"According to an inside source, a session was held at Microsoft's recent TechReady15 conference in which all the launch details were laid out. If things go according to the plan detailed then, the Surface for Windows RT tablet will be launching October 26th - no surprise there - at a compelling price of $199." My wallet just squealed in pure bliss.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2008-07-15
Member since:2005-11-09
Member since:2010-01-12
Member since:2007-09-03
Member since:2005-07-06
(Not that these matter to 90% of the people)
And 90% might be an understatement... (though, OTOH - piracy?)
But anyway, IIRC corporates can do more, can set up their internal distribution "store" - so that likely covers most of the needs (at least that of large, important(tm) customers)
Member since:2005-07-06
It sounds like it is exactly as locked down as the iPad; maybe more, maybe less, depending on the implementation.
The real question is whether it is as limited as the iPad. The iPad is very limited by the App Store restrictions. How do the Microsoft Store restrictions compare? What will MS allow that Apple prohibits, and vice-versa? I haven't seen a comparison between the two yet. All that we can count on is it being more restrictive than Google Play, for better and worse.
Member since:2005-06-29
My experience with it on Windows Phone 7 is that it is somewhat more flexible than the Apple store, but not nearly as open-ended as the Play store where you can find apps like Superuser and Terminal that are tied to rooting.
For one thing, browsing the Entertainment category on the Windows store means wading through dozens of overtly sex-oriented apps that would never make the cut on the Apple store. But that's just my subjective experience; I really have no idea what is officially allowed or not since I'm not a developer.
I'll say too, that since I've been playing around with a Nexus S I've found the Play store to be much less intuitive than when it was the Android Market, and find it only slightly better than the Apple store as far as ease of use goes. That's one thing I think Microsoft got right: You can demo ANY paid app without having to download a separate trial app, and the demos tend to be more fully functional than their Android and iOS equivalents. Again, my personal experience and that of others may vary.
Member since:2005-07-08
Member since:2008-07-15
Member since:2010-06-21
Member since:2005-12-23
Member since:2007-11-11
Are those real independent tests? or more marketing BS? because we've all seen with the laptops their "playback time" is a load of deep fried poo.
So I have to agree with the other guy that unless they are taking a PS3 sized bath on the unit price the battery life is gonna suck, no different than how you can buy a $199 Atom netbook but you get the lousy 3 cell battery and are lucky to get 3 hours out of the thing. Like it or not Lithium Ion batteries? EXPENSIVE. And to make it as thin as the pics we are talking about serious custom jobs, not the bog standard cells everyone uses in the laptops which means even MORE expensive.
Considering as we read all over the net MSFT wouldn't let reviewers actually put their hands on them for their "hands on" reviews? Yeah something smells fishy and I'm not buying it until an actual third party not being paid by MSFT puts one through the paces and gives us the real numbers.
Member since:
2012-04-18
If both prices are correct
http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/13/3082380/windows-rt-license-cost-8...
MS will be the only provider of WinRT tablets.
Member since:2006-01-27
Lenovo, Dell, and Samsung Windows RT tablets and laptops confirmed
http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/13/3239774/lenovo-dell-samsung-windo...
Member since:
2005-06-29
Acer is gonna have no market left to do tablets with Google having submerged their own market. No bliss for them. roflmao
I doubt 200$. More like 350$ or 400$.
Please let it be true. And no skipping of Canada PLEASE like Google did with the Chromebooks and Google Music and Microsoft did with the Zune and...
Member since:2007-09-23
RE: "My wallet just squealed in pure bliss."
Member since:2006-01-23
Wouldn't be surprised if they did have the sub $200 price tag. They already sell xboxes at a loss when they are first introduced. The tablets are no different as they'll be getting 20% cut from any sales of apps on the Windows Store. It might not seem like much to cover the cost of the machine, and I'm guessing it won't at the start, but their user base they want to create NEEDS to be there. Its not something they can brush off if it (Windows 8) doesn't work.
Microsoft has to edge its bets on this mobile market. Apple already have the mobile phone and tablet market that is worth more then Microsoft's desktop market, and that is slipping away month by month as people move away from Desktop machines in favor of tablets and phones.
So we have these machines, part of Microsofts bigger plan to get Windows 8 mobile.They can, and may have to , affort to take a big hit and loss to stay realivent... I think for a lot of people Microsoft may have already missed the boat.
Still, does that price tag include the keyboard as well or just a basic tablet?
Member since:
2010-05-06
I guess it would be compelling if you are already into the Microsoft archipelago (I won't call Xbox, Zune, Windows Phone, and the desktop where none can run each others programs an ecosystem). The Lumias looked good too. The Nexus has to have a razor thin margin, but the Surface at $199 must be a loss-leader.
I assume this is to try to get developers to port or write applications. That is both a chicken-and-egg problem as well as resistance with Microsoft mutating the API. Developers waiting won't be fatal, but will leave it in limbo for a while. The XBox eventually became profitable but it took years.
I don't think Microsoft can do an "iPad". It will need OEMs to provide windows phones and tablets with different features others might want - different screen sizes, cameras, connections and ports. Just the Surface and nothing else beyond won't work to create the necessary network effects. And I think MS has annoyed OEMs enough that Windows not-on-PC which was a 2nd tier will drop even further.
If you are already part of the Apple ecosystem, you are going to spend the extra to buy the iOS device. Apple itself already had a big boost with iTunes music and video, and even at that they have a Windows port.
Will the Surface play nice with the Apple ecosystem? Any better than Android?
There are slick and fancy machines, but what do you need to actually do the things you want? There are some who love their windows phone - but it is because the apps already there meet their needs the best.
Member since:2010-01-12
Member since:2010-01-07
Member since:2005-09-01
Member since:
2006-07-26
Member since:2010-06-01
Thx to MS franken-SecureBoot, you will not be able.
Accept preloaded stuff or get lost.
PS The true Secure Boot allows for disabling it. MS goeas against this standard, and force every OEM to disable such functionality. And we all know how likely MS is to add keys for Linux Distros or Android.
Member since:2008-09-11
Member since:2011-08-08
It can not boot Linux, but I'm sure you can triple boot iOS, Android and Linux on iPad 3, so go buy that.
Considering it hasn't even been released yet, maybe you should refrain from making that claim. Wait until it's available and then see what workarounds turn up.
Member since:
2005-07-06
Member since:2005-07-06
Zune was a sideline and its not realistic to even compare the two.
This could make or break their whole OS (the core of their dominance). This is why they took the incredibly bold step to become an OEM.
MS will market this (and by proxy windows 8) Everywhere they can and then some.
My prediction is that the marketing will be on a scale we haven't seen since Windows 95. In the UK, Microsoft bought the Times of London for a day, printing 1.5 million copies of a special edition and giving them all way free!
Member since:2005-07-06
They took the "bold" step to become an OEM because their retail partners were either lukewarm to or half-assing the formfactor they've been trying to push for over a decade.
No matter what happens with the tablets though, it'll still be a sideline. Tablets still have too many tradeoffs to even think about displacing Microsoft's core business.
Member since:2007-11-11
But if they sell the units below cost to try to buy their way into the market couldn't that be considered dumping? Not to mention using their Windows and Office profits to cover it could run afoul of Sherman Antitrust.
This will be interesting to see how the courts, especially the EU who seems to have gotten fed up with the usual MSFT tricks reacts if the price turns out to be true. There is just no way I can see it at THAT price with THOSE specs unless they are taking a hell of a loss per unit.
Member since:2005-07-06
EU is sadly far to slow moving an entity. They will only crack down on them if they develop a suitable market share and then abuse it. By which point, they can happily pay any fine imposed.
Even then, what are they doing that would get them in trouble?
You can't crack down on MS for IE as iPad (dominant market leader) does the same with Safari. Office equivalents are included in many tablets already. Just not the iPad. BB Playbook, for example, has "documents to go" included. Limiting the installation of another OS/App Store is generally accepted as standard on all tablets by the consumer market.
Remember, its not 'illegal' in any way to sell a loss-leading product. At launch, the XBOX 360 was Losing about $120 per unit. Microsoft made their money back, and then some via games sales (app sales in the case of the RT).
Member since:
2010-01-28
Microsoft could give the tablets away and I wouldn't have an interest in it...I would rather pay full price for an iPad, any day....
Sorry, but Windows 8 is horrible. 'Metro', or whatever they will be calling it, is a sad excuse for a touch interface...
They should have hired someone (UI Designer, maybe?) to design a UI that is actually enjoyable to use, instead of these awful flat tiles...just horrible interface....
Member since:2010-04-09
Member since:2006-12-06
Member since:2012-07-30
Member since:2007-08-27
Member since:
2010-01-11
Member since:2009-08-18
Member since:
2005-11-10
This will be Windows CE all over again. What's gonna happen is regular windows users are gonna run out and snap this up because of price and be pissed to high heaven when they realize they can't run any of their old windows software on it.
I am sure the X86 versions of their tablets will be pricy as hell.
Member since:
2005-09-27
Member since:
2005-12-07
If this is true, I wouldn't be at all surprised if we see Xbox-esque direct-to-desktop advertising sooner rather than later. This is the only way I can think that they're coming out ahead on this, unless they're pulling a Sony and hoping to make back in software what they lose in hardware.
Member since:
2009-06-20
Member since:
2011-04-11
Microsoft has to very carefull with the pricing of the Surface. Price it like the iPad, and it will fail like any other tablet priced like the iPad (Motorola Xoom, Transformer Prime, Playbook etc). Price at a loss, and other OEMs will steer away from WinRT, so the Surface will have to lift the entite WinRT sales. Price it at razor-thin margins, and it will probably be more expensive than the Nexus 7.
My bet is on "razor thin margins". The Surface is Microsoft's way to tell OEMs "this is how you do it, and how much you should charge". Microsoft doesn't care about how much the Surface will sell, this is why they 'll sell it only at Microsoft Stores. The Surface was made because Microsoft didn't trust their OEMs will make a good product and price it right, so MS had to literally show them. And since MS would like their OEMs to sell their Win8 tablets at razor-thin margins, it's reasonable to assume the Surface will be sold at razor thin margins too.
Edited 2012-08-14 19:36 UTC
Member since:
2006-01-25
I said it when they announced this thing... They should price it identically to the iPad if they they are serious about being a long term competitor. They are making the same mistake that everyone else makes when trying to compete with Apple...
They should be trying to make a better product at the same price (so they can, you know, actually make some money on it). If they don't feel they have a better product yet they should go back and spend some money and improve it until they feel it is a better product. They won't get a second chance with this.
I have to say that personally I think the product has potential. It has some very compelling and creative features and if they get some developer love they might be able to make a dent in the table market with it.
But...
Pricing it at $199? They just make it look like a cheap wannabe. Sure it will put the product in more hands faster (which definitely affects developer confidence positively), but as a developer that pricing does not give me any sense that they have confidence in it. It makes it feel like an experiment, i.e. "lets give it away and see if it sticks"... Why should I bother with that?
Part of the reason that developers flock to Apple devices is that they are not cheap. Apple makes gobs of money - no one is seriously worried about the product being dropped any time soon. How long will Microsoft bankroll a product when they lose money on every sale? Will it ever be popular enough that they can actually increase the price (or decrease the costs) enough that the question of its continued existence goes away? Do I want to try and market my software to the "I really wanted an iPad, but this was cheaper" demographic???
On top of that, pricing it to make a profit on it would have at least given their OEMs a small sense of hope. They could at least have tried selling "cheap" Windows 8 tablets as an alternative to the pricy Microsoft product. Fighting over the leftovers is better than nothing at all... But at $199? Why bother even trying?
They should come out at $499 and fight for the 2 or 3 years it will take to get some traction (and it will take that long either way). It is definitely a better product than any of their OEMs can make, so that isn't worth worrying about. Let Android guys fight over the crumbs in the market, Microsoft should focus solely on Apple - that is their only real competitor. They need to try and beat them at their own game for once.
After they have a bit of traction they could take advantage of economies of scale and probably drop the price some. But it is stupid to come out the gate losing money on every sale - it won't work...
Sorry, they are totally screwing up going this route out of the gate...
Member since:2006-07-04
Member since:2006-01-25
But one thing I do know is that Microsoft spent orders of magnitude more time and effort on studying different pricing models than the average off-the-top-of-my-head armchair CEO message board anon (like you) has.
I hope the rumor isn't true - I am actually pulling for them and I think low-balling the price is a big strategic mistake.
As far as the relative value of my opinion... I do know the true value of market research: if you spend and enormous amount of time, money, and effort doing market analysis using all the "right" people and data it buys you exactly one thing - an excuse when everything goes wrong
Tim Cook is a fan of a book called "Competing Against Time". You should read it. It will tell you, among other things, why you should never set prices based on market acceptance research, and especially why you should never set a "low, low introductory price!" on an expensive to manufacturer technology product...
Think whatever you wish of my opinion on the matter...
Member since:2006-01-25
Also...
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/08/how-microsoft...
There is another armchair CEO who writes for Ars that agrees with me... He isn't anonymous - maybe that will sway you
Seriously though, read this bit - he says it better than I could:
---snipped a bit for brevity---
Tablets are unlikely to be able to buck this trend. While a $199 Surface RT would leave the door open to pricier devices sporting, for example, 13" screens, more internal storage, or 3G connectivity, it still doesn't leave much wriggle-room, and would yield no profit with which to fund future developments.
Bolding is mine...
Member since:2012-06-22
I think you mean vain tech hipsters, not developers.
It's economics that attracts developers, not the consumer price of the platform. We've seen this with game consoles where the cheaper option (ps2 vs xbox) gets more developer support simply because the install bsae is larger.
They should come out at $499 and fight for the 2 or 3 years it will take to get some traction
That would be foolish. Apple can get away with overpricing hardware because it has tricked enough people into believing that the hardware is magically special and not from the same Chinese sweatshops as everything else. Kindle has done the best against the iPad and the $200 price tag is a major part.
Through marketing Apple has convinced millions it is a premium brand. Microsoft's marketing department is terrible and couldn't use the same strategy.
Member since:2006-01-25
It's economics that attracts developers, not the consumer price of the platform. We've seen this with game consoles where the cheaper option (ps2 vs xbox) gets more developer support simply because the install bsae is larger.
Tablets are not consoles. It matters a whole helluvalot to be cheap when your market demographic is pimple faced kids and twenty somethings...
Consoles are pure home entertainment devices. They don't have to be well crafted, no one cares. They don't have to use good materials - they end up hiding on a shelf in an entertainment center, plastic is perfectly fine. People don't hold them in their hands (well, except for the controllers). They have 5+ year product cycles (current one being much longer) to recover sunk costs through licensing. Business people don't buy them. Executives don't buy them. Doctors don't buy them. Totally different demographic.
If you think Microsoft can market a tablet like a console your crazy. It won't work.
They should come out at $499 and fight for the 2 or 3 years it will take to get some traction
That would be foolish. Apple can get away with overpricing hardware because it has tricked enough people into believing that the hardware is magically special and not from the same Chinese sweatshops as everything else. Kindle has done the best against the iPad and the $200 price tag is a major part. " [/q]
http://paidcontent.org/2012/08/14/new-stats-show-ipad-surging-again...
Yep, Kindle is doing great! They are losing marketshare even with their stellar price point, and they probably have to sell 25 of them to make as much money as Apple makes on a single sale... Brilliant strategy!
Member since:2012-06-22
I never said they could. What I think is crazy is that thinking a higher price would sell more surface tablets than a lower one. It's like suggesting ford should randomly tack on 10k to the F150 to increase sales. It won't work no matter how many commercials they make trying to claim it is now a premium truck. Sales would fall.
They should come out at $499 and fight for the 2 or 3 years it will take to get some traction
Yep, Kindle is doing great! They are losing marketshare even with their stellar price point, and they probably have to sell 25 of them to make as much money as Apple makes on a single sale... Brilliant strategy!
I said Kindle has done the best against the iPad, or are you going to try and deny this?
Samsung already tried selling Android tablets at premium and it failed. Why not just buy an iPad? That is what it comes down to.
Member since:2007-08-27
Maybe it would be dumb, but why would MS think it not so, why is Win 8 on the desktop hung on whatever Metro is being called today and why is Win 8 priced so cheaply as an upgrade?
Might even upgrade myself, now I've figured how to only see 'Metro' fleetingly and have a start button back (if not quite perfectly)
Fear of future profitability and losing control over whatever the market will be for computer devices now its no longer limited to PC's. If I was MS, I'd bear any burden, pay any price...
Not sure it'll work but then I think Apple is in just as much danger, if not more so, in the medium term unless they come up with yet another whizz cash cow, have my doubts.....hence absurd patent legal trials
Edited 2012-08-15 07:54 UTC
Member since:
2011-08-08
Member since:2006-01-25
Its kind of different when everyone in the market is doing it too... Microsoft was losing something around $60 per sale originally, where as Sony was losing around $200. Nintendo actually made a small profit, and their strategy worked for a while (cheap low-performance hardware with innovative controllers) but soon ran out of steam and everyone else took their key advantage away. Now Wiis are just cheap...
Anyway, none of them were competing with a company who routinely operates on a 60% gross margin... Apple is pricing proof, they have demonstrated that repeatedly. You can't price yourself into competition with them - their customers don't care about you having a better price. You have to have a better product.
Maybe the surface is a better product, but if this rumor is true it isn't priced like it is...
RE: Comment by ilovebeer
Member since:2011-08-08
Member since:2012-06-22
Member since:
2008-05-03
Member since:2006-01-25
Member since:2005-09-01
Member since:
2005-07-22
If this is the true price (+ local taxes etc) then it seems to me blindingly obvious that MS wants to retire windows on a PC with an X86 chip unless it is running Windows Server.
This may not happen for a couple of years but to me, their aim is pretty obvious. Price this so low that no one else can make any money. This will drive the competion out of businesss. People will choose a Surface device over a normal PC because of the cost. They are not only after the PC biz but the whole Android and Apple infrastructure.
This might seem a bit far fetched but I firmly believe that MS wants to put all their competitors out of business. This is a high rish gambit and may fail. If it does then MS will have to break itself up to survive.
The next few years will be rather interesting.
Edited 2012-08-15 03:42 UTC
Member since:2012-06-22
Intel may be the best way out of this mess.
x86 tablets means will put an end to Sinofsky's wet dream of selling Windows without Win32.
People want Windows with the applications and not an overly animated ad screen instead of the start menu.
If Intel can keep cutting the fabs it won't be long until ARM advantages are offset by Win32/.NET compatibility. x86 tablets don't have to beat ARM on battery life, they just need to be thin and get around 8 hours.
Member since:2005-07-06
We've been hearing this for several years now, how it's just around the corner...
Meanwhile, ARM goes forward too, you know.
And MS tried with ~desktop apps on tablets, people don't like that approach. Pretty much making ARM the entrenched one.
Member since:
2009-09-03
Member since:
2008-09-11