Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 6th Feb 2013 11:23 UTC
Windows And there we are - the Surface Pro reviews are in. Reading through them all, there's clearly a common theme, and it's not particularly positive. We're a few months in now, so I think we can finally call it: Windows 8 and Surface are the wrong way to go.
Order by: Score:
kragil Member since:
2006-01-04

BS. Any site that only writes drama and hyperbole will loose clicks very quickly.

I totally agree with Thom, Surface and Windows 8 are full of fail.

In germany you can get a Zenbook + Nexus 7 for less this the Surface. Those two give you a much better experience.

Reply Score: 11

chekr Member since:
2005-11-05

"Any site that only writes drama and hyperbole will loose [sic] clicks very quickly."

Clearly you are not familiar with journalism

Reply Score: 7

Priest Member since:
2006-05-12

This is true of Journalism in general but the reviews linked were Anandtech, TheVerge, Engadget, and Arstechnica. I read them often enough to know I can generally trust their collective opinion on something.

Some quotes from the Arstechnica conclusion:

"From the tablet perspective, Surface Pro is not acceptable. It gets too hot for a hand-held device, its battery life is woefully inadequate, and it's too thick and heavy to be comfortable to hand hold for long sessions."

"From a laptop perspective, Surface Pro falls down too. The traditional laptop has a stiff hinge to hold the screen at an angle of your choosing. It is hard to understate the importance of this hinge....The Surface kickstand offers me none of that. It puts the screen at the right angle when my desk is a particular height, but at any other height it's the wrong angle"

"In practice, the Surface RT and Surface Pro have a bigger footprint on my lap even than my old 15-inch MacBook Pro. And if I move a little, whomp, the screen drops off the back of my knees and folds out of sight."

These points are all pretty valid even if you ignore that the specs on paper are't that great of a deal.

Reply Score: 5

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Too bad you ignore the over all conclusions on the final page - but hey, it is cool to slam a product from Microsoft these days ignoring the horrific clusterfuck that Android is and the fact that Samsung and HTC customers are routinely screwed over when it comes to updates and upgrades.

As for the Surface Pro - it's a product looking for a niche to fill where as Microsoft would have been better off going Windows RT, allowing win32 applications via a recompile and introduce an x86 tablet when the hardware was actually available rather than the compromised device that exists today. As for what I'm going to do - the Windows RT Surface is what I'm after.

Reply Score: 3

nej_simon Member since:
2011-02-11

Too bad you ignore the over all conclusions on the final page ...


What are you talking about? The things he posted where from the conclusion on the final page and the rest of the conclusion wasn't particulary positive either. For example, they actually write "The design fundamentally doesn't work".

... - but hey, it is cool to slam a product from Microsoft these days ignoring the horrific clusterf--k that Android is ...


What android clusterf--k?

... and the fact that Samsung and HTC customers are routinely screwed over when it comes to updates and upgrades.


You mean like Microsoft and windows phone 7? Expensive flagship phones with WP released in 2012 didn't even get the new version on WP released just a few months later. That's worse than any flagship android phone I can think of.

Edited 2013-02-10 12:47 UTC

Reply Score: 2

bassbeast Member since:
2007-11-11

I am a firm believer in logic and understanding: If you look and can truly understand a thing then you can see where it will do good and where it will not so lets try that right now:

What IS Windows, what causes people to buy this product over other products? This is quite simple it is OLD SOFTWARE that drives sales of Windows, everyone from businesses to your grandma has some Windows software they want to run and THAT is why they buy Windows. They don't buy it for the brand, they don't buy it to only run the software it comes with like a lot of cellphones end up doing, they buy Windows because they have software they need to run and Windows has (more or less) been backwards compatible for eons.

When you look and understand this its obvious why Win 8 and Surface will fail, all that software wasn't written for touch or a hybrid UI and frankly doesn't run well AT ALL in such an environment. I'm sure everyone saw the little cartoon I posted by a tech writer who tried win 8 and couldn't find how to do basic tasks like "How to make a recovery disc" and actually had to use a Win 7 PC to Google how to do things with his Win 8 PC, this is because there is almost NO context or clues given to the user, you are supposed to "know" the commands and terms which most just won't. Hell I even had this problem, the "charms bar" WTF? Its a sidebar, looks like a sidebar, is in the place both Vista and Win 7 put the sidebar/gadgets by default, so how am I supposed to know ctrl+C brings this up?

At the end of the day it can do nothing but fail as it ignores the entire purpose of Windows, which is to get out of your way and let you run your third party software. Hell look at how many are perfectly happy with XP, they don't care that its dated it gets out of their way and lets them run the software they care about so its just fine to them. Until MSFT stops aping Apple and takes a page from IBM and sells services and support for what is a mature product instead of trying to become "hip and cool" then all we'll see is fail fail fail.

Reply Score: 2

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

It's not so simple, never was... a lot of people grab Windows because that's what comes with their new laptop (and nothing bad with that, really; they are mostly happy that way). Also, nowadays many people use their PC mostly for www, plus some general needs (like media player or IM) covered by generic software.

Reply Score: 2

ichi Member since:
2007-03-06

OK so when Microsoft allow us to run "legacy" window applications outside of Metro, we complain that the interface is not touch friendly.

On RT where they restrict our ability to install "legacy" apps we complain that they are restricting us.

Do you see the problem here.


Yes, I do see the problem: you either have an actual desktop or you don't (half assed compromise solutions don't cut it) and you should be consistent with your decision to release a primarily touch based device and go full metro there instead of squeezing a limited desktop only because their own apps are not ready.

I mean, the only reason you have a "legacy" desktop on the surfaceRT is because Office completely missed the deadline to go metro-style. Isn't that pathetic?

Reply Score: 4

ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

The problem is that tech journalists need to create drama so that people read their articles. Negativity and hyperbole gets clicks, clicks = money.


Then why wasn't he negative about Windows Phone?

I have a Windows Phone and I think Windows 8 is crap and Surface is a joke.

If you look at Amazon user reviews you'll see similar sentiment. Windows Phone reviews are positive while Windows 8 reviews are a mix of hatred and pathetic defenses from apologists.

The excuses for the Sinofsky Windows 8 / Surface plan don't add up and this was true a year ago.

It's a dumb plan. It's just a damn dumb plan and it isn't going anywhere just like most of us predicted on Sinofsky's blog. Trying to compete with the iPad by forcing a mobile interface on desktop users to create an ecosystem was FREAKING STUPID and we haven't even seen the full ramifications of this idiocy. Windows 8 defenders get off Ballmer's short bus while you can.

Reply Score: 5

grat Member since:
2006-02-02

OK so when Microsoft allow us to run "legacy" window applications outside of Metro, we complain that the interface is not touch friendly.

On RT where they restrict our ability to install "legacy" apps we complain that they are restricting us.

Do you see the problem here.


Yes, but apparently you don't. Metro is a perfectly reasonable tablet/phone interface. Windows 7 is a perfectly reasonable desktop interface.

Windows 8 (and by extension, Surface Pro) is the result of using duct tape to jam two totally disparate application environments together, and call it a "unified operating system".

Much like a flying car, it doesn't serve either of it's purposes well-- a car makes a lousy airplane, and an airplane makes a lousy car.

Reply Score: 2

boldingd Member since:
2009-02-19

Ah yes, the classic "story-mongering media" canned response.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by ephracis
by ephracis on Wed 6th Feb 2013 11:58 UTC
ephracis
Member since:
2007-09-23

I really hope Windows 8 flops big time so Microsoft will learn not to abandon the desktop. That way I can remain optimistic about Windows 9.

I completely agree with TFA: Use Windows Phone for phones/tablets and keep the old Windows ("Windows Desktop") as an OS with a single identity: desktop. Then by all means integrate those two along with the Xbox as much as you want and create great services to move data between them all. But keep the UX separated!

But the flop has to be really, really big for MS to abandon Metro on the old Windows. I fear they will just keep the desktop a few more versions but still consider it "legacy" and slowly move focus away from it.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by ephracis
by bnolsen on Wed 6th Feb 2013 13:39 UTC in reply to "Comment by ephracis"
bnolsen Member since:
2006-01-06

The problem is tha MS knows that windows phone is a bust with little or no hope of breaking open the mobile market. That's why they chose to do windows 8 the way they did. They risked their stagnant desktop monopoly to try to leverage themselves into high growth mobile. We'll see how this plays out, so far not looking good but that desktop monopoly is hard to break.

Edited 2013-02-06 13:40 UTC

Reply Score: 10

RE[2]: Comment by ephracis
by ephracis on Wed 6th Feb 2013 14:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by ephracis"
ephracis Member since:
2007-09-23

I would argue that it doesn't matter if Windows Phone is not popular among smartphones. It still has more apps than Windows RT and besides, the bet that people would enjoy their x86 apps on tablets through Windows 8 seems to not work very well when you consider battery life, heat, device size and price.

It seems that consumer don't consider these trades to be worth the ability to use their usual programs on a tablet. I bet it's because the vast amount of apps available on both tablets and phones. There is no big need for the usual x86 apps on tablets.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by ephracis
by Nelson on Thu 7th Feb 2013 03:34 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ephracis"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

What about when the Windows Store surpasses the Windows Phone Store? What then? I'm convinced there is more momentum behind the Windows Store than the Windows Phone Store (and it is a tragedy, but a reality).

I think it was smart to not scale up Windows Phone unless Microsoft was ready to make Windows Phone a 1st class citizen within Microsoft. Not some barely acknowledged science project which is almost completely shut out by WinDiv.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by ephracis
by cdude on Thu 7th Feb 2013 11:33 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ephracis"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Its not about x86 vs ARM at all and not about UX either. Its all about API's. See, tuning a UI to work acceptable or even good on touch and different form factors is porting-work, compiling x86 code on x86 and ARM is porting-work BUT replacing the win32 API with a totally different Metro API is rewrite-work. The later is just not acceptable IF there is no way to ROI anytime soon cause of the massive investment needed for little gain.

Serious, IF you rewrite THEN it makes more sense to do in a cross-platform way to be able to deliver the result to markets where customers and money are (iOS and Android) and not to a ~2% niche market ONLY (and heck, Metro-API is highly incompatible to anything else including win32 making it an ONLY rather then a ALSO platform).

Microsoft shot itself in the foot by raising the maintainence and porting and rewrite cost so much that ISV's are not going to jump in and on but jump away to competition. All that at a time where they are late and vulnerable already anyways. Its not the 90's any longer and Microsoft has no monopoly, no critical mass to force there incompatibility onto ISV's, partners and sales. They need to adjust. They did not realize that yet. This Vista 2.0 may change that. Hopefully.

Edited 2013-02-07 11:43 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by ephracis
by bert64 on Thu 7th Feb 2013 15:59 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by ephracis"
bert64 Member since:
2007-04-23

The whole point is that they didn't risk anything... The vast majority of their desktop users are locked in so they're not going anywhere.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by ephracis
by ilovebeer on Wed 6th Feb 2013 18:37 UTC in reply to "Comment by ephracis"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

I really hope Windows 8 flops big time so Microsoft will learn not to abandon the desktop. That way I can remain optimistic about Windows 9.

I'm optimistic for Windows 9 because no matter how I look at it, I just can't see Windows 8 being that successful. I don't claim to have a crystal ball but I don't believe Windows 8 is going to be successful enough to keep it moving forward. I do believe MS will be doing some backtracking.

But the flop has to be really, really big for MS to abandon Metro on the old Windows. I fear they will just keep the desktop a few more versions but still consider it "legacy" and slowly move focus away from it.

The first mistake is thinking tablets or smartphones are a replacement for desktops. They are not and never will be. The second mistake is thinking desktops are legacy. They are not. If the desktop vanished tomorrow, it would be crippling. There is no shortage of tasks that only make sense and can only be done efficiently using desktops. For that reason alone I have no fear desktops are going to disappear any time soon.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by ephracis
by ze_jerkface on Wed 6th Feb 2013 19:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by ephracis"
ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

The first mistake was ignoring/censoring feedback from Windows developers, MCSEs, retail partners, and just about everyone else but the me-like-sparkly suckers that bought into Sinofsky's bullshit.

The early Windows 8 pre-release polls were showing widespread rejection but Ballmer and Sinofsky went ahead with the plan anyways.

Hopefully Ballmer will get his NBA team and lose interest in tech so he can stop damaging the company and also give Microsoft apologists a break from having to defend his continued incompetence. They are really having to put a lot of extra time in defending all these flops.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by ephracis
by Delgarde on Thu 7th Feb 2013 01:44 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by ephracis"
Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

The first mistake is thinking tablets or smartphones are a replacement for desktops.


Not quite. Tablets and smartphones *are* replacements for desktops, for a certain range of activities. I've done a fair amount of travel over the past few years, and while I've previously carried a laptop with me, I'm unlikely to do so again in future - on the most recent trip, a smartphone was adequate for almost all circumstances, and a lightweight tablet would easily cover the rest.

So yeah - I agree that phones/tablets can't replace desktops for *all* use cases, but they do cover enough of them that a lot of users (particularly students and home users) no longer need a desktop. Desktops/laptops won't disappear completely, but they *will* become a great deal less common as tablets become more and more capable.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by ephracis
by ilovebeer on Thu 7th Feb 2013 16:30 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ephracis"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

"The first mistake is thinking tablets or smartphones are a replacement for desktops.


Not quite. Tablets and smartphones *are* replacements for desktops, for a certain range of activities. I've done a fair amount of travel over the past few years, and while I've previously carried a laptop with me, I'm unlikely to do so again in future - on the most recent trip, a smartphone was adequate for almost all circumstances, and a lightweight tablet would easily cover the rest.
"

There is a pool of common uses that these devices share. If the only thing you do is within that pool then whichever device you prefer should suit you. But, many many people have uses outside of that pool where just one device doesn't cut it.

So yeah - I agree that phones/tablets can't replace desktops for *all* use cases, but they do cover enough of them that a lot of users (particularly students and home users) no longer need a desktop. Desktops/laptops won't disappear completely, but they *will* become a great deal less common as tablets become more and more capable.

Well, ..no. Desktop sales aren't growing but they're not plummeting either. Desktop PCs continue to sell hundreds of millions of units per year. There's enough data to know people aren't typically buying tablets or smartphones as replacements, but rather in addition to the other devices the have. How many people here have both a smartphone and a tablet? Of those people, how many need both versus own both for any other reason than need? As far as (college) students go, you see a whole lot of laptops & netbooks but you'll be hard-pressed to find anyone doing all their work on a tablet or smartphone.

Tablets have their place, nobody is saying otherwise. But so do desktops and it's going to remain that way for a long time. It's important not to forget that fact. These devices are used for a lot more than email, twitter following, facebook updates, google'ing, etc.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by ephracis
by miguelholandes on Fri 8th Feb 2013 14:11 UTC in reply to "Comment by ephracis"
miguelholandes Member since:
2013-02-07

microsoft did not abandon the desktop with windows 8.... who gave you that idea? It is all still there...

that is exactly why windows 8 is nothing short of brilliant, two completely different operating sytems in one....

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by ephracis
by _txf_ on Fri 8th Feb 2013 16:40 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by ephracis"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

microsoft did not abandon the desktop with windows 8.... who gave you that idea? It is all still there...

The fact that one has to deal with the start screen indicates that the desktop is definitely playing second fiddle...

that is exactly why windows 8 is nothing short of brilliant, two completely different operating sytems in one....

Yeah, because two of anything is always better. Much like we consider multiple personality syndrome a plus...

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by ephracis
by ephracis on Sat 9th Feb 2013 10:42 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by ephracis"
ephracis Member since:
2007-09-23

It is called "legacy" for a reason. It is there now, but it has been abandon in the sense that it will not receiving the attention and focus that it deserves. The desktop is being removed slowly.

As an analogy I could argue that DOS is still there in the form of the command line. But how much new features are brought to the command line versus the Windows GUI? Microsoft doesn't have an infinite number of personnel and can't focus on everything. It seems they are moving the desktop down the priority list very fast.

That's what gave me the idea that the desktop has been abandoned. Not removed, but abandoned.

Reply Score: 1

Tough decision...
by Lava_Croft on Wed 6th Feb 2013 12:22 UTC
Lava_Croft
Member since:
2006-12-24

Should I get a Nexus4, Nexus7 and a Chromebook or should I get a Surface Pro? I think I know...

Reply Score: 2

RE: Tough decision...
by _cynic_ on Wed 6th Feb 2013 12:32 UTC in reply to "Tough decision..."
_cynic_ Member since:
2012-04-18

Really? Replace a Nexus 4 with a Surface Pro?
Why use a smartphone when you can use a 4 hour battery tablet/notebook to make calls with Wifi, right?

BTW
Nexus 4 350.00 + Nexus 7 200.00 + Chromebook 250.00 = 800.00
The surface pro goes from 900 to 1100

edit: I think I got it, the other way around ;)

Edited 2013-02-06 12:37 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Tough decision...
by marcus0263 on Wed 6th Feb 2013 22:29 UTC in reply to "RE: Tough decision..."
marcus0263 Member since:
2007-06-02

Really? Replace a Nexus 4 with a Surface Pro?
Why use a smartphone when you can use a 4 hour battery tablet/notebook to make calls with Wifi, right?

BTW
Nexus 4 350.00 + Nexus 7 200.00 + Chromebook 250.00 = 800.00
The surface pro goes from 900 to 1100

edit: I think I got it, the other way around ;)


Me I say
Nexus 4 + Nexus 7 for mobile and get are real dekstop for the real work. ;)

Reply Score: 4

RE: Tough decision...
by Soulbender on Thu 7th Feb 2013 03:08 UTC in reply to "Tough decision..."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Asus Transformer?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Tough decision...
by cdude on Thu 7th Feb 2013 11:50 UTC in reply to "RE: Tough decision..."
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Same crappy OS/software story made by a reseller who cannot change the underlying systematic problems.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Tough decision...
by marcus0263 on Thu 7th Feb 2013 19:28 UTC in reply to "RE: Tough decision..."
marcus0263 Member since:
2007-06-02

Asus Transformer?


I've got the TF700 with keyboard, it's replaced my laptop which I've gotten rid of. My desktop does the heavy lifting and when I'm out and about I'm on the Transformer (actually on it now). The insane battery life, light, very functional it's almost perfect for my needs. Heck I can use a serial usb dongle to connect up to hardware when I need, I seriously don't need a lappy. Still need my desktop and there's no way it'll replace the desktop anytime soon.

Reply Score: 2

v No Thom, no.
by ronaldst on Wed 6th Feb 2013 12:51 UTC
RE: No Thom, no.
by lindkvis on Wed 6th Feb 2013 15:17 UTC in reply to "No Thom, no."
lindkvis Member since:
2006-11-21

If it weren't got the small screen, I'd say this is the top Ultrabook out there.


Except it isn't very good as an Ultrabook. Its keyboard isn't good enough for extended use as a laptop. It is certainly considerably worse than having a regular Ultrabook with a top notch keyboard. It also has a very small screen for extended use.

It is also not very good as a tablet, because it is much heavier, larger and has much worse battery life than a typical tablet. It has considerably less available "tablet" software than an iPad or Android tablet and its "Windows classic" software is clunky to use on a tablet.

So this Frankentablet is only really the best choice if you definitely need to carry both a tablet and a laptop (and you can live with the small screen and poor keyboard on the laptop). If not, buying a separate tablet and laptop is going to be cheaper and better.

This means the target market for this thing is really quite small.

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: No Thom, no.
by JPisini on Wed 6th Feb 2013 19:56 UTC in reply to "RE: No Thom, no."
JPisini Member since:
2006-01-24

I have to disagree with you this isn't the best tablet with a keyboard. I have been using a keyboard with my Android tablet for months with no issues and half the people that I know with Ipads also have keyboards that work fine. This is MS trying to be different and failing this tablet is not better at anything than the devices it tries to replace.

Reply Score: 0

RE: No Thom, no.
by WereCatf on Wed 6th Feb 2013 16:11 UTC in reply to "No Thom, no."
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Most people here complain about the whole thing being inconsistent. But in reality, they're complaining about the lack of apps and the mediocre ones included.


No, atleast I know perfectly well what I am complaining about and I do definitely mean inconsistency and the jarring transitions between the two different UI-styles. The total loss of discoverability is also a big issue.

Reply Score: 4

RE: No Thom, no.
by ze_jerkface on Wed 6th Feb 2013 19:48 UTC in reply to "No Thom, no."
ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

Most people here complain about the whole thing being inconsistent. But in reality, they're complaining about the lack of apps and the mediocre ones included.


Ok so when I'm complaining about two IE's that switch back in forth inconsistently or two interfaces that inconsistently switch between tasks I'm actually complaining about application compatibility. Right.

Or how about in Surface where you click "Word" in Metro and you get dumped to the desktop which then auto-launches Win32 Word. I'd say that is inconsistent.

Windows 8 is a piece of shit OS as seen by the consistently failed attempts by people like yourself to deflect and delegitimize criticism. I work in enterprise and everyone I work with thinks it is a bad joke but please continue trying to flail and defend this stupid idea.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: No Thom, no.
by Nelson on Thu 7th Feb 2013 02:19 UTC in reply to "RE: No Thom, no."
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I just refuse to take people who complain about this serious. It is really not a big deal.

There are plenty of valid criticisms of Windows 8, this one is one of the more baseless ones I've come across.

So your screen fades into the Desktop when you run Office (a Desktop app). Big deal.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: No Thom, no.
by aaronb on Fri 8th Feb 2013 08:42 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: No Thom, no."
aaronb Member since:
2005-07-06

Indeed, because constantly switching between two different interfaces on a PC or laptop is not at all inefficient.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: No Thom, no.
by Tuishimi on Thu 7th Feb 2013 15:55 UTC in reply to "RE: No Thom, no."
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

What's your favorite ice cream flavor, because I am pretty sure I won't like it.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: No Thom, no.
by -pekr- on Fri 8th Feb 2013 05:53 UTC in reply to "RE: No Thom, no."
-pekr- Member since:
2006-03-28

You work in an enterprise? Then why your reply is a joke as much as your claim that Win8 is a joke? Your enterprise has to have 5 employees, you, and your 4 IT friends probably, who can't even sort out, what Windows 8 is, sorry.

I really wonder, how 3 ppl can raise your post score. If you can't sort out, how to use Metro/Desktop, then you should probably stop using a computer. Well, I work in an enterprise too, and first thing is - users don't care at all. For them, Metro just provides them with sorted-out icons to start their apps (yes, we replace Metro ones with Desktop ones). In fact, if we ask, the transition was absolutly flawless for all ppl we ask, noone raised any problems, so either most of ppl in your enterprise are extremly stupid, or our ppl are extremly technically savy. Decide for yourself :-)

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: No Thom, no.
by Soulbender on Fri 8th Feb 2013 06:16 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: No Thom, no."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

You work in an enterprise?


IN American, every company is an "Enterprise" and every enterprise is the global leader in their field.

Reply Score: 3

RE: No Thom, no.
by dsmogor on Wed 6th Feb 2013 20:37 UTC in reply to "No Thom, no."
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

MS dropped the ball by not using Haswell, since Windows 8 kernel was the one for which its extraordinary power management was designed.
How ridiculous is that?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: No Thom, no.
by sonnyrao on Sun 10th Feb 2013 08:44 UTC in reply to "RE: No Thom, no."
sonnyrao Member since:
2011-07-18

I'm guessing they'll have a Haswell version out by the end of this year, and then many of the issues with battery life (and possibly heat) will be reduced, and when Broadwell comes out it'll likely be competitive with the (current) iPad on battery life.

So, should they have waited yet another 6-9 months to release the surface pro? Maybe but I also doubt MS executives would have allowed that considering how badly PC sales have been lately. IMO, unless you know the experience is just abysmal ahead of time (which is often very difficult to know) I think the better strategy is to release and iterate.

The other problem is, nobody else is standing still, and everyone else will have these advances too. Microsoft doesn't have an exclusive right to Intel's power improvements (or those from ARM SoCs for that matter), so the hardware available at the time isn't always the biggest factor, and I think the real question is how well the Windows 8 software does in the market and if people are willing to accept it, and having more iterations also gives them more chances to fix the brokenness/stupidity of windows 8.

If they're smart, then they'll take that opportunity and the version of Surface with Haswell will be more mature and just better overall.

Reply Score: 1

RE: No Thom, no.
by Vanders on Wed 6th Feb 2013 23:49 UTC in reply to "No Thom, no."
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

The Surface Pro is actually pretty good. I am not surprised one bit by the battery performance. It seems on par with other Ultrabooks.

If the Surface Pro was an Ultrabook that wouldn't be an issue, would it?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: No Thom, no.
by Nelson on Thu 7th Feb 2013 03:32 UTC in reply to "RE: No Thom, no."
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

That's not all, its even bad by Ultrabook comparisons, and it doesn't make for a great Ultrabook at any rate.

Reply Score: 2

RE: No Thom, no.
by mikebelle on Thu 7th Feb 2013 17:23 UTC in reply to "No Thom, no."
mikebelle Member since:
2012-10-22

While I understand that you may want "both worlds" and that's perfectly legitimate, I can attest that I personally do not.

No it's not just because of the horrible apps(though that doesn't help, it's because I find switching between two very different interfaces jarring.

Reply Score: 1

Surface Pro
by Nelson on Wed 6th Feb 2013 13:13 UTC
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

The Surface Pro is hard to love. The premise of the idea is sound. A no compromise device that can scale to handle all of your work flow from the simplest to the most complex.

I think the Surface Pro has crucial misses which will make it DOA in the market except for a small niche:

- Too expensive.
While I don't think they should go down to $199 or whatever, they are still to expensive. I don't know who they're aiming for, but they've specced and priced theirselves out of any market.

- Form factor needs a solution for laps
I think the Surface desperately needs to be more usable from your lap. This is a key scenario.

- Compromise more on specs:
Toss the ARM processor in RT, toss the Core i5 and throw in a low power Intel processor.

Most people want a tablet that's a good netbook. $399-499 is the sweet spot. Not an Ultrabook class wannabe Tablet with abysmal battery life.

A lot of this can only be attributed to Microsoft's lack of optimization. The W700 is specced similarly but gets way better battery life. Surface Pro getting a THIRD of Surface RT's battery life is unacceptable. Someone dropped the ball.

- Weight
You MUST have the weight of a tablet and the strength of an ultrabook if that's what theyre trying to pull off. Having the weight of an Ultrabook and masquerading as a tablet is never going to work.

This all could've been avoided if Microsoft had aborted the Surface RT and Surface Pro and released just a "Surface" with midrange Intel processor, modest specs, exceptional battery life, and respectable performance.

I think in their quest to not compromise, they made the wrong compromises.

Reply Score: 6

RE: Surface Pro
by jared_wilkes on Wed 6th Feb 2013 16:13 UTC in reply to "Surface Pro"
jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

All of your criticisms scream: the premise is unsound.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Surface Pro
by Nelson on Wed 6th Feb 2013 16:42 UTC in reply to "RE: Surface Pro"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

The implementation in this particular case is not where it should be. The overall idea is a good one in my opinion. Devices are converging.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Surface Pro
by ze_jerkface on Wed 6th Feb 2013 20:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Surface Pro"
ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

The premise is unsound given existing hardware realities.

If hardware realities favored a sound implementation then costs would also be decreased for competing alternatives.

But the more important point here is that Surface is just another example of how Microsoft detached itself from reality thanks to Ballmer's mad drive to "get even" with Apple.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Surface Pro
by Nelson on Thu 7th Feb 2013 02:17 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Surface Pro"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

The premise is unsound given existing hardware realities.


Thanks Captain Obvious, that's exactly what I said.
And just so we're clear, everything to you is an example of how Microsoft is allegedly detached from reality.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Surface Pro
by jared_wilkes on Thu 7th Feb 2013 05:18 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Surface Pro"
jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

How do you solve the "lap problem"?

And I think it's absurd to say that Win 8 also doesn't have a far bigger "schizophrenia problem" as well.

Waiting on hardware that's always just on the horizon isn't going to allow Microsoft to leapfrog or even carve a small niche out of the success Apple is already achieving.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Surface Pro
by galvanash on Wed 6th Feb 2013 16:47 UTC in reply to "Surface Pro"
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

Form factor needs a solution for laps


This one I 100% agree with. I think this ends up being the platforms achilles heel.

toss the Core i5 and throw in a low power Intel processor.


The problem is there are no such processors (at least not yet). The i5 they used is the 17W variety. That is as low as any Intel ULV processors get currently (not counting Core 2 Solos from 2008, which don't have GPUs, or Atoms which categorically suck).

A handful of 13W models were just released last month - too late for Surface Pro. There is a 10W Pentium too - but it has 1st generation GPU which is absolutely awful and would cripple such a machine.

This all could've been avoided if Microsoft had aborted the Surface RT and Surface Pro and released just a "Surface" with midrange Intel processor, modest specs, exceptional battery life, and respectable performance.


I think they should have waited for Haswell and worked to figure out how to put a bigger battery in it, but it would have set the product back almost a year... That only addresses the battery life issue though. I don't know how to fix the kickstand-on-your-lap problem. Maybe someone could design an aftermarket "shell" with a hinge to hold the screen at a comfortable viewing angle, but the problem is you need to counterweight the screen - that means the base of the thing would need to weigh at least 2lbs.

I _really_ want to like it. I can live with the battery life and the price as is. But the kickstand thing has put me seriously on the fence - if it is uncomfortable to use in laptop scenarios Im afraid Im going to hate the thing...

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Surface Pro
by WereCatf on Wed 6th Feb 2013 16:52 UTC in reply to "RE: Surface Pro"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

The problem is there are no such processors (at least not yet). The i5 they used is the 17W variety. That is as low as any Intel ULV processors get currently (not counting Core 2 Solos from 2008, which don't have GPUs, or Atoms which categorically suck).


The new 7W Ivy Bridge - CPUs from Intel ( http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/01/power-saving-through-marketi... ) should make things a lot easier for manufacturers and a lot more interesting for end-users once they arrive properly in the mass-market. I would love being able to run x86/x64 software on a tablet without terrible compromises in speeds or loud fans keeping the thing from scorching my fingers.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Surface Pro
by galvanash on Wed 6th Feb 2013 17:36 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Surface Pro"
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

The new 7W Ivy Bridge - CPUs from Intel


Yeah. Those are the ones I was referring to as being released last month. They are technically 13W TDP - the 7W number is SDP, some new made up metric for "average" power use. i.e. they are lower power, but not as much as the number implies.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Surface Pro
by Nelson on Wed 6th Feb 2013 19:05 UTC in reply to "RE: Surface Pro"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

I think Atom would be adequate for most tablet uses. Just not heavy duty Photoshop or whatever. Its doable, but not perfect. I think THAT could've waited a year. A Surface Pro running haswell would make sense a year from now.

But given that the Atom in Clovertrail out muscles what they put in the Surface RT, with comparable battery usage, it would make sense to put one in a normal Surface.

As for the lap issue, I'm not sure how they'd fix it, but I'm not worried. They're smart people. If they want to fix it they can figure out a solution. I'd be surprised if they weren't receiving a lot of feedback on this.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Surface Pro
by sonnyrao on Sun 10th Feb 2013 08:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Surface Pro"
sonnyrao Member since:
2011-07-18

I think you forget just how *awful* the Atom processors have been.

We're talking 3-4x slower than the processor that they put into the surface pro.. probably roughly on par with the Tegra 3 that's in the Surface RT.

How could they demand a premium for that?

Reply Score: 1

core i5/i7 too hot??
by bnolsen on Wed 6th Feb 2013 13:46 UTC
bnolsen
Member since:
2006-01-06

color me shocked. As I mentioned before I've been able to easily overheat and hard crash 5 different brands of core i7 based laptops. The cpu does okay, locking at 99C and running at a crawl, but the ram overheats to 125C+ and crashes. I don't see how stuffing the same stuff into a more restricted area is going to fix anything, probably just burn your customers and break their tablet sooner if they actually do try to run anything serious (most people don't).

Reply Score: 2

earksiinni
Member since:
2009-03-27

Windows ME --> Windows XP
Windows Vista --> Windows 7
Xbox --> Xbox 360

Give 'em an iteration.

Reply Score: 4

BushLin Member since:
2011-01-26

Tee hee, although I think you've forgotten Windows 2000 as the antidote to Windows ME.

Reply Score: 1

_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

Windows ME --> Windows XP
Windows Vista --> Windows 7
Xbox --> Xbox 360

Give 'em an iteration.


Yeah, maybe. I find it utterly shocking that they keep getting these second chances.

How about succeeding on the first try?

Edited 2013-02-06 20:58 UTC

Reply Score: 2

cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

New age is more:
CE => good
WP7 => failure
WP8 => failure
RT => failure
Pro => failure
WP9/RT2/Pro2 => ?

We may look at a permanent loser here or not. How much more iterations they need is still open. It may the case they never will succeed. I wouldn't wonder.

Edited 2013-02-07 12:10 UTC

Reply Score: 1

phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

It generally takes MS 3 tries to be successful:

MS-DOS 3.x
Windows 3.x
Windows 98SE (third major release of 9x OS)
Windows 2000 (third NT release)
Windows 7 (third release of the combined consumer OS)

They've released a tonne of mobile phone OSes without much success, although WP8 is the third major design/release in as many years.

So it'll be the next Surface product that succeeds (RT, Pro, ??).

Reply Score: 3

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

hehehe

One minor quibble though:

Windows 98SE (third major release of 9x OS)

There were a few editions of Win95 as well (albeit only sold as OEM discs rather than retail).

95SE was actually pretty tolerable. I genuinely preferred it to Win98. Though even back then I wasn't the biggest fan of Windows (the only Windows OS I've truly loved was Win2000).

While we're on the topic of Windows versions, I've always looked at it like Star Trek movies (alternating between good and bad)

Edited 2013-02-07 11:50 UTC

Reply Score: 2

phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

One minor quibble though:
"Windows 98SE (third major release of 9x OS)

There were a few editions of Win95 as well (albeit only sold as OEM discs rather than retail).
"

Since we're quibbling over minor points, Win95 only had 1 major release. The OSRs weren't advertised as new versions of the OS. Windows 98 Second Edition was advertised as a new OS, a major update. Thus, Win98SE was the third major release of the Win9x OSes. Hence, the major in my original post. ;)

I found Windows 95b (aka OSR 2.1) to be the nicest version. Full USB support, better drivers, nicer directX support, no IE integration. Made for a great base for LightStep/DarkStep UI tweaking.

Win98SE was also nice, and something I kept around for many, many, many years.

While we're on the topic of Windows versions, I've always looked at it like Star Trek movies (alternating between good and bad)


Pretty much.

3.1 good; 95 ok; 98 good; ME bad.

NT 4 ok; 2K good; XP ok; Vista bad; 7 good; 8 bad.

Reply Score: 3

laptop that doesnt work on the lap
by Adurbe on Wed 6th Feb 2013 14:52 UTC
Adurbe
Member since:
2005-07-06

My main concern with the surfaces is could i use it on my lap on the train/traveling? You dont always get a table. If you dont, you cant use the kyb so you cant get real work done and it must be a tablet..

Reply Score: 2

gsyoungblood
Member since:
2007-01-09

The ASuS Transformer tablet with keyboard dock still got the closest in this form factor. I have one of the first generation (tf101) and it's a great device. I really like it. My daughter likes it even more and has taken it. She's 5 now, and has had the tablet since I got it, a little over a year ago now.

The only thing ASuS flubbed on that was the keyboard itself, but playing with some of the newer keyboard docks I think it was just a 1st generation device problem.

Sure, it's not full laptop OS, and it doesn't try to be, it's an Android tablet after all. But in my mind it proves the form factor to be viable.

So while the Surface Pro may be a flop, I'd really like to see how reviews of things like HP's Envy X2 with Windows 8 compares. It might be it's the Surface Pro hardware that's the problem.

Reply Score: 4

dvhh Member since:
2006-03-20

Love my tf101 after fiddling with linux on, it I also installed droidEdit on it and do some of m. coding work on it. It is like a laptop that could last for days.

The only part of it I dislike is the touchpad (too small, and the button is tooo clicky ). Apart for games, it pretty much covers most of my computing needs.

Reply Score: 2

Battery Life and Metro
by snip3rm00n on Wed 6th Feb 2013 17:02 UTC
snip3rm00n
Member since:
2011-06-08

I'm willing to bet that without the Metro UI, battery life would probably be better. I have a Windows 8 box on my desk, even when its 'sleeping' the power consumed by it is astronomical as long as I have Metro active. Its sounds like its always trying to crunch huge amounts of data and the fans are running at full speed constantly.

I found a tweak called Ex7forWin8 (Explorer 7 for Windows 8) that takes the Windows 7 explorer and creates a wrapper around Windows 8 and disables metro entirely. The tweak can also allow you to switch between the two UIs, so Metro isn't gone completely its just not enabled or active. Since using it, the computer is whisper quiet.

Reply Score: 3

I'll Still Get One
by runjorel on Wed 6th Feb 2013 17:56 UTC
runjorel
Member since:
2009-02-09

I've been catching up on the reviews and I definitely understand the complaints. My only problem with the reviews I have read so far is that they either compare the Surface Pro (not speaking to the Surface/RT) to Laptops or Tablets. Because of the hardware and the full-blown OS, I really don't think these are fair comparisons. Reading some of these reviews is almost like reading a review from someone comparing the merits/faults of a Laptop in comparison to a Desktop and/or a Tablet. A Laptop has features of both a Desktop and a Tablet, but by no means is it the same product in either category. I feel it's the same with the Surface Pro...it's not a laptop and it's not a tablet...it's a ?. And I think that's the Surface Pro's main problem: device identification. It's not a tablet that converts to laptop with a lapdock etc. It's not a laptop that can go into tablet mode. It is what it is.

I am not saying that in defense of the Surface Pro, because I think MS should have done a better job communicating about what this is exactly and what problems this device has solutions for. But overall, despite some of the complaints, I think I will still be getting one, because I use a tablet with an on-screen keyboard when I am on the couch and I can do that on the Surface Pro. When I am at a coffee shop, desk, or table, etc. I can use it like I would a laptop. When I just want to browse the web, I will hop into tablet (Metro) mode. When I need to finish writing up some code, I'll hop back into the traditional desktop. All on ONE DEVICE. Sure for the same price I could buy both a tablet and laptop, but I don't mind spending the extra money to carry around ONE device. I am tired of carrying multiple devices.

Besides, I remember when the iPad came out and everyone laughed at it. They said it was just a big iPhone and that it wasn't going to do anything. It was going to flop. Now look at it. It has defined what tablet computing means. And I am not trying to foreshadow the market acceptance of the Surface Pro. I am just saying some ideas were thought of as stupid when they first came out, but then turned out to be really cool things.

Overall I think this is a good idea poorly communicated. I know a lot of people will disagree, but to each their own.

Reply Score: 4

Comment by Luminair
by Luminair on Wed 6th Feb 2013 19:40 UTC
Luminair
Member since:
2007-03-30

The race to tablet wasn't just for the tablet shape. It was for the effortless weight and dimensions we dream about. Now that laptops are thin and light, are we still so sure we need the tablet design?

Reply Score: 4

ze_jerkface
Member since:
2012-06-22

all make a better hybrid at a better price.

Of course I am joking about the duct tape but from the beginning I haven't seen a good explanation as to why the vast majority would buy a Surface Pro instead of a laptop + an iPad mini.

I don't think Microsoft or any of its pathetic defenders even understand how people are using iPads. They're using them to watch tv, play games while on the toilet, read a book on the plane, etc. We are talking consumption devices and Surface is a bad idea in this regard. It's too expensive and doesn't offer a comparable touch-based library. Android tablets are a better competitor and the market has already affirmed this.

Reply Score: 0

Hell Just Got Chilly
by ezraz on Wed 6th Feb 2013 20:26 UTC
ezraz
Member since:
2012-06-20

-Thom posting a front page post that I agree with 100% ? Wow. I posted these same thoughts and more last August:
http://wfnk.com/blog/2012/08/surface-thoughts/

I get called a 'fanboi' all the time around here and Thom sees a product's deficiencies the same way I do? Progress ;-)

Reply Score: 0

Why was this not obvious to them?
by leos on Wed 6th Feb 2013 21:33 UTC
leos
Member since:
2005-09-21

I can't understand why microsoft didn't learn anything in 10 years. They tried this exact strategy ages ago with their Tablet PCs and it failed. After the iPad showing them that you need a dedicated OS with new apps to make a successful tablet, they staunchly refused to learn anything and made another Tablet PC with some newer bits in it.

This isn't about not getting it right, it's about trying to accomplish the impossible. If you want laptop power you will get more heat and weight and poor battery life so it will never be as good as a dedicated tablet on a mobile processor.
And the reality of putting the battery in the screen rather than keyboard means that the weight balance will always be wrong when used as a laptop.

This isn't about implementation, it's about physical impossibilities until we come up with components that are orders of magnitude lighter and more power efficient.

Reply Score: 2

miguelholandes
Member since:
2013-02-07

I do not have any experiences with Surface, but in my opinion Windows 8 is nothing short of brilliant. First of all, I have no problem at all using it with a mouse, so I really do not understand why people state that Metro should only be used for touch based devices....
Second, it offers two entirely different operating systems in one, Metro and the old Windows 7, and both natively, and with one quick you can switch between the one and the other. Granted,there are not so much applications for the Metro interface, but that holds true for any new operating system. Install new software in Metro is very easy, just click once or twice, you do not have to think of where you want it installed, easy can do. And in my opinion it is a pleasure for the eye too. If you do not like the Metro interface, you do not have to use it, you do not even have to see it ever, but you can still benefit from lots of suttle technical improvements in the background, like performance and security improvements.

What more can you expect from a new operating system??

Reply Score: 3

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Indeed Windows 8 is a work of genius. Clearly the best OS in the world, and probably on earth as well...

Reply Score: 2

miguelholandes Member since:
2013-02-07

I am new here, do not know how to quote yet....

<<Let me guess, you work for Microsoft Brazil?>>

No not at all....and I have used Linux too, lots of different distributions.... I really think Windows 8 is great, easy to use, pleasant for the eye, and I think it is unique that it gives you two different ways to work within one os. On top of that, the price is really very low, or at least was, I bought it for about 26 euro for the update version during the promotion period. That is dirt cheap, it also means that one reason to use Linux, that it is for free, hardly is a valid anymore, why subject yourself to all these bugs and lack of software only to save yourself 26 euro or so....that is weird.

Edited 2013-02-08 14:45 UTC

Reply Score: 1

r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

That is dirt cheap, it also means that one reason to use Linux, that it is for free, hardly is a valid anymore, why subject yourself to all these bugs and lack of software only to save yourself 26 euro or so....that is weird.


As if price is the only reason to use Linux. How about the freedom to use your system as you see fit? Not everybody needs a ready-made, one-system-fits-all solution.

When it comes to software. Do you need the platform that has thousands of applications you don't have a need for or the platform that has the applications you want? It all depends on what you want to do with a given system.

When it comes to bugs, all software has bugs. Linux isn't more or less buggy then Windows or OS X.

Personally, I'm glad that I'm a Linux user. It has given me the option (at home) to sidestep the harebrained idea to replace an efficient, context preserving menu with an ill fitting, context destroying, (mobile inspired) floating overlay, with badly organized program shortcuts.

If these new fangled interface elements would have been optional, I wouldn't have minded as much, but these things are force fed.

Reply Score: 2

v Virus scanner
by bram on Thu 7th Feb 2013 01:11 UTC
RE: Virus scanner
by Nelson on Thu 7th Feb 2013 06:15 UTC in reply to "Virus scanner"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Just install Windows Store apps, they run in an isolated sandbox.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Virus scanner
by lucas_maximus on Thu 7th Feb 2013 10:22 UTC in reply to "Virus scanner"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

The little computational power advantage it may have on an iPad is quickly gobbled up by virus scanners, crapware, adware and malware.


Not these arguments again.

Windows only has these problems because people willy nilly install crap, the same problem is evident with novice ubuntu wannabes take Remastersys and install every service and application under the sun.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Virus scanner
by cdude on Thu 7th Feb 2013 12:17 UTC in reply to "RE: Virus scanner"
cdude Member since:
2008-09-21

Yeah, dump customers. If they not install anything, not browse the internet and not email there is no problem. Clearly customers fault.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Virus scanner
by lucas_maximus on Thu 7th Feb 2013 12:49 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Virus scanner"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

:|

The point being that installing applications by itself doesn't slow Windows down, never had done ... never will.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Virus scanner
by REM2000 on Thu 7th Feb 2013 14:12 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Virus scanner"
REM2000 Member since:
2006-07-25

i generally agree with you, a pure application will not have an impact on Windows.

However it's easy to install apps that slowly but surely grind Windows into the ground. Say you install Adobe Reader (free one) that installs a background update checker that runs every time you boot windows, it also then installs a plugin into IE which again gets started when you open IE, finally if you have outlook, outlook will then load the PDF plugin.

Overall this one application that is simply viewing PDF's is having 'an' impact on the machine, slowing (slightly) the boot, slowing IE and slowing Outlook. Of course being a power user you can disable a lot of that and windows 8 improves things by allowing users to easily view startup items in the task manager, however for your average joe, installing apps does start slowing windows down.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Virus scanner
by lucas_maximus on Thu 7th Feb 2013 15:03 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Virus scanner"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Again all of it is trivial to turn off. Also tbh, any OS does this (MacOSX does the same, I hear the designers say the same).

It a consequence of being able to run what you want.

Edited 2013-02-07 15:13 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Virus scanner
by darknexus on Thu 7th Feb 2013 15:51 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Virus scanner"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Again all of it is trivial to turn off.

Of course it is, if you understand the concepts. Remember, from the point of view of the majority of users, they just "installed that Adobe Reader thingy" and now their computer slowed down a bit. We know we can turn these background updaters and plugins off. Unfortunately, most people don't even have a concept that a program is multiple parts. It's "that Flash thing" or "that pdf thing" and they no more understand all the crap it installs than most of us would understand the inner workings of subatomic particles.

Also tbh, any OS does this (MacOSX does the same, I hear the designers say the same).

Well, strictly speaking, it's not the os that does it in either case. I will say though, most OS X programs are much better behaved (although, of course, Adobe products are an exception). Most programs on OS X don't run background updaters, they check for updates when you launch the program and either install them automatically (Chrome) or alert you and let you decide. This is not an inherent strength of OS X, just a consequence of better application design. I'd like to see this design be used more often in Windows programs, and there is no reason why this couldn't happen except for laziness on the part of the application developers.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Virus scanner
by lucas_maximus on Thu 7th Feb 2013 18:24 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Virus scanner"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I completely agree. But blaming Windows for this is incorrect.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Virus scanner
by darknexus on Thu 7th Feb 2013 15:53 UTC in reply to "Virus scanner"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

The most damning part of this contraption: you need to run a virus scanner on your 'tablet'.

Bullshit. There's nothing a virus scanner can do for you that you yourself can't do with some fucking common sense. If you're dumb enough to download "1000 Free Gamez and crackz," then you deserve whatever you get and it doesn't matter what os you're running. The same applies if you just click yes to every damned thing that pops up without reading it.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Virus scanner
by lucas_maximus on Thu 7th Feb 2013 18:25 UTC in reply to "RE: Virus scanner"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I run with a Virus Scanner on just in case I make a mistake. If a Virus scanner is half decent, it doesn't kill performance.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Virus scanner
by bert64 on Fri 8th Feb 2013 09:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Virus scanner"
bert64 Member since:
2007-04-23

What is it with this myth that malware only comes from dodgy websites, warez and user stupidity?

There are plenty of drive-by exploits which don't require user interaction, or don't require users to do anything they don't normally do.
Legit websites get hacked to spread malware...
Malware can come via physical media rather than the network.
Malware can easily come from people you know and/or trust who have been infected.
Store bought media and other devices have been known to arrive already infected.
There is plenty of malware masquerading as legitimate software, and since windows didn't provide a central repository until recently and most software doesn't use it anyway, users are forced to search for it themselves and will often fall victim to malicious versions.

AV is obviously deeply flawed, but then so is the underlying system and AV acts to reduce the impact of those flaws at the expense of performance. The most effective way for users, especially non technical ones to avoid this overhead is to use a system like iOS which is tightly controlled by a (hopefully competent) external party.

Reply Score: 3

The form factor is fail
by abdavidson on Fri 8th Feb 2013 02:13 UTC
abdavidson
Member since:
2005-07-06

It's that simple. I don't understand why more people didn't see it from the earliest time we saw it, presented as a no-touch-look-only by Sinofsky.

It was so obvious to me that it would be a failure for any purpose except ironically when used on a stable surface.

I don't know how many others said it but I personally didn't see many and whenever I've personally written it or said it I've been shouted down as speaking nonsense. And lo and behold many of the cheerleaders for it who are now using it are by and large seeing that hold on, this isn't actually any use for any case but... on a solid stable surface.

That's just referring to the Surface form factor. Windows 8 is a mess. Sitting with it on your lap and getting stuck in Desktop-land; Microsoft have learned nothing about touch usability of the OS from the WinCE/PDA days. Nothing. A bigger icon on the same old interface doesn't make it a touch interface.

Reply Score: 2

takes up too much room right now.
by graig on Fri 8th Feb 2013 02:51 UTC
graig
Member since:
2010-09-18

i kind of agree. windows 8 takes up too much space on a tablet.. in a couple of years when tablets get more SSD space it probably wont matter. but right now they need to cut out some stuff so that your not loosing half your space on the OS. i know it's more of a full fledged computer. so maybe it's ok. and really what should have happened, the windows RT tablet should have come with that pen too.. that would have been cool.

Reply Score: 2

Re:
by kurkosdr on Fri 8th Feb 2013 15:26 UTC
kurkosdr
Member since:
2011-04-11

How many people would make Metro apps if Microsoft hadn't force fed Metro on desktops and laptop users? Not many. Everyone would keep targeting iPad and Android tablets. Now that they force-fed Metro on desktop and laptop users even VLC has a Metro app.

Microsoft is sacrificing desktop and laptop upgrade sales to shoehorn themselves in the tablet market. If the execution was not as bad (hard drive space) Windows RT might had a chance.

Reply Score: 2

I am looking forward to version 2
by Moochman on Fri 8th Feb 2013 16:27 UTC
Moochman
Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't know how Thom came to these conclusions based on all the of articles he linked, other than by virtue of the fact that he's extremely biased to begin with. The AnandTech, Engadget and Verge articles are all pretty positive. They all pretty much say the same thing: It's a bit too heavy and the battery life is a bit too short. And the camera sucks. But everything else is really decent.

And here's the thing, which Anand very astutely pointed out: This is a first-generation product, that uses a CPU not really designed for these kinds of form factors. This is all set to get a lot better with the next iteration, which will an Intel Haswell chip (the first chips from Intel that are really designed to compete with ARM in terms of energy profile). So basically, the next version will run less hot and be more energy-efficient, and MS will probably find a way to slim things down and upgrade the camera. And with that, all of the major problems of this device (aside from Windows 8 itself, but that's a matter of taste) are solved.

This is an early-adopter device, pure and simple. The battery life alone makes it not worthy of consideration. But it offers a lot of cool stuff that Apple products don't.... A tablet that's not horribly locked down, is as fast as a laptop, that features Wacom pen input, has an awesome first-party keyboard accessory, and that lets me run any apps I want to in desktop mode anytime I feel like it. That's pretty freaking cool if you ask me. And compared to ultrabook prices or top-of-the-line iPads the price is within reason as well. Come the next generation, if the battery life is suitably improved, I would seriously considering switching from a 13" MacBook Pro to a Surface.

Reply Score: 4

You are so smart!
by modicr on Fri 8th Feb 2013 18:36 UTC
modicr
Member since:
2005-09-20

> Reading through them all,
That's ALL???

> All this has solidified my belief that Windows 8,
> as it stands now, was the wrong way to go.

Blah, blah, blah ...
I strongly disagree!!!

> Microsoft could have entered the hardware space with
> a beautifully simple range of devices

It is so easy to talk/write about it, isn't it?
There are a lot of challenges when implementing/executing it ...

http://hal2020.com/2013/02/06/congratulations-microsoft-on-the-surf...

http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/18063g/i_am_panos_panay_with_...

There are more than 2600 comments. Read them ALL for your homework ... ;)

Cheers, Roman

Edited 2013-02-08 18:52 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Why is Microsoft repeating its mistakes?
by PieterGen on Sun 10th Feb 2013 18:30 UTC
PieterGen
Member since:
2012-01-13

One big question for me is why Microsoft is continuing on this path of "One Windows Way". Consumers want things that are NOT desktop PCs. What I see is consumers who want "the right tool to do the job". Yet Microsoft is clinging on to the old vision of the same (clunky) Windows for desktop, phone, tablet, game console and so on. So, basically they are offering something that the market is moving away from.

Why not "pump up" WindowsPhone and thus create the WindowsTablet? Just Android and iOS have done ? That way they could offer stuff for the desktop and stuff for mobile. Windows has been a great cash cow for 15 years and will continue to bring revenue, but the market wants mobile devices AS WELL, with an OS that is right for mobile!

Suppose you have a market in which people move away from beer to wine. What would you, as a bar owner? What Microsoft does, is offer the clients beer bottled in wine bottles. Do they really think this will work ???

Edited 2013-02-10 18:33 UTC

Reply Score: 1

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

why Microsoft is continuing on this path of "One Windows Way". Consumers want things that are NOT desktop PCs. What I see is consumers who want "the right tool to do the job". Yet Microsoft is clinging on to the old vision of the same (clunky) Windows for desktop, phone, tablet, game console and so on

Not on games console - X360 doesn't use Windows NT kernel. And come on, while WP8 phones do use it, they come with completely new UI - so they're far from "One Windows Way"

Reply Score: 2

Sold out!
by truckweb on Mon 11th Feb 2013 17:38 UTC
truckweb
Member since:
2005-07-06

Well, forget about the reviews, forget about bad opinions, because the Surface Pro is sold out just about every were, even online.

I guess it did click with a few people!!!

Reply Score: 2

RE: Sold out!
by Jokel on Mon 11th Feb 2013 22:36 UTC in reply to "Sold out!"
Jokel Member since:
2006-06-01

Well - another one that falls for the marketing trick..

Yep - they are sold out.

Well - actually most shops do only had a few in stock, and they where indeed sold out. I have seen several story's about someone wanting to buy this thing, but the shop had only two in stock to start with. One was sold around early in the morning and the other one a few hours later. When he came for one at midday both where sold. There were even shops that could not deliver the pre-ordered devices, because (deliberately or not - make your choice) they did not got what they asked for.

The marketing trick is obvious. Give shops a very low supply, and when they run out of this small supply claim a huge success because all available stock is sold the first day!

Now - I think it is more interesting to know how many devices where actually sold, and how many of them where pre-ordered devices. That would give a better picture about what actually happened..

Reply Score: 1