Following your brilliant thoughts on criticism in general, I propose that we ban all tech reviews, literary critics, and all sorts of critical thinking, with the exception, of course, of people who have created flawless pieces of work. Roger Ebert should be dug up and then ceremoniously shot and stripped of all of his awards.
Also, it goes without saying that if you want to submit any criticism to this comment, you'll have to submit a full resume, a short fugue, and run a marathon backwards.
edit: Heh, I might have gone a bit over the top. On-topic: SP3 is a seriously impressive piece of work and I sense great things coming from Microsoft under Satya's reign (if only they would start properly leveraging their wonderful MSR).
I am going to assume your comment is in good faith.
My observation was that a single glitch is seen as some sort of disaster, when in reality is a simple issue in one scenario that clearly was not prioritized over many other scenarios. Anybody knows there are constraints in design, and clearly they decided one thing over another.
We can all be arm chair generals, but my focus is on the engineers themselves who must be frustrated that their work is generalized as a global failure because "it's Microsoft."
I don't know about other people but Ioway saw the built-in Wacom tablet as one the best features of the Surface. I know that having a great digitizers one of the few things that I wish my iPad had, and my brother seriously looked at buying a Surface because the built-in digitizer.
In fact some of the best reviews I've seen of the Surface, such as Penny Arcade's, we're so happy with the precisely because of the ability to draw.
Given that that's one of their standout features, it seems odd that they would make such a big mistake with it. From the description it sounds like something that anyone who used the Surface for drawing for more than a short amount of time would've run into. It also sounds frustrating enough that it might ruin the usefulness of the tablet for precisely the kind of people who might of bought it.
Good faith, in my opinion, is about contributing to the discussion in a valuable way. Reminding you that you don't get to set the conditions for criticising your work, even in a tongue in cheek way, is just that.
Also, it goes without saying that if you want to submit any criticism to this comment, you'll have to submit a full resume, a short fugue, and run a marathon backwards.
edit: Heh, I might have gone a bit over the top. On-topic: SP3 is a seriously impressive piece of work and I sense great things coming from Microsoft under Satya's reign (if only they would start properly leveraging their wonderful MSR).