[Capella]

Since some of us have been commenting on Twitter, I figured I'd make a thread.

-10.6" tablet
-Two flavors, one with "Windows RT" and a Pro that can run Windows 8 applications
-Two kinds of integrated-keyboard covers; one with multitouch and one with tactile keys
-Priced "to compete", whatever the fuck that is.

I really like it. It's definitely a bold step for Microsoft, and I want it to do well just to reward them for being different and taking risks. Also, I really, really like that the cover has a real damn keyboard. Being able to run real Windows applications on the Pro model is nice, and will make up for the lack of an app catalogue like iOS and even Android have. I think this is way more interesting than any Android-based tablet.

[chucker]

No pricing announced. Tentatively agree with Jason Snell:

Surface is already a more interesting iPad competitor than any Android-based tablet. Google really blew an opportunity to stake out ground.

Intel and ARM version is a tragedy, since no customer will know how to choose.

[torifile]

It sounds great in theory but Windows has a lot to prove. It's a relic and people can't wait to get away from it.

[Jason]

I think a lot of problem for this product right now is mindset. Millions of people have already bought into either Apple's offering or Android. MS are so late to this. They really should have had tablet ready at least two years ago.

[torifile]

The other thing is that MS again pre announces a product with no date or price. Sure, the KB looks innovative but it's nothing that wondrous. It's all about the software and without it working 100% right, it's not good enough. What is here that is better than the iPad aside from the KB? And that's probably just a tap away from Cook's desk.

[thegeriatric]

Looks interesting, but when the party is coming to an end, it's no good turning up expecting all the good looking birds to be waiting for you!!

[Capella]

Originally Posted by Jason Millions of people have already bought into either Apple's offering or Android. MS are so late to this. They really should have had tablet ready at least two years ago.

Agreed. However, Android has tablets out that are slow, clunky, and not updatable to the new OS releases in many cases. I do think they can pull market share away from people who are dissatisfied with crappy Android tablets. Correct me if I'm wrong, but not many devices are on Ice Cream Sandwich, and most reviews still point out that Android on tablets has serious quirks and flaws. I only know two people with Android-based devices that like them, and one is because she's a developer, and the other is because Amazon kits up the Kindle Fire with custom stuff. It's gonna depend on how long it takes them to get it to market and if it's affordable, but I do think they can bite into that market.

Originally Posted by torifile The other thing is that MS again pre announces a product with no date or price. Sure, the KB looks innovative but it's nothing that wondrous. It's all about the software and without it working 100% right, it's not good enough. What is here that is better than the iPad aside from the KB? And that's probably just a tap away from Cook's desk.

I'm not sure MS actually wants to compete with the iPad. It's obvious it's the juggernaut in the room. But, as I said above, stealing market share from Android sounds attainable, assuming it comes out soon and affordably. I don't know if MS can survive only on taking away potential Android buyers, but I know I'd rather have 3 choices in the market than 2.

[alcimedes]

Is there any idea how much of a pre-announcement this product was? I remember being very excited about a number of Windows products in the past, only to have all the features I was most excited about slowly cut to make a launch date.

Granted there's no launch date, but is this supposed to be close to gold master so to speak?

[rampancy]

Originally Posted by chucker Intel and ARM version is a tragedy, since no customer will know how to choose.

Yes, I think that's one of the key flaws with the Surface tablet. There's no clear distinction between the WinRT tablet and the Win8 tablet, at least at first glance. What MS should have done was have one tablet with one hardware platform in a "good" "better" "best" setup (and that's sort of what they seem to be going with, with the three storage configurations for both the RT and the 8 tablet). That's probably what we'll see for Surface 2.

Originally Posted by Capella Agreed. However, Android has tablets out that are slow, clunky, and not updatable to the new OS releases in many cases. I do think they can pull market share away from people who are dissatisfied with crappy Android tablets. Correct me if I'm wrong, but not many devices are on Ice Cream Sandwich, and most reviews still point out that Android on tablets has serious quirks and flaws.

Not many, but ICS is slowly becoming the standard among Android tablets; heck, I'm starting to see cheap $99-$150 tablets on sale with ICS. And while ICS isn't perfect, it's gotten a lot better compared to where they were with Honeycomb.

I'm not sure MS actually wants to compete with the iPad. It's obvious it's the juggernaut in the room. But, as I said above, stealing market share from Android sounds attainable, assuming it comes out soon and affordably. I don't know if MS can survive only on taking away potential Android buyers, but I know I'd rather have 3 choices in the market than 2.

The problem with Surface is that, as was pointed out above, it's just too late. Android and iOS have had the benefit of at least 3-4 years' worth of development and maturation, not to mention the fact that they've both built up considerable momentum among mobile developers. What about Microsoft? I've no doubt that Win8 is going to be good, but it's a totally new platform for the mobile space. Unless they have full compatibility with existing Windows desktop apps, it'll be an uphill battle for getting developer traction with this.

The one thing which does frustrate me though is that, as per Microsoft's apparent standard operating procedure, they've made effectively a pre-announcement. Why couldn't you announce something I could buy in a store, right now?

[thegeriatric]

I'd imagine joint launch with windows 8, expected Sept/Oct 2012 or thereabouts!! (Remember this is Microsoft we're talking about here though )

[psmith2.0]

I hate to sound like a dick - and I'm probably missing some important piece of info - but why the hell don't you just get a laptop?





If you're going to have a touch-based tablet, and then you glom a bunch of stuff onto it to make it look and act like a laptop...why not just...

Ah, screw it. There is no answer for this, and I know it.

Okay, forget that "sounding like a dick" part...I'll just say it:

Everyone here knows damn good and well that a) this will be priced goofy as can be, b) it won't make the ship time with everything touted today (let's not forget who we're talking about here) and c) like everything else they've done in recent years, they're showing up late to the party, reeking of "us too!"

It's probably not going up directly against the iPad (which is smart on Microsoft's part), but is it too little, too late? Too much of a "what is it, exactly?" design? Trying to be all things to all people (because that's what they seem to try and do, time and again).*

I don't think that approach, in any aspect of life, ever really works.



* Yes, I know...Apple sells a Bluetooth keyboard that pairs up with the iPad, and tons of companies make little combo keyboard/sleeve things. Guess what? I think those are silly, point-missing things too. And by all their marketing (not to mention how you see them used), nobody thinks of the iPad as "keyboard bound", so it's not the same thing. If you're going to be a tablet, be a tablet. If you're going to be a laptop, then be a laptop. Embrace what it is. Jump in with both feet, don't straddle two worlds, half-assing it in each. IMO. YMMV.

[Moogs]

My immediate impressions:

1) The cover-as-keyboard was a classic MS ripoff except that they one-upped their game and added a very useful function to the cover without making it look clunky as shit. They deserve credit for that at least.

2) The whole kick-stand thing leaves me Meh. It really does look like a squashed and detached laptop on some level. Running Windows 8... I agree with the "why not get a laptop" question in that case. What's the difference in experience... that you're clicking Windows 8 with a screen instead of a mouse? Don't get it.

3) Is the non-windows 8 version more like an iOS version? Are their special apps for this thing, book reader, etc? While it does look on certain levels more sleek than past POS MS hardware products (Zune et al), it also looks on another level like MS couldn't figure out what they wanted it to be / who they wanted it to be for, therefore trying to make it everything to everyone... which will almost guarantee failure IMO.

MS has learned some lessons from the past, not others clearly. That said this would piss Jobs off and spur more innovation from Apple so he could make fun of their product at the next Stevenote. Let's see what Timbot does. Competition is good.

[torifile]

It is, again, an example of MS trying to be everything for everyone. They have no courage as a company. No one to say "no". It's sad and kinda pathetic to see over and over. And over.

[psmith2.0]

That's the impression I get, first and foremost (and strongest).

[SpecMode]

An alternative point of view: even folks who overwhelmingly prefer Apple products (like, say, yours truly) would like to see a legitimate iPad competitor finally break into the market. Competition breeds innovation (well, when it isn't spawning endless litigation, but I digress), and right now, Apple has effectively no competition in the tablet space. There's the iPad, and there's everyone else - and everyone else is sucking, hard.

The iPad is good, but imagine how much better it could be if Apple was having to actually fight off a good competitor making inroads into their profits and market share.

EDIT: Dangit, pscates, now my post doesn't have any context!

[Jason]

One thing that does bother me is that it seems no-one at the presentation actually saw the thing running and showing what it could do. But I'm only going off of twitter so I could be wrong.

[JohnnyTheA]

From a technical standpoint I wonder how many windows applications will really run on this pro variant. Their flagship office suite is pretty damned heavy. There are just so many windows applications that have been developed for real pcs that have tons of virtual memory, CPU power, hd space, etc. They can adjust for that by cranking up the CPU power and have heat and battery issues AND higher cost. Just a crappy laptop. The RT option seems more interesting but very very late.

MS has been tied to their windows API crack addiction for so long I doubt they could really produce a decent light weight mobile OS for the RT version. I bet it is still the same crud polished over yet again. They need to start over with OSs IMO..

[Xaqtly]

Oh, well here's your problem:

[Jason]

Boss to receptionist: "Could you grab my surface please. I need it for a meeting at three pm."

Great name

[Robo]

The weird thing is that Microsoft is now competing with their OEMs. Anybody who wants to make a Windows 8 or RT tablet is now going to be competing with Microsoft themselves. This is uncharted territory for Microsoft, business-wise. It's certainly a gamble — that the money they'll gain by selling their own tablet will be larger than the money they lose by scaring OEMs to Android. It'll be fun to watch, but I have to say, I'm kind of glad I'm not reliant on Microsoft for a paycheck, with this move...

Anyway, the device itself is certainly more appealing than any of the full-size Android tablets we've seen thus far. Microsoft actually seems to be slowly learning from Apple's example instead of just slavishly copying them, but I don't think they're quite bold enough to go all the way with it. Hence, offering both Windows 8 and Windows RT Surfaces. Why are they doing this? It makes no sense to me. They're beginning to get some of the details right, which is progress. But what they lack are the balls to really focus and to say, we're making one tablet, and it's going to be great. The average consumer doesn't give a shit whether their tablet is x86 or ARM; the distinction will just confuse them, and some of Microsoft's moves — like holding onto the desktop UI with Windows RT, but only for the pre-installed apps, are just going to confuse people more.

If Microsoft had even just said that Windows RT was Windows Metro, and would only run Metro apps, and Windows 8 would run Metro and desktop apps, that would be less confusing. There would still be two different versions of Windows, but one would be a complete subset of the other as far as apps and interfaces go, so it would at least be a little easier for people to grok. But Microsoft didn't want to make a Metro version of Office, so.

As far as why someone would want a Surface over a laptop: it's less than a centimeter thin and 1.5 lbs, and it's smaller than most any laptop screen, and you can hold it in your lap and touch it, like how I'm using my iPad now. Yes, there's a keyboard cover, but that doesn't destroy it's fundamental tablet-ness. There's keyboard covers for the iPad, too.

What the optional keyboard does do is make tablets less scary to people who haven't used them. It's like a security blanket. I know somebody who told me he wanted one of those Transformer Prime tablets that you could dock into a laptop, because it was two things in one and thus better than the iPad. I told him it was a piece of shit. I'd feel better recommending something like this Surface thing. Once you realize you don't really need the keyboard, that part is still usable, as a cover.

I'm pretty sure Microsoft announced this now just to get ahead of Google's announcement of their own tablet at Google I/O later this month, kind of like how Google had that maps event just to have an event ahead of Apple's Maps unveiling at WWDC. That's why there's no price or release date yet. (I sort of wonder why Microsoft didn't just announce it at E3 earlier this month; there was tons of talk about the Xbox SmartGlass app for tablets, and Microsoft's keynote could have really used the spice.) But I'm sure they'll ship it before the holiday season, probably alongside Windows 8 and Windows RT devices from their hardware partners.

But damn. If I were one of Microsoft's hardware partners, I would be furious right now. Remember, they're still trying to convince Dell and HP and Acer and Asus and Samsung and Lenovo to make their own Windows 8 and RT devices that are just like Surface. This isn't like Xbox or Zune or Kin or that Courier thing, where Microsoft was building devices that ran their own special OSes. Microsoft's building their own Windows hardware for the first time. They're essentially making PCs now. And where does that leave Dell and HP?

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Robo The weird thing is that Microsoft is now competing with their OEMs. Anybody who wants to make a Windows 8 or RT tablet is now going to be competing with Microsoft themselves. This is uncharted territory for Microsoft, business-wise.

This is no different than Zune killing Plays For Sure, except in this case, Microsoft didn't even give OEMs time to do the Windows 8 tablet thing on their own for a year or two.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by chucker This is no different than Zune killing Plays For Sure, except in this case, Microsoft didn't even give OEMs time to do the Windows 8 tablet thing on their own for a year or two.

But the weird thing is, they're still trying to sell Windows RT and Windows 8 to OEMs. It's not like they're saying, we think for iPad-style tablets it makes sense for us to just provide a complete, whole-widget product ourselves and not worry about licensing the OS. They don't have the balls to say that. They could just say that tablets are post-PC devices, but they're not bold enough to. The official story all along has been that Windows tablets were the PC reborn, that the PC era of Microsoft supplying the software and OEMs supplying the hardware wasn't going to end just because the PCs got smaller and ARMier. And now they still want HP and Dell and all to make Windows 8/RT products...that compete directly with Surface.

So in that respect, it's really not like Zune, which pretty much replaced Microsoft's PlaysForSure strategy wholesale. They're trying to have it both ways, here. The only comparable situations I can really think of is when Palm licensed out PalmOS, and the old Mac OS clones. And neither of those stories seemed to end well — Palm was eventually split into hardware and software companies, and the clones business certainly wasn't successful enough to convince Jobs not to axe it as fast as he could. I guess we'll see how much of an impact the whole "Google owning Motorola" thing has, in the future, but I can't imagine the Android OEMs are thrilled about it.

(The hardware guys should have really seen this coming, though. If Microsoft didn't try to cut them out, their component suppliers or retailers eventually would have. They add very little value to the equation — they don't make the components, they don't make the software, they don't own the stores, and for the most part they don't run the factories where the not-theirs components are assembled and the not-theirs software is installed and the boxes are shipped to the not-theirs stores. So, uh, what exactly do they do? Supply the brand?)

[nikstar101]

Right going against nearly everyone else here, I have to say I really like it. Although this is only based on the photos and marketing buff. Once we see and use it in real life then that will be the time to make a proper judgement.

It looks good and if Windows Metro is anything like Windows Phone 7 then it will offer a good mobile experience. But they really need to get the developers on board. Microsoft seem to pay developers to port their apps to the windows mobile platform but they need to convince them they need to do it on their own accord.

Although they have placed it against the iPad, I think it is the premium tablet for non-Apple people. Therefore like others have said, it's aimed at stealing the Android maker-share or taking the share of people who haven't bought a tablet yet.

Looking at Microsoft decision to make their own hardware, I think this could work as benefit to OEMs. Basically it allows OEMs to see how they are selling without risking their own money. Companies don't care about competition, as that's a given, what they care about is making money. If they can make money by selling an MS tablet then they will sell.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Robo But the weird thing is, they're still trying to sell Windows RT and Windows 8 to OEMs.

Right; this is classic Microsoft being unable to make a decision. Just like they didn't on "should this run x86, or ARM?", or "should the keyboard be thin and integrated with the case, or do we want one with better tactile feedback?".

Originally Posted by Robo It's not like they're saying, we think for iPad-style tablets it makes sense for us to just provide a complete, whole-widget product ourselves and not worry about licensing the OS. They don't have the balls to say that.

It's the latter, not the former. They have concluded that; they just aren't honest with themselves enough to actually mouth those words.

Originally Posted by Robo So in that respect, it's really not like Zune, which pretty much replaced Microsoft's PlaysForSure strategy wholesale. They're trying to have it both ways, here.

Right.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by chucker Right; this is classic Microsoft being unable to make a decision. Just like they didn't on "should this run x86, or ARM?", or "should the keyboard be thin and integrated with the case, or do we want one with better tactile feedback?".

Exactly. There's something to be said for options, of course. Even Apple, they of the horrible appalling sealed-shut MacBook Pro, offers options. But more options are not always better for the consumer.

This is something that your stereotypical nerds — so, Microsofties — seem to have trouble grasping. If you're on a nerdy forum or blog, and you comment that such-and-such should not be an option, you can count on being serenaded with insights like "yes, because options are evil" and "why are you opposed to consumers having the choice?" But some options are bad. Ones that don't add much besides confusion, for example. Like the Windows 8/RT thing.

I still don't get why Microsoft is putting Windows 8, with its designed-for-mice desktop UI, on these tablets. Using that via touch still seems like an awful user experience to me — I guess that's why they're pushing those keyboard/trackpad covers. And Metro is actually pretty nice! But the one billion dollar question — I've seen it posed before, I forget who wrote it — is, how is Metro ever going to get good at real apps? The iPad is good at real apps because it has to be — developers can't just count on users booting their iPad into OS X mode whenever they want to make something. But with Metro on Windows 8 at least, there's no such limitation. Are most Metro apps just going to be glorified full-screen widgets, with "real computing" taking place on the desktop? When I use my iPad, it doesn't feel like "Macintosh lite." It feels like its own, uniquely powerful thing. But I worry that the Metro UI is going to feel a lot like Windows lite — more At Ease than iOS. I worry that it's going to end up being the "grandma mode" that people who want to make stuff reflexively bypass, because its apps are so limited. And where will that leave Windows RT?

Microsoft built a good UI, the problem is that there isn't more of it. Where's the Metroified Office? Why is the desktop UI in Windows RT? Why is there still a file system? I think if you were to ask a Microsoftie that, he or she would say, well, users want to be able to manage their files. But that's nerd myopia. Users want their files managed — they want to be able to find their shit — but they don't particularly want to do it themselves. They've only had to manage their files, because the software wasn't smart enough to do it for them. But Microsoft looks at the file system and doesn't even think about it, that's just how computers are, whereas other companies think about what a computer could be. Why couldn't a computer be smart enough to manage a user's files without them thinking about it? They're smart enough to win at Jeopardy!, for heaven's sake. Keeping photos in order seems like it would be easy. But Microsoft lacks that imagination. It's not that they mean to be a follower, it's that it never seems to occur to them that things could be different until someone else shows them.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Robo I still don't get why Microsoft is putting Windows 8, with its designed-for-mice desktop UI, on these tablets. Using that via touch still seems like an awful user experience to me

It is. I have one.

[rampancy]

Originally Posted by Robo But damn. If I were one of Microsoft's hardware partners, I would be furious right now. Remember, they're still trying to convince Dell and HP and Acer and Asus and Samsung and Lenovo to make their own Windows 8 and RT devices that are just like Surface. This isn't like Xbox or Zune or Kin or that Courier thing, where Microsoft was building devices that ran their own special OSes. Microsoft's building their own Windows hardware for the first time. They're essentially making PCs now. And where does that leave Dell and HP?

I remember that CES when Microsoft was really talking up its hardware partners and all of the wonderful iPad-killing Windows 7 tablets that were coming in the pipeline. And where did that leave them? The TouchPad ended up being an embarrassment, almost more so for Microsoft than for HP. Reading some of Ballmer's lines on the Verge liveblog, I can't help but wonder if this was a response to what MS has seen as a failure on the part of its hardware partners to successfully compete against iOS and Android.

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by rampancy Yes, I think that's one of the key flaws with the Surface tablet. There's no clear distinction between the WinRT tablet and the Win8 tablet, at least at first glance. What MS should have done was have one tablet with one hardware platform in a "good" "better" "best" setup (and that's sort of what they seem to be going with, with the three storage configurations for both the RT and the 8 tablet). That's probably what we'll see for Surface 2.

I think MS touting an Intel based tablet is more a poke at the manufacturers than the consumer. The consumer is not expected to choose a tablet based on the architecture underneath. Windows 8 RT and Pro are still supposed to be for the most part the same 'platform' for Runtime based apps.

Intel hardware is getting to the point where it's actually feasible to wedge into a tablet, and that's worth experimenting on...

[psmith2.0]

Originally Posted by SpecMode An alternative point of view: even folks who overwhelmingly prefer Apple products (like, say, yours truly) would like to see a legitimate iPad competitor finally break into the market. Competition breeds innovation (well, when it isn't spawning endless litigation, but I digress), and right now, Apple has effectively no competition in the tablet space. There's the iPad, and there's everyone else - and everyone else is sucking, hard. The iPad is good, but imagine how much better it could be if Apple was having to actually fight off a good competitor making inroads into their profits and market share. EDIT: Dangit, pscates, now my post doesn't have any context!

No, I fully agree. Apple can't stay where they are with no prodding or (legit) competition. I want this too, otherwise they'll get complacent, lazy and/or arrogant. And none of those are good things.

My only thing is...it isn't going to be Microsoft.

And we probably need to stop acting like it is.

They've had their shot. And goodness knows they're not lacking in resources or talent. So when they put out such lackluster, go-nowhere turds over and over, it gets you to thinking "there must be other reasons at play". And then it gets into things like leadership, direction, vision, etc. All top-level sort of things, vs. actual talent or competency from those in the trenches and actually doing the work.

I don't think Microsoft's troubles or stumbles are unfixable, or beyond correction. But the things it would do to truly address them are never going to happen because it would probably mean a major house-cleaning and re-thinking in some big areas. Some people, or divisions, may have to go (or get completely redone). And nobody fires themselves on purpose.

None of this surprises me, as I've had a subtle, casual "in" to the company for over six years, in the form of my ex brother-in-law who worked there, first on the Office team, then, in recent years, on the mobile team. He left there two weeks ago to go to work for Amazon. Working for Microsoft was his lifelong dream (I mean that literally, because I knew him when he was a kid, when I met his sister 23 years ago, and he was coding and doing computer stuff from the get-go...he showed me, at nine, how to set up a word processing file in DOS and do a paper for school, as I was still a couple of years away from ever using/seeing a Mac for the first time). That was always his thing, he kept the family's computer and network up and running over the years, as he got older (but still a kid or young teen). So for him to finally throw up his hands - in his mid-late 20's and making really nice money/perks - and fly the coop, and depart the one company he looked to and talked about from my earliest days of knowing him...it speaks volumes, and if you knew the history and backstory there, you'd be as stunned as I was! This past Christmas, he and I stood in the kitchen and talked for 90 minutes about all the things that bother and frustrated him, working there...the politics, game-playing, lack of focus, cliques, in-fighting, no sense of "we're in this together", doing the same thing and expecting different outcomes, putting the cart before the horse on so many levels to the detriment of the product or service being worked on, etc. I got the distinct sense that "spinning my wheels and wasting my time" were ongoing issues for him. I never dreamed he'd leave there, but he did. And it was a shock to learn (I only learned this past weekend, talking to his dad). I realize all the above isn't unique to Microsoft. But since we are talking about them here, and we do have some history/precedent to go on, it fits. He's told me little things over the years, about this or that idea or project - in vague, general terms (he's never given anything away or violated any NDA sort of stuff - and the crazy ways good, solid ideas have been stifled and shot down for the lamest of reasons (a certain person or team wasn't in on it, or the person who did come up with it isn't so-and-so's "pet", etc.). Six years of that - and other things he talked about - I'd leave too. And his complaints/reasons were exactly what I said above. It's not the people, the designers and engineers and those skewing younger and flowing with good ideas. It's the "up top" guys and structure, and the entrenched ways that don't/won't/can't bend or flex or see beyond what they've always known or done. So you either realize and accept that, and just put your head down and go with it, happy to have a job with such a large, prestigious outfit. Or, you realize it's ultimately not for you and, as much as it hurts, you move on to where maybe things are different or better.

[Moogs]

Originally Posted by Jason Boss to receptionist: "Could you grab my surface please. I need it for a meeting at three pm." Great name

At least they didn't name it "The Probe".