[Permit]

Everyone seems really blown away by the pricing and I'm not sure why. This isn't an iPad, it houses a fully functional operating system that lets you run existing Windows 7 desktop applications.

In a use-case scenario I see it being more similar to a laptop than to the iPad. If I can run Visual Studio on it and it handles all my existing Windows 7 applications correctly, I'd consider purchasing it. I don't look at it like it's a tablet I'm going to be installing a Scrabble App on, though.

[smacktoward]

The problem is that the pricing puts it into a weird space in the market. If you want to use it as a laptop, you have to add one of the covers (the $120 Touch Cover or $130 Type Cover) so you have a keyboard, and that puts the price of the package over $1,000. You can get a "real" laptop (even a Macbook Air!) for less than that.

An argument could be made that Surface Pro isn't just a laptop, but a laptop plus a tablet, in which case the appropriate price comparison would be the cost of a Macbook and an iPad. But the extra horsepower the Surface would require to run like a laptop would mean lower battery life and greater weight. So you get a tablet, but one that's less appealing than a tablet designed to only be a tablet.

[Bud]

Not just a keyboard. If you want to use it like a real laptop, you will need a mouse or other pointing device, as well. Touch on a vertically-oriented screen is not going to cut it for laptop-ish kinds of uses, as has been proven in years and years of UX studies.

Clarifying edit: Touch is great if you are holding the device in your hands, of course, like an iPad. But once you are using a keyboard and Surface's kickstand and trying to run Windows apps, which is the use case we're discussing here, you'll need a mouse or a trackpad, just like you do to run Windows on any other device. Windows apps are not touch friendly and that didn't magically change just because Ballmer is trying to enter the market that he publicly mocked in 2007 (iPhone) and 2010 (iPad).

[potatolicious]

Both the touch and type covers have a trackpad built in - it's surprising that they didn't include these items in the package, considering how core they are to the Surface experience

[cooldeal]

>because Ballmer is trying to enter the market that he publicly mocked in 2007 (iPhone) and 2010 (iPad).

I'm tired of these kinds of statements. The golden rule is that companies' employee publicly have to put down their competitors' new strategies. Imagine if Balmer said the iPad is great it's going to kill us, or if Jobs said 7" tablets are good but we'll make only in two years, so wait for us to make it. Or even Andy Rubin saying that Android UI is laggy compared to iOS, fix coming in 18 months. All of them(except maybe Jobs) would be summarily fired or atleast will be forced to recant their statements immediately on threat of being fired. It's almost part of their job to publicly mock their competitors, or their shareholders will dump the stock.

The more puzzling thing to me is, why do so many people actually think that these people say what they really believe and really believe what they say?

[tluyben2]

> The more puzzling thing to me is, why do so many people actually think that these people say what they really believe and really believe what they say?

Because most people here are developers? In most manager courses one of the lessons is; focus not on what people say but why they say it. Those things are often not the same thing. Ballmer (etc) are in the eye of the press, which means that not only do his words influence the stock price, they also influence the 1000s of people working for the company and their partners. All need to have their eye on the ball (MS MS MS) meaning the rest of the world is just shit. No matter if it is/he thinks it is or not; that's not relevant at all.

[gonehome]

I'm not sure if I agree that that's what happened in this case. I think Ballmer actually believed what he said which is why they were so slow to react and is a part of the problem.

Google's reaction is a good example. After the iPhone launched in 2007 They immediately threw out the original blackberry like android device they were planning to release first and focused on their more iPhone like variant. Microsoft just mocked Apple and did nothing.

As far as the surface goes I think it's an interesting idea and could be great, but they're doing annoying marketing things again that are hurting it. Making people pay an extra $120 in order to get the actual product is annoying, why sell the crippled version without the keypad when that's the entire point of it? Just include the keypad at the lower price point instead.

[erikpukinskis]

> Microsoft just mocked Apple and did nothing.

I'm no Microsoft fan, but this is hyperbole. They release Windows Phone 7, widely regarded as a credible response, two and a half years after the iPhone came out. That's not exactly record time, but my guess is some serious hammers came down at Microsoft when iPhone launched.

[recoiledsnake]

>The problem is that the pricing puts it into a weird space in the market.

Edit:Just like usual it looks like the notable number of anti-'M$' haters on HN are flagging this article down the front page just like they do to any article that is not hating on MS(resulting in some legit sites getting fully permabanned). Stay classy HN.

Original Comment:

That's the thing, it defines a new place in the market because it has new characteristics, just like the iPad did when it started and many were calling it just a bigger iPod Touch or a smaller crippled laptop and were saying it would fail.

I think it's especially good for developers when you can run the full Visual Studio and Eclipse etc. but still portable, not to mention the Enterprise where it fully integrates with AD and group policy and can support the full Office Suite including Outlook.The digitizer and the pen is a nice bonus. In some companies, tablets have a stigma that they're entertainment devices meant for Angry Birds and Fruit Ninja, and thus management doesn't like buying them(except for senior management). With the Surface Pro, it might be seen as a productivity device that you can use while traveling and also they can lock them down as much as you want to with group policy, do updates and deployments just like the regular desktop PCs and laptops.

It'd be okay for couch surfing, I have a HP Touch pad which roughly the same size and weight and it isn't too bad, but you could probably buy a 7" tablet on the cheap if couch surfing is your thing. So, for some people this is a good choice and I think the pricing is on the premium to make it feel like a premium device.

I think one of the big points is the portability factor, thus it may not replace a 13.3" Ultrabook or a 7" tablet for all, but for some, it can and for some others, they will just buy it in addition to them.

My only concern is the battery life, they could swap out that i5 for a Clover Trail Atom but I think they want to keep the power. Maybe there will be a cheaper lighter version later with a new Atom.

>An argument could be made that Surface Pro isn't just a laptop, but a laptop plus a tablet in which case the appropriate price comparison would be the cost of a Macbook and an iPad.

I don't think pricing ever works like that. But anyway, if you want to think it that way, they're giving a discount for the lower battery life and greater weight.

One other issue about pricing is that they can't use their tens of billions of dollars to subsidize it, it'd just kill the OEMs. With this price, the OEMs have some breathing room to make competing devices.

I think quite some folks will have a desktop for PC gaming, Laptop for couch work, Surface for working while not at home, and a 7" tablet for couch/web surfing(or a ~5" phone).

[rmrfrmrf]

I don't get it, really. They designed a tablet whose primary use-case is in laptop mode? Why not just buy a better-spec'd laptop for the same price? And why does Surface have a mission-critical piece of hardware (the keyboard) missing from it? Sorry, but at a whopping $1050 after purchasing this critical component, I'd rather just buy a 11in Macbook air for cheaper.

[hosay123]

Windows has supported gestures and handwriting recognition for years, and the Pro comes with a stylus. To say a keyboard is critical seems a gross overstatement.

As for use cases, how about: it's a tablet, without the regular complexities of 'tablet mode'. It runs the same stuff as your desktop, acts, smells, barks and looks just like your desktop, and if you want to use it like a crippled toy in the style of an iPad, you're free to use the metro apps.

Let us also not be too quick to forget that Microsoft were the first to seriously meld the desktop and tablet experience. They're the only company (out of two runners, really) with a serious story in this department. Waiting with bated breath to see if Apple wholesale copies the Microsoft approach, toy-apps-as-start-button works wonderfully.

[rimantas]

You put a lot of effort to get it backwards.

  > it's a tablet, without the regular complexities
  > of 'tablet mode'

No, it is a table with added complexities of desktop mode.

  > It runs the same stuff as your desktop, acts, smells, barks and looks just like your desktop

Except your desktop expects you to interact with keyboard and pointer device not with you touch. And there it all fails apart.

  > if you want to use it like a crippled toy in the style of an iPad

The words you were looking for are "use it optimised for touch, as iPad".

  > Microsoft were the first to seriously meld the desktop and tablet experience

And were seriously unsuccessful at it.

  > Waiting with bated breath to see if Apple wholesale copies the Microsoft approach,
  > toy-apps-as-start-button works wonderfully.

What's the logic behind that? Microsoft "seriously meld the desktop and tablet experience" and it fails. Apple launches iPad with "crippled toy style" and it is wildly successful. No somehow Apple should copy Microsoft's approach which failed?

[hosay123]

A desktop expects input devices, yes, but also there has been a wonderful need to accommodate disabled people for decades prior to the whole tablet thing, and so all modern desktops have great support for auxiliary input devices, and in the case of business software some of it is even legally mandated in order to sell to government. Microsoft has had a great built-in framework for touch/stylus driven input since Windows XP (2001).

The end result is that an on-screen keyboard or gesture input is just as capable of driving desktop software, and it's been that way for a very long time. If any aspect of the experience is suboptimal, it would be tiny widget sizes that are unaccommodating to thumb-sized input. But that's covered by inclusion of a stylus.

[debacle]

I think a better question might be "Why buy a tablet that is also a laptop when laptops that are also tablets have been around for years?"

Asus has touchscreen laptops for less than half of the price, and convertible laptops have been around for at least a decade.

[potatolicious]

Try using a Surface - it really is nothing like the old tablets of yesteryears.

Convertible laptops were 5lb monstrosities that were nearly impossible to hand hold, emitted tremendous amounts of heat, had incredibly poor battery life, and infamous reliability issues that came from a mechanically complex transformation mechanism. They also used resistive touch screens that were easy to damage, required frequent recalibration when heavily used, and were difficult to use with fingers (making the devices almost exclusively stylus-based devices).

So no, the modern incarnation of the tablet (in the way that iPad has defined it) is nothing like the tablet of old. In fact, if you look at the new convertible tablets coming out of OEMs, they've come pretty far too: capacitive screens, solid construction, hugely reduced weight, unbelievably lower heat output, and battery life that actually matters. We're also seeing novel new ways of building convertibles (e.g., separating keyboard from screen entirely) that make the devices far more realistic for handheld use.

The big secret to tablets that Apple realized, and other companies are slowly picking up on is the importance of the screen. Old convertible laptops used the absolute worst screens that had limited viewing angles, demonstrated ugly moire and discoloration on taps/presses, along with a slew of heat output and power consumption problems. Compare with the calibrated, accurate, brilliant IPS panels that now inhabit tablets (both Surface and iPad have IPS panels), they are worlds apart. When you're putting together a mobile device that is going to be oriented this way and that in someone's hands, a shitty LCD panel really doesn't cut it.

And the problem with Asus and their "half price" touchscreen laptops is all in the screen.

[debacle]

I guess I should state that I plan on buying a Surface when it comes out (not RT). I'm pointing out more from the business standpoint that people are going to be comparing these devices to other devices that look the same, not other devices that are equally as powerful or as well-made.

MS is going to have to work really hard to convince people that the surface is worth $900, at least in my opinion.

[cooldeal]

>Asus has touchscreen laptops for less than half of the price

Are they full HD resolution? Do they have an active digitizer? Core i5 ?

[facorreia]

I see it as an answer to this question: when I leave home, should I bring my MacBook Air, my iPad, or both? None, take the Surface.

[rayiner]

So you have something that's not good at any of the use cases involved?

[WrkInProgress]

I'm curious as to how this isn't as good (on paper) as something like a Macbook Air or a PC Ultrabook ?

[seunosewa]

- A crappier keyboard. - A rigid display whose viewing angles can't be adjusted. - The keyboard doesn't work very well when you use it on your lap. You have to place it on a table. - It's more fragile, especially in tablet mode.

[JuDue]

And portrait mode that has a bad aspect ratio. It's a fundamental mistake for a tablet.

People thought the RT was slightly heavy to hold as a tablet. Will be interested to see their opinions of this.

[bunderbunder]

Ditto. As it is, I'm seeing it as something that's price-competitive with my Macbook Air, but which can handily double as a tablet for when I want to kick my feet up to just browse the web or read a book.

Given that it actually sounds inexpensive to me, after you factor in that it saves having to spend an extra several hundred dollars if you also want a tablet.

[eykanal]

Everyone's blown away because they priced themselves out of their target market. Whether they agree or not, this is going to be compared to the other tablets (i.e., the iPad) out there, and for the base models, the cost is almost double. For a company attempting to play catch-up, their giving themselves such a tremendous handicap is pretty unexpected.

[moconnor]

I don't think their target market for the Pro is the hobbyist, or Mom and Pa, it's the enterprise business market, where the iPad has seen little penetration.

This market doesn't care if the kickstand works on your knee. Or about a few hundred dollars here or there. Exchange integration, legacy internal applications, these things matter.

Note taking in meetings.

[taylodl]

I work in the enterprise business market, for a 100 year old blue chip firm - and the iPads have come in like a tsunami thanks to our BYOD policy. They have Exchange integration. Legacy internal applications? These have all been web-enabled over the past 10 years.

And the adoption has been top-down: it's the C-level execs that are driving this change. This has been going on for two years now. Microsoft seriously missed the boat and more and more is considered to be an old-school technology company like IBM.

[steverb]

Active Directory integration is huge for the enterprises I deal with.

[absconditus]

Enterprise users are still stuck on IE 6, 7, and 8. How are they going to use tablets with IE 10?

[wvenable]

The 64GB iPad is $699 vs. $899 for the Surface Pro. That's not double. I'd say that's entirely in the same market. In my opinion the Surface Pro is better value since it is a full PC.

[bjustin]

The cheapest version of a device gets people in the door. Many people will, rightly or wrongly, compare the $499 iPad 4 with the $899 Surface Pro. That one has 16 GB of space and the other has 64 GB (well more like 48 GB since Windows and Office take a lot of space) comes into play after people are thinking the iPad is way cheaper than the Surface Pro.

[wvenable]

The Surface Pro isn't the cheapest Surface device (it even has "Pro" right there in the name).

The cheapest iPad is still more expensive than most Android tablets.

[majorlazer]

Why not compare the $499 iPad to the Surface RT?

[cbhl]

For the last decade or so, a x86-based device running Windows with a half decent digitizer cost roughly $3000. I doubt you'll see people picking this over an iPad though.

[SG-]

Oh right, scabble is the only thing tablets or iPads are good for. The rest of your thoughts were spot on, but you sort of went the troll route at the end.

[rayiner]

I don't get the point of a device that's not a good tablet because it doubles as a mediocre laptop.

[sliverstorm]

I'm surprised, but I'm not surprised.

I'm not surprised because I knew it would have a premium over the Surface RT. At $699 for the 64GB RT, $899 sounds like just the right price for the 64GB Surface Pro.

I'm surprised, because there's no two ways about it- $899 and not even with a keyboard is pricey.

I think you're spot on though, this isn't an iPad. Looking at the photo at the top of the page, I have one word ringing about in my head, and it isn't "tablet"- it is "slate". This is not your grandma's new movie device, and it isn't meant to be.