While on stage, Microsoft Vice President of Surface Panos Panay explained how the teams have worked hard in making the next generation of Surface tablets cooler, lighter, quieter, more efficient and have longer lasting power reactors. The Surface Pro 2 was up first and is all about power, with new covers and better components to further improve the user experience. If you’re after the premium Surface experience, this will be the correct choice.
[…]
The Surface 2 is lighter, has a faster CPU and now sports a 1080 display with ClearType. Powering Windows RT 8.1, the Surface 2 brings new exciting features to the table, without bumping the price above the competition.
Specification bumps all around, and thinner, lighter, and changes borne from customer feedback, such as the adjustable kickstand. I like the full HD display on the Surface 2 (the ARM version of Surface), and the Haswell improvements to power and battery life on the Surface Pro 2 are substantial.
Still, as a Surface RT owner, the hardware has never been the issue. My Surface RT is a very enjoyable piece of hardware to hold – well-built, sturdy, solid, and very well designed. Specification-wise, it packs more than enough power, too. Sadly, Surface was let down by software; Windows RT and the Metro interface are simply not of decent enough quality, and the applications for it are even worse – slow, jittery animations, crash-prone, rarely updated. All the hallmarks of side projects; things developers may work on when they’re not working on Android or iOS applications.
Windows 8.1 seems to have fixed little of those issues (although Surface RT owners are still waiting for the final release), and with Microsoft’s notoriously slow development pace, I hardly see that change any time soon.
Surface RT –> Surface 2
Surface –> nothing
Surface Pro –> Surface 2 Pro
I predict a lot of people with the original Surface will be upgrading to the Surface 2 only to discover that none of their apps work, none of their x86 software works, and will be returning them en masse.
Dropping the “RT” from the name of the ARM version is just going to cause even more confusion in the MS tablet space.
They really should have named it the “Surface RT 2”, and then the other version should be named “Surface Pro 2”.
There is no “Surface”. It was always Surface RT and Surface Pro.
Surface Pro updates to Surface Pro 2 and Surface RT updates to Surface 2.
The original named Microsoft Surface project and hyped enormously a few years ago is renamed Microsoft PixelSense though in their continuing trend towards hiding any former market failures (even though the tech-demos I have seen was fairly impressive for the time)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_PixelSense
Hrm, could have sworn there were 3 versions of the original.
Either way, dropping RT from the name is just going to lead to confusion.
I don’t think it’ll make much of a difference in either direction. I honestly don’t think a single person said “Surface RT is such a confusing name I’m going to buy an iPad” and I also don’t think they’ll say “Surface 2 is such a simple name I’m going to buy a Surface”
Where I do hope they simplify is the Lumia naming convention, that’s a clusterfuck.
Can someone explain why Microsoft didn’t go the C# + .NET way? It seems like a perfect solution for ARM vs X86.
Legacy software.
They did. Apps in the store will run on both tablets and Windows 8 on the desktop.
But, while Windows RT has the desktop included, you can’t install/run desktop apps. The included version of Office is the only desktop app allowed.
I don’t know if the Surface Pro has access to the desktop or not, but it would be painful to use on a touch-only interface (no Type/Touch cover).
http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2009/12/version-1-sucks-but-ship-i…
* Took 3-4 versions of Windows to get it right.
* Took 5 version of Windows NT.
* Took 3 versions of the CLR to get right.
* Took 8-9 versions of SQL Server to be decent.
Will have to see. The competitive environmnent is different now from those previous conditions. All I know is that I don’t want them succeed to the point that I’m forced to pay a windows tax to get a decent tablet.
What is Windows Tax? because I never seen it mentioned in my payslip.
Edited 2013-09-23 19:49 UTC
While MS tries to catch up to what Android did years ago. The pricing and spect bumps aren’t going to cut it. MS needs.. developers, developers developers developers. Android/IOS have them.
And the competition at that time for the first versions were?
You see, the scenery this time is a bit different, they are fighting two already entrenched and “admired” players with lots of money to invest on their products too with a similar potential to keep the fight going, i.e., they get lots of cash from other activities. It is also very different from “Word x Word Perfect” case and all that happened before.
And I am still unconvinced of it.
Granted, it is a decent product now but then again it is a different battle from what MS tablets are entitled to fight.
Again, I am not saying that they may not succeed, only that its is really different this time. Will be a great spectacle, nevertheless. I am already stocking popcorn. 😉
They can stay in this fight for years.
Be unconvinced then, I will keep on solving problems for my employer using it. I really don’t like it when people slag off .NET because tbh you won’t find a better designed core API.
Most .NET programmers would agree that the first truly decent version was 2.
Again it was saying that Microsoft usually takes quite a few iterations to get it right.
And I am still waiting for the big project that will make use of all the potential .NET, XAML and all provides. I see lots of small projects that are great to interact with MS business backends, though. Perhaps, I have my fingers burned by the first iterations and should try it again but most of my things are on Linux/Android camp right now.
I really like questions that are loaded, because they are easy to debunk.
ASP.NET and the .NET if you actually followed any of their blog posts or correspondence of any sort are basically trying to let yo load stuff up like Lego … i.e as a set of components.
This attitude is generally present now in the ecosystem.
He’s obviously never used OWIN, its pretty much awesomesauce for webdev
Well, at my employer we have lots to choose from.
Just as an example, the last .NET project I took part on, was a two year project, with more than 30 developers on average, scattered in three development sites.
It made use of IIS, ASP.NET, App Fabric, SiteCore, SQL Server, SAP, REST/SOAP, jQuery, TFS, partial deployment in Amazon EC2.
In terms of project costs and profit, you could buy a few houses.
There are plenty of big C++/Java/.NET in the Fortune 500 consulting world to choose from.
It amazes me that micro-Ballmer is still trying to push out even more garbage than before. But, it doesn’t suprise me either! Stupid is as stupid does, I guess. ;-P
Well that was insightful … not
I insist on this because It’s so obvious, yet no one realizes it.
Microsoft develops everything in-house. Their own OS, driver model, display technologies, programming languages. Apple does to a certain point, but not as much and Google (Google reuses plenty of what is available out there for Android).
In practice, if you compare Android, iOS and WinPhone, this reflects on how much the OS improves over time and how fast. Android is the clear winner, iOS comes second and Windows Phone has barely changed in years.
I don’t think Microsoft can keep the pace of developing OSs anymore, everything takes them so long and constantly release unpolished or unfinished software. Over the time they always end up in great and mature products, but they never had the competition they have now.
Whoever the new CEO will be, I hope he or she adapts more open development models, so they can reuse more of what is available (or allows others to participate).
I’m glad to see they’re pushing forward with the Surface Pro line. I’ve heard good things about the Wacom-built stylus digitizer in the base model as a cheaper, more portable alternative to owning a Wacom Cintiq.
Combine that with reports of success installing Linux on the original Surface Pro and that sounds like something I’d like to own once process has gained a bit of polish.
I really want MS to succeed with the surface. The concern I have is the glacial pace of software updates and releases.
The iPad and iPhone updates tend to do things like optimise battery life and speed. How long will it take MS to release these optimising updates?
The phones suffer from the same problem.I wish to upgrade my phone, I am torn between the Nokia 1020 phone and the IPhone 5s, I know Apples’ software updates will be timely and available to install.
Historically Nokia updates in Australia are not released in a timely fashion and woe if you have a contract phone as the carrier may never allow it.
Tablet software updates are not tied to the carrier like phones but the release schedule for one is tied to the other.
OOHHHH! New craptablets from Microsoft! NEAT! While I will not debate the utility of the Surface Pro, I will call into question it’s ridiculous price…which automatically means it will not sell in the numbers needed to be successful….
Instead I will wholeheartedly agree with the author on the “RT” Surface, WHATEVER they decide to call it. You have a CRAPPY OS, guys! One with VERY little good software, and little to recommend it to most customers other than the fact it runs Office! Until they fix the problem they have with the DEVELOPERS!!! DEVELOPERS!!! DEVELOPERS!!! and the crappy quality and quantity of the apps in the store, this will CONTINUE to be a money pit and total failure for MS!
I have ZERO faith that they will be able to execute on this product, and can not WAIT for the $1.5 billion write down next year.
I don’t like software amateurs botching the operating systems I run in my mobile devices.
I’ll wait for the Surface 2 Google Edition to experience a pure version of… oh, wait.
Windows 8.1 is a solid but incremental update; I’ve been fiddling with the final release and am itching to update my gaming PC to it. (Unfortunately no final version of RT on MSDN though, so my Surface RT is still on Preview…)
The biggest problems remain:
* Modern app ecosystem is both locked down AND relatively unpopular. People put up with iOS’s code signing and review system because there’s a huge market, but there’s just not the same demand for ‘Modern’ Windows apps so devs don’t put serious effort into it. The ‘side project effect’ is very real.
* The ARM desktop is totally locked down for NO APPARENT REASON. This hugely limits the appeal of Windows RT as a lightweight dockable laptop/desktop replacement unless Office is literally the *only thing you do* on a Windows machine.
Simply allowing cross-compiling of desktop apps to ARM would have made the Surface RT a useful work tool for me instead of a toy and testing machine…
The Ars Technica article “Hands on with Surface 2…” by Peter Bright refers to the Surface Tablet as “robust and secure”.
I have run into similar comments before, and although I have assumed that some of this refers to the apparently high quality of the construction, there usually seems to be an implication that the operating system itself is solid.
I see very mixed results when I ask if a Surface needs anti-virus (which astonishes me—I would have assumed it was a given).
Is there any reason to think the Surface operating system is more stable or more secure than Android? I run one flavour or another of Linux on my systems, but Android, and tablets in general, are among the many things I know nothing about.
Just curious.