Why Microsoft's Surface Pro Could Fail

Nerval's Lobster writes "Microsoft's Surface Pro boasts one feature that could rapidly become an Achilles Heel, especially if Microsoft intends for the device to compete against Apple's iPad and a host of lightweight Google Android touch-screens. In a Nov. 29 Tweet to a customer, the official Surface Twitter feed claimed: 'We expect it [Surface Pro] to have approx. half the battery life of Surface with Windows RT.' That means Surface Pro will have roughly four hours of battery life. That's roughly half the battery life (if not less) of Apple's various iPads, the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1, Research In Motion's PlayBook, Hewlett-Packard's now-cancelled TouchPad, and Motorola's all-but-forgotten Xoom. In other words, pretty much every tablet currently on the market. Nor can the Surface Pro compete with other tablets on price. The 64GB version of the device will retail for $899, with the 128GB version coming in a little higher at $999."

Comments

*facepalm*

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a full-blown Windows 8 laptop in a tablet form factor, stop comparing it to the iPad, the Galaxy Tab, the Playbook, the TouchPad, the Xoom, the Transformer Prime, etc....

Re:*facepalm*

[marcosdumay]

Ok, so let's compare it with full-blown laptops, that are both more powerfull and cheaper.

Forget battery life - price is way too high

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

Forget battery life - price is way too high.

I'd love to have a 7-8 inch Surface...if the price was around $250-280 and it included Microsoft Office. Instead, I'm moving my wife and kids Nexus 7s ($200/pop) and hooking them up to Google Docs. I've even abandoned my iPad/iPod infrastructure at this point - tablets are way too fragile (and easily stolen) to be paying $400+ for each one.

Too expensive!

[kencurry]

It's just too expensive; only clueless, rich snobs with more money than brains can afford it!

Sincerely,
Apple User

Re:It doesn't compete with tablets

[joh]

It competes with ultrabooks. Unfortunately, it doesn't compare all that favourably to ultrabooks either (about the same price, same weight, smaller screen, no keyboard included), and stealing sales from Wintel ultrabooks doesn't really help Microsoft or Intel.

Yeah, it's a tablet that actually is a laptop that you can't use on your lap and is delivered without a keyboard anyway. Basically it's just an expensive PC that tries hard to look like a tablet. Because tablets are hot right now. So MS thinks that selling a bad tablet that also is a bad ultrabook must sell like hot cakes, because everybody badly wants the "full PC experience" everywhere.

Some people will love that thing, most won't care at all.

I think what MS will never understand is the simple fact that most people just hate PCs.

Re:It doesn't compete with tablets

[rtfa-troll]

Have you used Windows 8 for more than 30 seconds in a store? I'm using it right now on a 6-year-old laptop. Windows 8 is just fine. It's certainly superior to IOS in every imaginable way.

I'm guessing you haven't used it much on a tablet Have a look at what the usability testers have to say ("modern UI is a new codeword for Microsoft's Metro interface

The available advice on designing for the "modern UI style" seems to guide designers to create applications with extraordinarily low information density. See, for example

The tablet version of Windows 8 introduces a bunch of complicated gestures that are easy to get wrong and thus dramatically reduce the UI's learnability.

Oh no.. that's not what I was looking for. I guess the visual design must be better than iOS:

The Windows 8 UI is completely flat in what used to be called the "Metro" style and is now called the "Modern UI." There's no pseudo-3D or lighting model to cast subtle shadows that indicate what's clickable

Maybe it's the new powerful features they added over Windows 7?

One of the worst aspects of Windows 8 for power users is that the product's very name has become a misnomer. "Windows" no longer supports multiple windows on the screen

Maybe the sacrifice is worth it because it improves the desktop version?

. On a regular PC, Windows 8 is Mr. Hyde: a monster that terrorizes poor office workers and strangles their productivity.

My only disappointment with the Surface is its low resolution. I've been rocking 1920x1200 for 6 years, and just got 2560x1440 on the desktop. I don't want to go backwards.

For most people it seems that the main disappointment is the low quality of the apps, even where there are any available, and the lack of responsiveness of those apps compared to the swishy interface. Given this, the only thing surface is really good for is acting as a video player. In that role, the low resolution screen is probably less important than in other roles.

WHY COULD IT FAIL?

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

HOW COULD IT NOT?

1) 900 Dollars
2) Hot, Power Sucking Intel Chip
3) Boots desktop OS with a BIOS
4) Consumes 32+ GB of storage with system binaries
5) The frequently-discussed "Win8 trainwreck" UI
6) Needs Forefront/Essentials/McAfee/Symantec-Norton/etc..
7) Steve Ballmer

Re:WHY COULD IT FAIL?

[rgbatduke]

I was in our local supermall yesterday. They had an interior kiosk set up to sell Surfaces, manned by an easy half dozen earnest young salespeople hired for the season. They didn't have a single customer in view -- not one in all the times I walked by it. Everybody standing around looking bored.

The Apple store about fifty meters away, on the other had was absolutely packed, as it always is, with customers waiting in line. It wasn't even a busy night at the mall -- parking was actually pretty easy for the season.

The really interesting question is -- can Microsoft compete ANYWHERE on a level playing field? If they didn't have the world's computer retailers in a ball-lock with their pricing formula, would they even exist? The answer is not so clear. I've watched student PC and laptop ownership transition from nearly all WinXX PCs to nearly all Apple products in only five years. iPhone, iPad, iPod, thinline apple laptop -- standard operating equipment for current college students. A smattering of Droid tabs and phones in there -- it is the nerd product and also pretty cool. Even linux-based systems -- the choice of the ubergeek -- are starting to compete with Windows systems for a whole generation of kids.

If Valve/Steam works out and games move over the Linux big time, Windows could actually experience the start of its long awaited death spiral.

rgb

Re:It doesn't compete with tablets

[0123456]

If I wanted to type in application names to run programs, I'd still be using DOS.

If your GUI requires you to type application names to start them, you've just shown that it's a lousy GUI.