Slashdot Mirror
With the Surface Pro, Microsoft Is Trying To Recreate the PC Market
An anonymous reader writes "An opinion piece at ReadWriteWeb makes an interesting suggestion: Microsoft's efforts in the tablet market aren't aimed at competing with the iPad or any of the Android tablets, but rather inventing a new facet of the PC market — one Microsoft alone is targeting. Quoting: 'Microsoft wants everyone to think the Surface Pro 3 is a tablet, but its pricing gives the game away. Microsoft wants to recreate the lucrative PC market that made the company billions of dollars by repackaging a PC into tablet clothing and then hammering away at the Surface product line until everybody believes that PCs never really went anywhere, they just got a touchscreen and a cellular connection.' This is also supported by the lack of a smaller Surface tablet, which many analysts were predicting before this week's press conference. Microsoft is clearly not pursuing the tablet-for-everyone approach, but instead focusing on users who want productivity out of their mobile computing device. The Surface Pros are expensive, but Microsoft is hoping people will balance that cost against the cost of a work laptop plus a personal tablet."
To Microsoft, everything is a PC which is going to run Windows and Office.
They've never really been able to see past that.
My personal desktop has never had Office (or open Office, or any office suite on it), because for personal purposes, I have simply never needed one. I use my tablet for infotainment and looking up stuff on the web when I travel. I don't use it for heavy work.
I'm not sure that most people want what Microsoft thinks is the tablet market. In fact, given the sheer number of less-powerful tablets out there that people are happily using.
Microsoft has ever really predicted much in the way of new markets or products, or led the way in innovation. They have mostly stuck with their tried and true "all roads lead to Office".
If I wanted a laptop, I'd buy one. I'm not convinced that what they're selling is what most people are looking for.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Don't think iPad. Think Macbook Air with a detachable keyboard.
This article about post-PC devices separates computing into "work", which it defines as focused activity, and "relationship-centric computing", essentially the digital version of social grooming. Phones and tablets are purportedly better for "relationship-centric computing", while PCs are better for "work". It appears Surface Pro is intended to be portable enough and to have a mode simple enough for "relationship-centric computing" while being able to shift to "work" as needed.
Dogged determination and perseverance?
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Meaning it is best at neither. Just muddled enough to offend everyone.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
duh.
MS is leading the way to a place where you carry you computer all the time and just drop it into a cradle when you need a bigger screen.
Something that works for well over 80% of the populace.
I'm not a fan, but the iPad would be horrible to do that with. With it's in ability to shop more then 1 window at a time.
And I own an iPad, and I like it.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Personally, the Asus Transformer got 90% of the way to what I was looking for back in the twentieth century. Microsoft's latest offering appears to go the last 10%. I'm a Linux geek personally, but I do need to be able to run MS-Office compatible software on whatever platform I use. Microsoft's pitch -- "runs all your favorite MS software on your device of choice" is actually a powerful incentive for marketing to professionals. If they are addressing the perceived shortcomings of the tablet form factor, I suspect they may well be onto something.
Not planning on ditching my Android devices anytime soon, nor installing Windows on my Linux PC's - but I can sure see a lot of professionals doing so just for the ability to more or less seamlessly integrate their mobile devices with organization infrastructure. I may not like MS software, but nothing integrates with a Windows-based infrastructure like MS-Windows - hardware platform notwithstanding.
The tablet PC is not new. It preceded the iPad and Android tablets by several years but the technology sucked. It's better now to the point that a tablet PC is workable and for my money, MS is proving the point well with the Surface Pro line. The iPad succeeded where the previous tablets failed because they reduced functionality down to media consumption only while taking advantage of the then more advanced technology to create a far more elegant design. It’s still not suited to real work while the Surface Pro actually is. I welcome it. I have an iPad and I hate having to switch to my laptop every time I think of some small bit of work I need to do. There is a huge market for a device like this among business users and less casual home users like me. I hope they succeed and if it brings them a windfall of new money. That’s exactly as it should be.
Sure, these kids won't need Microsoft until they get a job. The surface is for corporate folks that need a portable computer to do work and are aware that carrying a laptop will make them look out of touch (pun intended).
love is just extroverted narcissism
but I don't want a separate device just to do Office...I want whatever device I use to be able to run "everything I use" so I can combine stuff, rework, sort, juggle, scrape and reformat all that stuff into one coherent work output. If, like the Surface, the other apps from other suppliers are either not present or unusable with a touch screen, it's dead in the water. And it's dead in the water if I have to buy again software I've already paid for on another platform. And don't say Cloud. Cloud is dead because using it makes me legally non-compliant.
"Cock Up Your Beaver" does not mean what you think. This sig is intended to clog filters and annoy do-gooders
They're a fantastic business machine. They really are.
How so? What fraction of business users have even considered Windows 8 and above for their desktops / laptops? Less than 5%, if that. A business machine that cannot run Windows 7 or Windows XP is dead on arrival.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
And there are those who want a Mac because the hardware is decent, well designed, and it ships with a Unix and a GUI OS that works quite nicely?
"Microsoft is more laissez-faire." Uh, then how come MS has to have Winders everywhere stomping on anything perceived as competition?
Ruggedize these things and every lineman, every CCTV installer and every warehouse forklift driver will want them. No, I don't want to have to use a touch screen on my desk, but when I was out in the field I would have killed to have something as light and portable as this while standing on the top of a ladder.
"Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
> For one, though you will undoubtedly disagree, they ensured the popularization the PC.
No. IBM associated their monopoly with the PC. Microsoft just took advantage of IBMs good name.
Also, Apple and friends established the microcomputing market. IBM just came in as a johnny-come-lately spoiler.
Ultimately IBMs marketing muscle and Microsoft's subsequent dominance RETARDED the industry and delayed the introduction of better hardware and better operating systems.
Fixating on Apple II misses Macintosh, Atari, Amiga & Acorn.
Compared to the DOS that lurked beneath any Microsoft product leading up to 1995, AppleDOS is not so bad. Even VMS is not so bad.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Microsoft has become largely irrelevant and they're trying to get back to their glory days. The same happened with IBM some years back. Both companies expected their users to go where /they/ were going, instead of the other way around. Then, to no one's surprise but their own, they lost their edge in the market. "We're so big and we're so important our users have to follow us wherever we go."
Windows 8, anyone?
Sic transit gloria mundi.