Why Microsoft Surface Took So Long To Deploy

An anonymous reader writes "Nearly a year after all the fanfare unveiling a new touchscreen tabletop interface, Microsoft's Surface computer will finally appear in select AT&T stores later this month. Popular Mechanics tech editor Glenn Derene, who first introduced us to Surface in May, seems to have done a complete 180 in this rant, blasting Microsoft for being more obsessed with Surface's novelty as a magnet for image-conscious partners while messing up a rare hardware device — and, surprisingly, the simple software he was told came with it. From Microsoft's official excuse in the article: 'It's actually been a good thing for us,' Pete Thompson, Microsoft's general manager for Surface, told me. 'We were anticipating that the initial deployments were going to be showcase pilots using our own software applications on units to drive traffic. What our partners have decided is that they want to skip that stage and go to an integrated experience where they build their own applications. That's pulled the timeline until this spring.'"

Comments

civ4

[ionix5891]

be cool to play civ4 on one of these yokes

Re:civ4

[s0litaire]

Nah! Think retro: "Space Invaders"

Re:civ4

[eldavojohn]

be cool to play civ4 on one of these yokes Um, while that's true, there's several more things I could think of that would be fun to do with this 'surface' technology. I just fear that Microsoft is going to make it expensive so that only the big boys can play with it.

A lowly developer that wants build a hobby project where anyone with a surface can play chess virtually against someone? Tough. Exorbitant license fees or no surface for you!

I remember in eighth grade trying to fathom how I would come up with $240 for a student license of Visual Studio! I can't imagine what these costs are going to be. And that's the sad thing, really, the neat stuff would all come from the hobbyists who still have an imagination that's not twisted towards profits.

Think what kind of senior project a graphical artist could make with one of these things! I'd go to an art show where you get to interact with the art any day.

To reiterate, I doubt your civilization 4 dreams will come true unless its creators decide the demand is big enough for them to drop megabucks developing another interface to the engine hoping that fans will splurge for the 'surface.'

Re:civ4

[Itchyeyes]

To reiterate, I doubt your civilization 4 dreams will come true unless its creators decide the demand is big enough for them to drop megabucks developing another interface to the engine hoping that fans will splurge for the 'surface.' Well, the video game industry is something like a $14 billion/year industry these days and developers have dropped megabucks into systems in the past that showed far less promise for gaming applications than the surface.

I do think the GP is being a little bit shortsighted though. The true potential of the Surface for gaming is not ports of old PC games, just like all those PS2 ports on the Wii are not utilizing the system's full potential either.

When I think of gaming on the Surface, I imagine something that takes more advantages of the Surfaces unique features. For instance the Surface is capable of recognizing dozens of different individual objects. Game developers could use this technology to create games that had real world pieces ala traditional board games but used the Surface's computational power to form much deeper and more complex rule sets. Think Eye of the Judgement but much more deeply and seamlessly integrated between the real world and virtual.

Re:civ4

[Hatta]

Funny you should say that, the very first version of Space Invaders was actually a sit-down "table top" game.

Not entirely dissing Surface

[mugnyte]

  He's not really criticizing MS, but more like chiding them gently. I'm a little underwhelmed by Surface. If you've ever had a coffee table that you can't put your legs under, you know how awkward they are to sit at. Plus, this price seems awfully exaggerated.

  I like ROSIE's surface much more, although the direct screen (instead of projection) makes the resolution an issue, but hopefully that'll get addressed as hardware goes up.

  Really, if you took a touchscreen laid flat, added a bunch of multi-touch capability and some touch tags for wireless pseudo-plugs, why couldn't this be built by anyone?

Testing...

[AioKits]

...I wonder if they tested this with anyone who owns cats. Mine jump up on the coffee table all the time. Does anyone know if this thing will pick up pets?

A novel kiosk

[fred fleenblat]

TFA shows it being used as a sales tool in a cell phone store. While it has a cool GUI, it's usage is that of a sales kiosk. If that's the best use they can think of for this technology something is very wrong.

It may simply not be suitable for long-term use so they picked an application where people would interact with it and leave the store before they got tired of craning their necks and holding their arms up in the air.

Re:A novel kiosk

[JBMcB]

It would be a cool interface for games. Think of a hacked interface playing supreme commander, zooming in and out of different areas of the battlefield. Get a bunch of them together and it would be some expensive fun. If they can get the unit cost down - maybe some super-cool internet cafe furniture? How about some custom chat/game apps for high end club tables?

There are all kinds of cool niche markets for this thing. Microsoft's creativity stifling bureaucracy is in full effect in marketing this thing.

Re:A novel kiosk

[Jeremy_Bee]

One thing I don't understand based on the description of the *use* of the Surface table at AT&T is exactly how it will help them show off cell phones.

The original demo showed it recognising (some) cell phones placed on the table and so forth, but those were real live cell phones out of someone's pocket. Every cell phone I have seen at a store, AT&T or otherwise, is either behind glass or a tethered "dead" model. It simply won't be as easy as the customer helping themselves to cell phones and placing them on the surface of the big ass table to get information on them displayed. Given the limitations of the retail environment, one could argue that the customers would be better served by a simple printed sheet of paper, or a giant printed poster, or the same poster projected on a wall, etc. etc.

If this mis-match of function is the only application they have come up with so far, then the whole project seems doomed. A far better first adopter to have would be a casino or a bar. Remember in the 80's when bars had video games embedded under plexi-glass in the table? The "surface" is hardly a step better than that, and that kind of usage makes more sense than cell-phone sales IMO.

Roughly Drafted got it right

[MBCook]

I still think Roughly Drafted had it right in a post last year.

Surface took longer, was more expensive, and is uglier than the iPhone. The iPhone uses real touch sensitivity, while Surface uses cameras and a projection screen. Surface had interesting tricks like identifying objects, but it did that through essentially 8 dot bar codes.

So here we are, a year later. Surface has been no where to be seen. It is now coming to 4 AT&T stores in large cities, where it will do next to nothing.

You can compare phones. Neat. A normal kiosk could do that (as the article points out). The more interesting abilities of Surface (like collaboration and such) won't come out in that. You can only compare two phones at once? There are only 8 or the (what, 20+) phones AT&T sells that will work with it? And how long before people steal some of the special phones (with the magic bar codes or whatever) thus rendering it a big expensive table? Or will those phones be tied up with leashes also?

It's a semi-interesting technology, that isn't going anywhere because of the management. Is anyone surprised? This is how basically every tech demo ends up. We never see it, or it gets managed to death.

They should have just started selling them to the (business) public at a high price with an SDK and just let people figure it out.

Rome was not built in a day

[iamacat]

It's not unusual for a truly innovative technology to take 10 years to develop. Original IBM PC, first Internet connections, the first web site or the first AJAX app were all not very useful for anything practical. While Surface demo looks cool, it's not easy to develop affordable hardware or software that does more than shows little lighted ripples around objects put on the top. Besides obvious games, most software will be probably rather high and and specialized, like CAD design or astronomical modeling tools. It will therefore take a while to develop.

How badly do we need multitouch for e-mail, web browsing or posting on slashdot?