Surface 3 Stocks Dwindling As Microsoft Plans System's Demise (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Microsoft's Surface 3 may be coming to an end. Brad Sams at Thurrott.com reports that many versions of the Surface 3 are listed as being out of stock in Microsoft's online store, with no expected availability. He notes that the only version in stock online is the version with 2GB RAM/64GB storage/LTE. There's more availability in-store, but stock appears to be limited overall. What this generally means is that manufacturing is slowing down or going to stop entirely. In a statement, Microsoft said: "Since launching Surface 3 over a year ago, we have seen strong demand and satisfaction amongst our customers. Inventory is now limited and by the end of December 2016, we will no longer manufacture Surface 3 devices." It's possible a Surface 3 successor is right around the corner, although Ars Technica notes "there hasn't even been the merest hint of a rumor about such a device." The Surface 3 is being powered by a Cherry Trail Atom processor, which hasn't seen a major upgrade or replacement since they were released in the first quarter of 2015. "Without new processors, there's little reason to update the Surface 3 line," writes Ars. Microsoft could equip the Surface 3 successor with a Core M processor, but the implications of that decision would likely cause the device's price to shoot up or cause the device's quality to significantly decrease. Microsoft may simply abandon the segment entirely and focus strictly on the Surface Pro line.

Comments

Damn!

[Anonymous Coward]

Why did I put my entire 401k into Surface 3 Stocks?

Getting Ready for Apollo Lake Upgrade

[nateman1352]

Without new processors, there's little reason to update the Surface 3 line

I guess whoever wrote this article didn't do very much research. Intel is expected to release Apollo Lake (Cherry Trail's successor) in the 2nd half of 2016.

Re:Getting Ready for Apollo Lake Upgrade

[PCM2]

Intel is expected to release Apollo Lake (Cherry Trail's successor) in the 2nd half of 2016.

But if Microsoft was planning to use that chip for a new Surface, it wouldn't EOL the current version now, because it won't be able to get new product into the market until the first half of next year. Companies don't just put brands into temporary retirement for 6-8 months while they wait for their downstream supply chains to catch up.

Re:Getting Ready for Apollo Lake Upgrade

[Lumpy]

Except that intel's current processor is a joke compared to the last version, and the next is to not be worth a damn compared to it either.

Sorry but All of intel's offerings over the past 3 years have been a waste of time. There is zero incentive to upgrade a 3rd gen processor machine to anything with a 6th gen or beyond due to the increases being so small that spending $800+ for it is a waste of money.

Is this like the HP Slate

[puddingebola]

Aren't I supposed to be able to scoop one of these up at bargain basement prices and install Linux now. That's how this is supposed to work. Someone inform Microsoft.

Can it really be that bad?

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems like anything outside of their stranglehold through lock-in (Windows, Office) fails. Honestly, I don't mean this as a troll. But everything from Zune to the Windows phone to this tablet to Bing turns into a flop, or sensationally mediocre. With the possible exception of the Xbox but isn't that because they refuse to stop throwing money at it? (pleading ignorance on that one)

Putting Apple fanboism aside, how is it that Microsoft can fail so consistently with so many products yet Apple seems to fail with so few?

Then they have the hutzpah to pull the Windows 10 telemetry and forced upgrades stuff, both of which should have been handled with some simple, competent PR. Is it so fractured internally that no one person sees these problems as obvious and says "hey, wait a second, we need to think this through"?

And marketing/image...from sweaty Ballmer to the Linux flip-flop to angry cheerleaders ads to the Surface getting called an iPad on national tv, on and on...what are the odds of being a laughing stock consistently for so many years, yet no one takes control and puts a stop to it?

I don't get it, please enlighten.

Re:Can it really be that bad?

[PCM2]

I'm perfectly happy with my Surface Pro 3 and the Surface Pro 4 seems like a worthy successor, albeit not enough of an upgrade to be worth the price tag for current Surface Pro 3 owners.

The only area where the Surface line has consistently failed is on the low end of the market. When Microsoft cheaps out with low specs (and the resulting poor performance), customers don't bite. There's too much cheap PC hardware to choose from already. If Best Buy is already awash with pieces of shit from Dell, HP, and Toshiba, why would I pay more for a piece of shit from Microsoft?

For the Surface 3, Microsoft was clearly hoping it could succeed on the low end with full Windows 10 instead of the disastrously bad idea that was Windows RT. It looks like it may have proven itself wrong.

Putting Apple fanboism aside, how is it that Microsoft can fail so consistently with so many products yet Apple seems to fail with so few?

Surely you're only talking about hardware products. In which case Microsoft has produced far fewer products than Apple has, while Apple's history is not without its share of failures. Before the Powerbook G3, Apple laptops were often pretty crappy. The entire Performa line sucked. Some of Apple's tower cases were nearly impossible to open without cutting your hands. The 25th Anniversary Mac was a stupid idea. Shit, Apple has had to suck up its share of failures going all the way back to the Apple ///. Microsoft put out its first PC in 2012 and you're unwilling to grant it a failure or two here and there?

And if you wanna talk software products, let's talk about the billions and billions that Microsoft makes from software every year. Meanwhile, Apple has managed to sabotage what few software markets it had. Let's ignore Claris, just to be charitable. Let's forget all the projects that never really made it to market, like Copeland. Instead, go ask a former Final Cut user how he's liking Adobe Premiere. I'll wait.

Re:Can it really be that bad?

[MightyMartian]

No, where it's failed is in actually getting enough people to buy it to make the development, manufacturing and marketing worth the effort. You can try to spin this any way you like, but the Surface line is a complete failure, right up there with Windows Phone.

These conversations about Surface remind me a lot of the kind of fanboism that surrounds Blackberry. The same wishful thinking, the same insistence that someone's personal (and anecdotal) successes with the device must somehow represent some counter to the fact that the devices themselves are just not selling.

Re:Can it really be that bad?

[lucm]

We hear that over and over, but Microsoft is actually making money with Xbox. And Minecraft. And Skype. They make money in the cloud business (unlike Amazon who pours money from their retail business to keep AWS afloat).

They even made money with Yahoo, something few companies can brag about (including Yahoo).

Microsoft has been profitable every single year since 1985. That's the bottom line. There will always be people to make clever comments about the Zune and Nokia, but taking a dive for a few quarters or years is a strategy that paid off in many cases. If you start looking at how much money individual product lines made or lost at Microsoft, you're missing the point. Multiple streams of revenue, that's how you stay in business while other companies boom and bust.

They're not sexy, they're not cool, but they make money, they pay their employees well, and they give a decent dividend to their shareholders. That's a sound business in my book, and 10 years from now I'll still hold on to my MSFT stock while today's cool companies will be as relevant as Nortel or Blackberry.

Re:Can it really be that bad?

[Gravis Zero]

everything from Zune to the Windows phone to this tablet to Bing turns into a flop, or sensationally mediocre.

that's because instead of focusing on making something that somebody would want to buy, they push marketing bullshit on people and that backfires. if it's actually a good product, you don't need to shove it in everyone's face at every turn because users who like it will tell other people about it. so when they pay the NFL to use their device and make a big deal about it by pointing it out all the time (nobody cares because it has nothing to do with the sport!), people are going to laugh when they call it an ipad because that's exactly what microsoft doesn't want.