All this from a wank-tastic buzz video that doesn't even show the device in operation?
What is it with the punditry these days? Surely there is a whole evo-biol book out there devoted to explaining this particular nonsense facet of human behaviour?
While I don't disagree that the video is style over substance, it would be wrong to say that the hardware is vapour. MS gave out 5000 windows 8 tablets last year: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/BUILD-Tablets-Developers-Wi... I assume that they've learned from those devices in the nine months since they shipped hardware.
Yes, those devices were "Samsung" branded and these will be "Microsoft" branded. The components inside, or the factory in China where they may be assembled probably won't be changed by that.
Technically, anything that has been announced and not shipped is vapourware. But I wouldn't say that surface is notably vaporous, since it's not late - it can't ship before win8 does; nor is it technically unlikely for the hardware or software to ship - similar Win8-beta devices shipped 9 months ago, and Apple makes similar hardware in huge quantity.
Most importantly of all, no prices at all have been unveiled. There are no reviews. There is no ecosystem (speaking specifically of the ARM device. The Intel device is going to be a hot, power-gobbling, very expensive beast and is effectively an ultrabook more than a tablet)
Yup, sure thing. Apple better start saving for that rainy day.
OP here. I agree (and state in my article) that MS could completely screw this up by pricing themselves out of the market. I don't expect they will though, but mostly because they can afford to make it cheap - even sell at cost, if they have to.
I'd argue that reviews and software are less relevant here than they were for say Android in a similar position:
1. People will buy it regardless of reviews (even if only on the desktop at first). Metro is guaranteed to get share off the back of Windows.
2. Developers will follow that share.
Essentially with enough time Microsoft are guaranteed to leverage their Windows share to Metro, and combined with some competitive hardware makes them a force to be reckoned with.
I'm pretty much the definition of an Apple fanboy (I own an iPad, 2 MacBook Pros, an iMac, an iPhone AND APPL stock). And I still stopped to say - that hardware looks impressive. If they can do that to me, well...
That's taking shape already. There is an app store, there is an SDK. And there are loads of programmers who know one or more of the supported languages on the metro API for Arm and Intel - C++, C# or Javascript
The brilliance of the ipad isn't what it can do, it's what it doesn't do. E.g., Apple took away file management from the user, much like an automatic transmission takes away shifting gears from the driver. Consumers love it but enterprise IT is resisting for various reasons, so MS still has the advantage in the corporate world.
But I'm not convinced this 'all in one' strategy is the best way for Microsoft. If it's just Win7 with a fancy tiled interface, then it's really not that much different from their previous tablet efforts. It all hinges on getting good 3rd party app support. It'll probably sell higher volume because they are faster and more responsive than the last generation, but they'll be lucky to see half the sales of ipads in 5 years.
Surface is Microsofts attempt to appear relevant verses Apple and Google. They need to show that they are still a mover and a shaker in the industry, even more so given the damp squib that Windows Phone 7 has been so far.
A smarter move would have been to keep Windows 8 and Windows Metro separate. Have Windows 8 be the continuation of the desktop/laptop line, a cash cow they can continue to milk until it falls over dead a ways down the road. Metro would the new hotness that brings the developers back to the yard. A new environment for them to build off without the weeds of the last 20 years strangling them.Free of the constraints of Windows, Metro would stand an excellent chance to succeed against Apple, Android et al.
While bundling Metro together with Windows might give it a foundation to build off but its more likely going to be the stone that sinks it.
I respectfully disagree - in fact, I'd argue keeping them separate is one big reason why Windows Mobile failed in the past (the other reason is it sucked donkey balls).
Windows will sell regardless. It's a bit like if Google does something to the UI which people don't like - people complain, and some may leave - but the vast majority will stomach it. They're just that entrenched. Even Vista sold 400 million copies.
So by foisting Metro on their existing audience they virtually guarantee hundreds of millions of Metro users (albeit on the desktop, or hybrid platforms, at first). That gets their new OS traction, attracting developers, building a software library and brand equity.
If they don't do that, they'd be stuck selling Windows AND selling a competing OS at the same time (that rarely works out well). And they'd be up against iOS and Android purely on their own merits. With the market as busy as it is now, that'd be equivalent to releasing the Blackberry Playbook.
Of course I could be wrong - this is all just my speculation (I'm the OP btw).
My feeling is that this will be a hit because imagine finding there are some great applications you use daily on your Laptop in the WinRT mode and now you can take them with you on your Surface device. As a developer and consumer I am very excited about this and from an enterprise view consider being able to re-use a lot of your code base to make these applications for your workers - excellent!
I haven't used windows 8 so I don't know if it feels like a disaster to use on a desktop but I am hoping and assuming once I get used to not having a start button I will be quite happy using it and will love jumping into RT for the more funky fun stuff.
Very true this is aimed at a generation of Xbox players (youth) who aren't tied to the old methods of getting things done this is basically a computer/tablet with enough power for the standard user and if word,excel... etc runs on it, it's what my kids are getting for school very flexible for them. Though three things can kill microsofts growth.
1.price point, people won't understand the pro model's pricing which will be the same as a standard pc in the $1,000 range
2.dont try to be like apple actually do the opposite, prove your product is different.(the viewing should have been live your the new guy on the block)
3.make a tough decision and only allow windows 8 on touch screen desktop p.c's if it's not touch screen you have to use the alternate desktop interface.
On top of this I'm wondering how much the language their using will be an advantage C++ if any, if they supply devs with great templates like apple.
If they can get this out before Fall classes begin, this should enjoy a nice bump form the back-to-school demographic. If I were I student, I'd be considering an an Apple Air (and perhaps an HP equiv) and an iPad.
With the nice keyboard integration, and USB I/F along with windows application compatibility, this would definitely have the upper hand. An advantage an Ipad would have might be display quality, if I were in a creative field (i.e. looking at hi-res images). For note taking, this Surface seems like it hit a good balance.
Why don't you just grab a MacBook Air 11" with you and have everything you have ever used in your "bag". Small, light, enough processing power and no sacrifices using your notebook. Why on earth would you want a tablet which you could transform into a half assed notebook?
Would you buy a motorcycle and try to drive it like a car?
The pompous attitude of Microsoft and everything that surronds them is getting more silly and childish every time they do it. Does anyone buy it at all anymore?
I'd say this has the markings of overhype, what with not actually demonstrating the device. We got, what ... a single demo of a video playing or something?
I would love to finally see some real competition with iOS in the tablet space, but my feeling is that this isn't it. It's Windows Phone 7, bigger. And that worked beautifully for Apple, but nobody has been buying Windows Phone.
Don't underestimate the value of Microsoft Office. A lot of people are completely dependent and vendor locked on MS Office. No matter how good Android and iOS tablets are, they're not able to be the only computer of someone who's been Office-locked. So even if the Surface comes out with a few rough edges, there might be a surprisingly big audience.
I personally use TeX for docs, mutt for e-mail and don't really use spreadsheets, so I'm quite indifferent about this.
Windows Phone had to compete with entrenched rivals, and was very late to the party.
Metro is bundled with an OS that is essentially assured a crap-tonne of sales before it's launched. It'll also have more exposure (in retail space etc) than every other laptop and desktop out there.
Not saying it's a slam dunk, but if I were Apple or Google I'd be concerned.
Windows Phone had to compete with entrenched rivals, and was very late to the party.
Windows Phone wasn't Microsoft's first dance on the smartphone floor. In fact they were one of the very first on smartphones with Windows CE, heralded as a sure thing because it was "bundled with an OS" with some sort of desktop synergy that assured world dominance.
We know how that turned out. Apple and RIM ate their lunch, and the synergy with the desktop thing was an anchor instead of a lift.
It's a fair point, but I don't believe the comparison holds this time round.
Firstly, Windows CE was demonstrably years behind tech-wise - even a causal grandmother consumer could see the difference between an iPhone and a CE device. That's not the case here: this looks (to casual eyes) like an iPad equivalent.
Secondly that time round they went at it by making the phone alude to the Windows brand. Here they're using the Windows sales (which are assured) to get Metro in front of users.
Thirdly they're now copying a proven thing (the iPad). Last time they were half-leading the charge for semi-smartphones, and never figured out the right tech to evangelise people. They've always been better at copying than at innovating afresh.
Forthly they're all in. They basically screwed the desktop OS over to put tablets front and centre. All their considerable weight and spending power will be behind this - in shops up and down the land.
Of course it's not over yet. But if they play this right, it could be very interesting game indeed.
- Microsoft was in the phone business long before the iPhone and their allegiance to Windows was one of the big reasons they sucked.
- Massive Windows 8 sales numbers are far from guaranteed.
- They've diverged pretty radically from the iPad UI. I'm happy to see this, but this also means they can't count on similarities to the iPad to drive sales.
This may in fact turn out to be a hit but I'm not persuaded by your arguments.
I had one of the first O2 XDA phones (released 2002) and also one of the first iphones. I'd say the biggest improvement was in the network speed and price of the data packages over the (5?) years or so between those two purchases. I'm not saying the iPhone doesn't roundly trounce it in general, just other things matter more.
What is it with the punditry these days? Surely there is a whole evo-biol book out there devoted to explaining this particular nonsense facet of human behaviour?