[s_henry_paulson]

Second glance? Even on the first glance this article doesn't pass the sniff test.

Nobody would predict Windows 8 would "stop" the iPad only a month after release. (not to mention the weird comparison of an operating system to a hardware gadget)

"Employees switching away from Windows PCs", and then citing a large iPad purchase by a company. Again, nobody with half a clue would think that these employees are replacing their work computer with an iPad.

Comparing the years old Apple Store to the brand new Windows Store, and trying to pretend like the numbers mean something.

Saying "office is losing relevance" and then citing absolutely nothing.

Saying Microsoft can't continue to invest the profitable Xbox.. because they can't make it the flagship of the company?

Saying their "platform business is collapsing", and then citing areas where they are doing well, and then just assuming they're all eventually going to fail.

This "writer" needs to be fired.

[pyre]

  > This "writer" needs to be fired.

Why? The pageviews just keep coming in!

[bobsoap]

And that's exactly what's wrong with such publications these days. Linkbait takes preference over accuracy. That's not journalism anymore, far from it.

[prewett]

It's not just "these days." Journalism has always suffered from linkbait, although they called it other things, like "sensationalism," back in The Day. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism. Even the august Joseph Pulitzer engaged in it.

[bobsoap]

Good point. I think the main difference between then and now is that back then, it was easier to identify yellow journalism. Pulitzer started sensationalism by printing caricatures on the front page, if I recall correctly. Polarizing and wild imagery then went on to become one of the things that helped you spot trash easily from miles away.

That characteristic slowly became more and more ubiquitous... in the internet age, linkbait became Pulitzer's cartoons because that's what attracts attention.

So I'd say it's become a little harder these days to identify sensationalism as such, because sometimes, there's not much about the appearance of the publication that screams 'yellow journalism' anymore... The cartoon has moved into the content itself.

[dingfeng_quek]

You got it for free - why should you expect more? If there's a demand for accurate, well-supported, and much harder-to-produce news and commentary, which someone is willing to pay for, many journalists would be happier as well. This, however, is a free publication that (simplifying) earns on a per-view basis. Perhaps there already exists another source of information that's accurate, but behind a paywall.

[novalis]

I don't think we should act like there aren't any quality freely distributed reporting sources. Someone paying for content can have the perception that it is worthy and better than other models, but that often leads to comsumption of more targeted content that fits the internal level of bias and doesn't necessarily make it to be of higher journalistic quality. These both considerations shape the content industry, and none of them are "free" models. Ignorance, in communication, is not an externality that we can afford in this day and age.

[bobsoap]

There are plenty of monetization models besides trashy linkbait and paywalls that are capable of producing great results. I agree with you that, as a consumer, if you get something for free, it's actually you who is the product. But there are many facets in the quality/trash spectrum and there are quite a few good examples of successful business models that are "free" yet produce good quality.

[wisty]

Also, it's too early to call the Surface. The RT has flopped, but the Pro is very interesting. I can imagine it being very handy for students.

[shinratdr]

No tablet with less battery life than a cheap laptop will be handy for anyone.

[enraged_camel]

Exactly. What the heck is anyone going to do with a tablet that is (over)priced like an ultrabook and has only 4 hours of battery life? It would be especially useless for students since it wouldn't last till the end of a school-day.

[pmelendez]

> What the heck is anyone going to do with a tablet that is (over)priced like an ultrabook and has only 4 hours of battery life?

I might be getting too old to understand this but when I was an undergraduate student 14 years ago, I had an 1-hour-battery laptop and was 'really' useful. I can't see how a portable computer (even if I have to plug it to use it) would be 'especially useless' for students.

Coming from a latin-american country, the whole battery life issue sounds a lot like a "1st world problem" to me.

[avens19]

Most of the students I know at my university get maybe 3 hours on their laptops and many have Wacom tablets to write notes with. Most classrooms have plugs now. Writing directly onto the screen is a big value proposition for many of these students. I wouldn't count it out yet.

[barista]

And I am sure it will be even less popular than a certain laptop that had less than 4 hours battery life and didn't even have a touch screen but it fit in a manila envelope (MacBook air)

[JuDue]

Unfortunately being similar to 2008 Apple Air specs just isn't going to cut it.

[enraged_camel]

Exactly. In order to be competitive this thing needs twice the battery life and half the price.

[wisty]

Haswell will fix this. Microsoft does well when it designs for next year's hardware - sell to the enthusiasts, then wait for the masses to upgrade into their maw.

[enraged_camel]

Haswell will fix what? The battery life? Because that's a no. You might see some marginal improvement, but that's about it.

[wisty]

The main difference between the RT (10 hour life) and the Pro (4 hour life) is the CPU, isn't it?

A peak 17W vs 10W draw is a pretty big difference. And that's peak power; Haswell may be even better at idling. We might see 6 or 7 hours on the next Pro (wild guess).

[recoiledsnake]

Not to mention harping on about an IDC report about last quarter Windows Phone sales while WP8 launched only last month and is selling okay according to many reports. People were waiting for WP8 to launch because of both the new OS and hardware but also because WP7 phones can't be upgraded, so sales weren't that great.

>This "writer" needs to be fired

The "writer" is more likely to get a pay hike or get promoted because his blogspam is garnering a lot of hits from sites like HN because of the headline and content.

[bobsoap]

My thoughts exactly. The writer is comparing apples to oranges (PC / iPad, for one). I must have uttered "are you kidding me" a dozen times while reading that crap.