same experience whether I'm on RT or my Desktop.

Sothryn
on Dec 2, 2012

The restriction is that you can put the same app on up to 5 devices. That's plenty for me.

jsclmedave
on Nov 30, 2012

Agree 100% Paul.

tbsteph
on Nov 30, 2012

The 11" MacBook Air cost $950 on Amazon (Obviously with a keyboard). Personally, anything higher for a 64GB Surface I would consider a "premium" price not a competitive one. Comparing the Surface (with Windows Pro) to an iPad is irrelevant.

zombiebacchus
on Nov 30, 2012

Personally I feel all the new Windows 8 and RT tablets are overpriced and Microsoft and the OEM's are missing an opportunity to really penetrate a market so far dominated by the iPad, and at the lower end, the Kindle.

At $399 with the touch cover and Office Microsoft still makes a profit on the Surface RT. As time progresses it just becomes cheaper to make the Surface RT and their margins increase. At $399 consumers are much more willing to take a risk on an unproven OS and ecosystem. OEM's could also come out at $399 and make a profit considering they are still bundling bloatware on these tablets. They will make up their profit in volume just like they did with netbooks.

Tablets running Windows 8 on Atom can also hit the $399 mark depending on how their licensing deals with Microsoft look. Considering they no longer have to pay for the Office license since these tablets do not include it I think it is doable. $399 for a full blown, albeit not super powerful, Windows 8 tablet is a nice price point and consumers will buy it.

Surface Pro is not too far off in price. It would have been better at $799 and $899. At the very least they need to include the type cover at the $899 and $999 price points. I agree with Paul about the battery life. It is completely unacceptable. They are estimating 4 hours under ideal use. If you start really pressing the unit perhaps you only get 2 and half or 3 hours. That wouldn't even get me to lunch time.

I really like my Surface RT and am also looking at the Acer w510 (I missed the $399 Black Friday sale) to see how the performance on the Atom is but I am an early adopter and a huge Microsoft fan and am willing to pay a premium but I just do not feel that the general population is. So far with the reported sluggish sales it looks like I may be right.

sircasio
on Nov 30, 2012

I still think Microsoft is pricing both devices too high so that they don't agitate the OEM's...to much.

Microsoft could sell each of these $200 below list and still make money on each one (won't call it profit, as who knows how many $M's they have in R&D).

I think if they stayed at $500 and $900 but each included (at that price) your touch/type cover of choice, that would make them more attractive and still not infuriate the OEM's.

One more note on the Pro (and other new Win8Pro products) - the ultrabooks you are comparing these to - none of them are touchscreen, that should factor into the comparison somehow.

ddeen
on Nov 30, 2012

I at first thought the sales of the Surface RT would tank when Surface Pro was released because of RTs limitations, but I didn't know that Pro would be twice as expensive and get half the battery life. Now I'm thinking Surface RT will be the one to get as long as legacy programs aren't critical. Heck even my junky Latitude gets 3 to 4 hours battery life.

mghartman
on Nov 30, 2012

We just need to let the market decide. If there is a need for a 10.6 tablet with keyboard, Windows, and pen input, it will succeed. It does not matter what the price is. People will determine if the limitations of the Pro merit purchase of the RT or other devices.

Paul_B
on Nov 30, 2012

I'm a bit dubious about the battery life quote. I think many of the quotes are for drain tests on the RT rather than real-word. My RT easily lasts a whole day the way I use it (not constantly as it is a companion to my main PC). As for pricing I honestly believe this is MS saying to OEM's you have once last chance. The Surface 2 will be much more aggresively priced in my opinion as MS go after market share

bdegrande
on Nov 30, 2012

RT tablets don't have the same issues with battery life. Full Windows 8 is putting a LOT of demands on the system, which is what accounts for the minimum of 64GB, the i5 processor, the fan, etc. To get battery life to be better you need either a less power-hungry OS (which RT has) or a more efficient processor (which the RT tablets also have and which the Clovertrail processors in future Pro models should be) or a bigger battery, which causes more size and weight and heat.

DPGumby
on Nov 30, 2012

Agree as well. All these tablets like it or not are competing with the iPad and the only way to beat it in most cases is price. Much as I like my Surface, at that price point its ultrabook everytime.

Vinny4
on Nov 30, 2012

Crazy expensive and crappy battery life........I was planning on getting one, now I'm thinking twice, 1000 bucks for the 128 GB version I would go for it, however the battery life is really bugging me.
I just installed a 128 GB ssd on my Lenovo Thinkpad Edge E220s which also runs a 2nd Gen Core i7 and 4 GB RAM, I also upgraded it to Win 8 pro, which works like a charm with the touchpad.....Im on the fence.

StephenPAdams
on Nov 30, 2012

I think Microsoft is playing the following game with their pricing:
They want to establish themselves as a premium brand w/ premium pricing a la Apple
They don't want to step on too many toes of their 3rd party manufacturers

They're created limited runs of the Surface RT and most likely the Pro to gauge the market. What they really need is a comprehensive suite of products and give consumers options to roll with what they want.

MS_nerd leaked that Microsoft is working on a smaller Surface as well as a Surface Book. As well as the next generation of Surface RT. This would give them the following lineup:

Surface Mini
Surface RT
Surface Pro
Surface Book

...sounding a lot like Apple, huh? They're defining price points of $499 for the RT model of the Surface and $899 for the Pro. Their accessories are expensive, but right now they're trying to determine: how many people are buying them vs. how many are selling. This is all V1 for them.

What we'll probably see in the future is a similar approach to Apple. Sell your V1 devices for cheaper than the V2 prices, so we may see something like:

Surface Mini (8.6" is what MS_nerd is reporting) for something like $299
Surface RT for $399
Surface RT 2 for $499, $599,
Surface Pro for $899
Surface Book (reporting as a 14.6" screen) for $1199 or so

That'd be a pretty comprehensive lineup that gives users the option of what they want to go with...but in the meantime MS is gauging the market for the Surface's price point. And also they need to get the ecosystem up to give users a reason to buy the RT devices. The Pro will sell itself, especially to the enterprise.

ad24
on Nov 30, 2012

I think MS made a grave mistake for not focusing on the Intel Atom platform. A Surface based on the Atom processor would be a clear winner with all features as an iPad plus a killer feature of x86 compatibility. Now they have a tablet without decent apps and an expensive ultrabook with touch screen. It is really hard to understand that strategy

Blattlaus
on Nov 30, 2012

For comparison, the Aspire S7 at $1299 has basically the same specs except for screen size and ports. Plus the Surface Pro includes real pen input with the included pen (not just a capacitive stylus). While its not a bargain, it in a reasonable range. Are they just afraid to undercut their OEMs?

henador
on Nov 30, 2012

The Surface Pro should be marketed as a PC first and a tablet second. I don't know why MSFT didn't include a simple dock for the Pro so that you could easily connect it to an external mouse, keyboard, and large monitor. Then you would have the best of both worlds: a powerful desktop computer and also an occasional tablet all in one device. That ends up being far less expensive than buying a laptop and tablet.

The Samsung Slate 7 I have handles this role nicely. I do full development in VS2012 when docked and undock to fart around with it on the sofa/wherever. And the Samsung I have has the older i5 with a much weaker GPU (Sandy Bridge vs. the Ivy Bridge in the new Win8 Samsung Slates).

Why MSFT is playing to the Surface Pro's weakness (pure tablet mode) is beyond me. It's as bad as them fragmenting the Windows platform with the ARM-based Surface RT. An Intel Clovertrail Atom Surface would have been ideal for that role.

You have to wonder if there's a lack of oxygen in the MSFT Executive offices or something...

dandbj13
on Nov 30, 2012

I disagree with only one point. The iPad pricing has been proven correct by the very examples you give as proving them too high. Neither of those products were produced to make a profit, and by all accounts, they don't. That suggests that any premium tablet has to cost around the iPad price. The Surface is not too expensive because $499 is too much to pay for a premium tablet experience; it is too much because the Surface is not a competitive product. The problem is the product, not the price.

Silversee
on Nov 30, 2012

I respectfully disagree Paul.

I believe that comparing the Surface Pro to the iPad is a bit disingenuous. The Surface Pro is clearly spec'ed and priced to compete with the 11" MacBook Air, which starts at $999. (Just as the Surface RT is priced to compete with the iPad.)

Like it or not, in the quality laptop PC market, one usually pays a *premium* for high build quality, ultra portability and beautiful displays. For example, the Sony Vaio Z *starts* at $1500 and there are models that sell for up to $3000. On that basis, the Surface Pro is a bargain. I would argue that with the Surface Pro, Microsoft is offering a quality as good or better than other premium Ultrabooks but with the *added* convenience of a tablet form factor and touchscreen capability.

If you think consumers might be confused because it's a tablet first and a laptop second, well perhaps you are right. But you are not helping to clear up the confusion by calling the Surface Pro overpriced in relation to the iPad. I think you would be doing your readers a favor by helping them to discern the differences between this product and the iPad.

Your critique of screen size is purely personal: *many* people choose the 11" MacBook Air precisely because of its portability, and the same will be true here. For those who need a device with a larger display, neither Surface model (or any other tablet) is for them.

Finally, regarding the battery life, Microsoft has made no official statement as yet. The tweet referenced apparently was from a support engineer, who may have been speculating or sharing dated information. I agree that 4 hours would be pretty disappointing, but I think we should be skeptics until the facts are known.

deagle
on Nov 30, 2012

Don't understand why MS are not simply buying market share... if they truly believe in a service based future then they should be selling at cost or modest profit. They have the cash to do this and risk losing their long term market by not being VERY competitive on price at this tipping point in the tech world.

The tablet devices that people are buying in large numbers in the next few months will (due to investment in apps and content) commit consumers to an ecosystem that may be costly and inconvenient for them to change from at a later date.

tboggs13
on Nov 30, 2012

I bought an RT and really like it. With a couple of exceptions (PuTTY and Quicken), I can do everything I normally do on my Desktop. For personal reasons, I would prefer it to be cheaper.

MS is trying what Apple failed to do. Sell an operating system to third party OEM's while still trying to sell their own hardware. If they intend to be a true competitor to those purchasing their OS, they will get more aggressive with their hardware pricing. If on the other hand, they are taking the Google approach and creating reference products, they can't afford to lower the price or they will alienate the OEM's.

If the Surface is supposed to be a low volume premium product, the price is reasonable. If on the other hand it is supposed to be a sales market leader, it is way overpriced.

If MS wanted to win with the Surface line, the RT would be priced starting at $299-350 and the Pro would start at $499.

The other pricing factor right now is the entire Windows 8 PC market. There are very few Windows 8 devices available right now. At my Best Buy, they had only 1 tablet in stock and it was an RT. They are sold out of the Yoga and even on the Lenovo site, there is a 3-4 week backorder.

I ordered a Dell Lattitude 10 as soon as I could pre-order it, which was a week after GA. It is not scheduled to ship till 12-13! I think pricing will stay high until we get more compelling options on the market, production gets up to speed and competition really kicks in.

ScubaDog2008
on Nov 30, 2012

Once again, I agree with you, Paul. I am actually more of a fan of Windows 8, not having as many reservations as you, and I have Win8 on all my machines, now, having been with the OS since the Developer Preview. I had high hopes for the Surface Pro. RT didn't interest me at all because I intended Surface as a replacement for my notebook. BUT, battery life is crucial as a part of that. In order to have any shot at all against iPad, battery life and price HAS to be on par. Being more expensive without even having cell capability...? Fail.

Waethorn
on Nov 30, 2012

I think the Surface Pro fits in line with Ultrabook pricing, especially when you consider most don't ship with touchscreens. The overall surface area of the thing doesn't make for a large enough battery, which is why the battery runtime is so short.

I'd personally like to see a Surface or other convertible tablet with an AMD chip though, since they have better graphics than Intel, and still have full x86-64 support (AMD invented it, after all) and all their chips support Hyper-V and they have far better value than an Atom.

GoodThings2Life
on Nov 30, 2012

I don't believe it's too expensive. I also believe it's MORE functional than any competing product.

However, battery life is a huge concern. That said, I think it's more like to get the 5-6 hour time rather than the lowball estimate you suggested. As I expressed on MJF's post yesterday, I have a similar configuration today in a 13" Vostro V131 laptop that gets 8 hours of life, and my Surface RT typically gets 9.

I think the tweet claiming "about half" from the Surface team is, for now, overblown and inaccurate. But if it's not 6 hours or better, it will NOT be on my purchase plans.

DanJReid
on Nov 30, 2012

I'd be surprised if anyone was actually surprised by these details. I bought a Surface RT because I knew the battery life of the Pro would be this low. Similarly, the price was going to be obviously high, too. This is, after all, a laptop in a tablet's body. It was obviously going to cost more than the Surface RT.

The Pro will come into its own when Intel give us the ULV processors it deserves. It may come with Haswell, but my money is on Broadwell providing us with a Core i5 that is as capable as our current ones, but with no fan and the battery life we crave from a tablet (ie. ~10 hours). I also expect for the weight to have reached the 600-700 gram region by that point, too.

Right now, Surface is like the iPad 1. Its an innovative idea that is slightly ahead of its time. It needs the technology to catch up with the idea. Heck, one could argue that Microsoft have been waiting ten years for the technology to catch up with the idea! I think we're nearly there and when it does come, Windows 8 will have matured enough as a platform that we will see a truly revolutionary device.

But for right now, anyone who thought a Core i5 - even a ULV version - would have battery life anywhere near an ARM tablet was simply deluding themselves. No matter how much Microsoft might want to build such a device, the technology isn't there.

Not yet.

ProGeek
on Nov 30, 2012

Lets be honest, you are upset because the Pro is not what you expected. All indications were that the Pro would be comparable to an ultrabook. That puts expectations at $1000. It has an Intel processor. There is no hardware innovation here. It is what it is. RT is the companion device. Pro is for Pro's who need a tablet but want versatility. If you want a touch laptop, go for the Acer or similar (future) device.

I think Microsoft is above board with all of this. If it doesn't hit your mark, that's a different (personal) issue.

pjs37
on Nov 30, 2012

*sigh* MS has been doing really great things lately but then they keep doing these massive mis-steps is there no one there who says "Hey guys wait a second does this make sense?" it feels like a whole bunch of yes men run the company. Paul is right MS is pricing the Surface too high. Its bad enough that they limited availability, but then they priced it like a premium device but keep forgetting they are new comers to the new world of mobile computing. Apple can afford to price higher because its the gold standard and they have a massive eco-system people will buy into.

Amazon,Barnes and Nobles, and Google get it: You won't beat Apple by being Apple you have to undercut them first establish a base then you can start with your premium devices.

Why MS is going this route with the surface is beyond me. Even more confusing is this desire to shove an i5 into the surface at the apparent expense of battery life. Shouldn't they have gone with Clover Trail instead which seems like it would just work better.

Maybe they were worried about ticking off their OEM partners but lets look at what they put out: Like 3-4 tablet devices and that's it. Everything is the old stock with the new OS installed.

Screw the current partners MS they clearly are useless.

applelover
on Nov 30, 2012

What you fail to understand is that AGAIN, this was Microsofts big moment to shine and blow Apple away. They had to come out with a product that was better then IPAD and all the other tablets to be at least in the game. Surface is a ho hum. product at best. It certainly isn't getting raves from the reviewers, it certainly isn't selling that well. Microsoft claims that they invented this market over 10 years ago and perhaps that might be somewhat accurate they certainly failed to do anything with it.

Microsoft is a company of knee jerk reactions, they dont innovate at all. Sure, kinect is fun but even then, where are the blow me down games to support such an innovative product.

Microsoft is dead in the water as long as the king of the bozos still reins there. This guy has no clue.....To save Microsoft your must kill the king.

>>>>> NOTE: this post was edited slightly for publication. The next time you make fun of readers of this site, you're out. There's no need for that. --Paul

darkurious
on Dec 1, 2012

I side with you; the trade off is about the same for the Lenovo. The Lenovo has much better battery life, more ports, and is lighter, and has a GPS. The Surface has more memory, 10 point touch, pen, better display and the VaporMg casing. I've looked at Acer, Asus, HP, and Dell. I even looked at Shuttle (don't ask me why I did that; waste of time) and none of them compare. I'm no MSFT fanboy but I think in comparison, the Surface is a descent buy. However, if it was up to me, I would have taken a bigger loss in profits to do market saturation against the iPad. My biggest concern is how MSFT going to take now three platforms (WP8 NT, WindowsRT, and Windows Pro [legacy]) and make “Windows everywhere”, the same OS for Windows 9? And who knows how the new Xbox will fit into all of this. I’m sure the goal is to have truly one OS platform for all devices. I’m sure developers would love to have it to where one app design will work on all devices. “One App to rule them all.”

rsquaric
on Dec 1, 2012

I agree with Messr. Thurrott. The pricing of the Surface RT and Pro are not in line with Microsoft's market position. However, I think there is a deeper argument to be made that tablets are only suited for consuming video, music, books, magazines, Skyping and simple email tasks. I include Exchange ActiveSync in the latter category as all the major tablets allow this feature. As Paul noted, an 8.9 to 11 inch screen isn't sufficient for productivity applications, e.g., Office (unless, of course, you are wearing binoculars). For real work and play, I use an IPS 1920 x 1200 monitor that is capable of displaying 1.07 billion colors. I have Audioengine A5 satellites and A8 subwoofer connected to Creative's Soundblaster Titanium HD and a GeForce 580 GTX with a 1.5GB frame buffer. Storage is cheap and I record HD movies from a CableCard and listen to iTunes lossless audio files. I have a $4000 entertainment system with very expensive Polk Audio speakers. I remote in to the businesses I support with LogMeIn Central so i don't travel much. Why would I want a truncated experience for 12+ hours per day? I think most people are going to realize this. I think anything less than a 23" 1080p screen is murder on the eyes. I am sitting back three feet from my monitor and I have no problem reading Windows default font size. Windows split screen capability is great when I am remoting in and searching for solutions with TechNet, Google and Bing. Essentially, I have two 12 inch screens for this type of work. I know this doesn't apply to serious road warriors but I think these types would want at least a 13.3 to 15.6 inch screen. Could be wrong, have been many times...

kdryzer
on Dec 1, 2012

The price of RT certainly is not in line. Those devices should be selling for at most $399.00. For a core i5 computer maybe not so much if Microsoft included the Type cover with the purchase.

kdryzer
on Dec 1, 2012

Windows RT pricing is ridiculously high for sure Those devices should be no more than $399.00. Surface Pro pricing might be more in line if the type cover was included. But still too much by at least $100.00 or so.

spinedoc
on Dec 1, 2012

It IS priced very well in my opinion. It's an ultrabook replacement, with an ultrabook battery life, with an ultrabook price, BUT with the added benefit of having a tablet mode which makes it more portable and convenient than any ultrabook. I think if you are going to compare battery life you need to compare apples to apples, the 11" macbook air for example has the closest physical dimensions to the surface and has a 5 hour battery life.

What many consumers are missing, and it's not their fault but poor planning from MS and poor performance from the OEMs, is the Cloverfield tablets. These are the tablets which are competing with the ipads and androids, these are the tablets MS should have been behind. I honestly believe MS went above and below the sweet spot with RT/Pro on purpose to leave that middle spot where most tablets will sell to the OEM's to not piss them off. The only problem is that the OEM's are seriously dropping the ball on releasing Cloverfield units and making MS look bad.

As for RT, it was a huge mistake, something no one ever needed and I hope it dies quietly and quickly, which it will. MS should have priced Cloverfield just at or slightly below the ipad, which they pretty much are priced that way, RT should have never existed, and the ivy bridge units will end up being enthusiast/enterprise tablets.

The Other Paul
on Dec 1, 2012

Since when are computers sold by the inch or pound? Seems to me through much of the past 30 years, people have been willing to pay more for smaller, more portable computers. And it costs more to make computers with more cutting-edge miniaturized components. I don't understand this conventional wisdom that seems to be developing (and you seem to have jumped on the bandwagon), that a 10" tablet should cost less than a 13" with the same capability.

I do agree with you on battery life, though. The success of the tablet form factor isn't just lack of a keyboard. It's all-day battery life, light weight, and connectivity everywhere. The Surface Pro falls down on all these points. I don't know why Microsoft didn't make a Clover Trail tablet. Ivy Bridge just isn't able to bring out the strengths of a tablet, apparently.

Rishicash
on Dec 1, 2012

I'm beginning to think MS would F-up a free lunch.

Please or Register to post comments.

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use