So some time ago I posted this:

Supposedly Surface RT is going to cost $199. This may be a game changer.

Well now supposedly the price is $499 with 32GB and no Touch (ie. keyboard) cover. So aside from first adopters, I don't see the Surface making much of a dent. Especially with the new iPad Mini and 9" Kindle. Microsoft burns themselves again......

So I guess no Christmas present for me. I'll just be waiting for the HTC HD8. Surface, Win 8, and new Metro apps are a no-go for me as it stands.

This seems like another one of their 'johnny come lately' products that no one will buy, and they'll completely drop support for by next year. They've done that a lot lately. Plays For Sure, Zune, Zune HD, XNA GS. There is barely any pre-release hype for this thing to begin with.

I want one. I think it will have the best programming environment of all the tablet choices. But I think in one year from now, no one at Microsoft will want to talk about Surface, like they don't want to talk about several other things. So it's not a smart investment until it's more proven.

And even then, it just muddies the waters more with tablet programming. Java for Android, Objective C for iPad, and whatever on Surface.

Oh come on, this is silly - the $199 was just a made up rumour.

$499 is cheaper than the ipad I think? And generally in line with 10" tablets. It's ludicrous argument to say it's expensive, just because it's not as cheap as some ridiculously unrealistic cheap cost that someone made up. I might as well claim the ipad 4 will be 50 cents, and then claim it's too expensive when the real cost is announced. As soon as I saw the rumour on $199, I could just see that these kinds of arguments would come :/

Yes there's a valid argument to say that the real mainstream usage of tablets will be in low cost devices - at high prices, they're luxury products, but at cheap prices, it's tempting to get not one but several for different sizes and purposes. But that argument applies against all the other high end tablets, from Apple, Samsung, ASUS etc.

Johnny-come-lately? That was Apple with phones If now is late for tablets, then MS don't have to worry anyway, as it means there isn't going to be any further growth. OTOH if there is plenty of future growth in tablets (the thing that concerns MS), then now is certainly not late.

Similarly with the idea of the Surface Pro - if there isn't a demand for tablets that are also usable as laptops/desktops/full blown PCs, then it doesn't matter anyway, MS will just go on selling Windows on PCs as before. But if there is, then they're certainly not late to the market - rather, they're first, as no one has yet to make a tablet that's actually a full blown PC, rather than an oversized phone.

Also consider that this is just one of many Windows tablets - unlike Apple, but like Android, you're not stuck with one product. As with the Google phones, it makes sense that the "flagship" product should be a high end premium product, but let other companies fill the market with cheaper products. I don't think that MS's aim is to dominate with the Surface alone (although I'm sure they wouldn't mind), but to provide a flagship example to other Windows tablet manufacturers, similar to what Google did with phones in the earlier days of Android (the Nexus line has never sold that well compared with other Android phones, but they are an important line).

ETA on comparisons:

Does an ipad mini actually exist yet? With pricing? All I've seen is rumours.

The 7" Android tablets look great, but it's not fair to compare 8/16GB 7" tablets to 32/64GB 10" tablets - if you're going to compare, let's compare like to like. (Plus if you want cheap, the cheapest seems to be Ainol, offering 7" tablets cheaper than Amazon, Google, Samsung or Apple - but do the media ever mention them...?)

The original Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 prices were $499 for 16GB, $549 for 32GB ( http://techcrunch.co...b-549-for-32gb/ ). I believe an Ipad 3 is $499 for only the 16GB version.

Given that Windows's strengths would be things like Office, easier integration with PCs and so on, it seems to me that this strategy is better than going for the ultra-cheap-low-end 7" market. Yes, every platform and device has its pros and cons, but I'm boggled at the argument that the Surface RT is expensive, when if anything it's cheaper than the competition.

The point of the Surface: RT or Pro is adoption. If no one is buying your tablets, no one is making apps for them. Win 8 also as a Desktop OS probably won't get a lot of traction either. It may end up like Vista. So, IMO, the Surface was the best way to introduce Win 8 to the world and get some major adopters. Both users and app devs. To price it against the iPad especially without the keyboard is crazy. The pricing brings up too many questions. Number one is: why should I buy this?

[quote name='Alpha_ProgDes' timestamp='1350492678' post='4991162']
The point of the Surface: RT or Pro is adoption. If no one is buying your tablets, no one is making apps for them. Win 8 also as a Desktop OS probably won't get a lot of traction either. It may end up like Vista. So, IMO, the Surface was the best way to introduce Win 8 to the world and get some major adopters. Both users and app devs. To price it against the iPad especially without the keyboard is crazy. The pricing brings up too many questions. Number one is: why should I buy this?

Why should you buy an iPad?
[/quote]
"It's cool. User-friendly. Everyone has one. And it has a zillion apps." If I was a normal user, that's what I would say.

So why would I buy a Surface?

The ipad doesn't come with a keyboard at that price either.

Whilst there were plenty of problems with Vista, I've never seen evidence that its adoption was bad - it continued to get sales the way that Windows always does, buy people buying new PCs. Yes, plenty of businesses stayed with older versions, but they always do that - they did with XP, they did with Windows 7. Many people don't upgrade until the service packs come out, which for Vista was basically Windows 7.

I'd say a Surface is cool and user-friendly. These are meaningless matter-of-opinion claims. And no, not everyone has an ipad; most people don't. Software for the RT will be a problem to start with, but by that logic, no one should have ever bought an iphone in the beginning. Plus Windows will have Office from the start, which is more useful to some than 100,000 fart apps or website wrappers. IIRC, Windows 8 software can run on both ARM and x86 (I guess they use packages with both binaries, for native applications?) So that solves the problem long term - there's a massive market long term for Windows 8, even if most of it is on x86, but if the software can run on both, RT will pick up the software support.

Why should anyone buy an iphone? Everyone has Android phones (at least, far more so than Iphones or Ipads).

Indeed, why should I buy an ipad over a Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 or an ASUS Transformer?

How about: look at what each one offers, and decide what you like, rather than arguing based on what you claim is "cool" or not.
If we're looking at market success, it doesn't have to beat Apple - I mean, it's okay for Apple to be a runner-up player in phones and desktops, so it's hardly a failing if there's one niche area where MS aren't number one. But of more interest I think will be how it compares to Android. I much prefer Android to anything Apple, but the success on non-phone tablets so far has been disappointing, especially at the 10" level. Nonetheless, I don't see people saying that 10" Android tablets are too expensive, or saying that they've flopped.

Can Windows do better than Android here? Just as Apple have settled for distance second place behind Android in the phone market (now that Nokia have ditched Symbian for WP), MS could still do well to rival Android in the larger 10" tablets, even if Apple still end up leading.

The ipad doesn't come with a keyboard at that price either.

Whilst there were plenty of problems with Vista, I've never seen evidence that its adoption was bad - it continued to get sales the way that Windows always does, buy people buying new PCs. Yes, plenty of businesses stayed with older versions, but they always do that - they did with XP, they did with Windows 7. Many people don't upgrade until the service packs come out, which for Vista was basically Windows 7.

Many people went from XP to Win7 by choice. Quite a number of folks uninstalled Vista and installed XP.

I'd say a Surface is cool and user-friendly. These are meaningless matter-of-opinion claims.[/quote]
And yet, in this market, opinions matters. Opinions of the users. Not hardcore hardware geeks or IT personnel.

And no, not everyone has an ipad; most people don't.[/quote]
I said if I was an user. I would say that. And yes, quite a number of people have iPad. 50% of tablets users (or more) have an iPad as a tablet.

Software for the RT will be a problem to start with, but by that logic, no one should have ever bought an iphone in the beginning.[/quote]
What? No. iPhone and iPad were not the first but were the considered the first of its kind. They ran the market until Android came along. So now you have a Microsoft as a late-comer into the game. If you look at the trend of WP7, it's not looking good.

Plus Windows will have Office from the start, which is more useful to some than 100,000 fart apps or website wrappers.[/quote]
Why am I buying this and not a laptop? Is Surface going to be marketed as an inexpensive laptop?

IIRC, Windows 8 software can run on both ARM and x86 (I guess they use packages with both binaries, for native applications?) So that solves the problem long term - there's a massive market long term for Windows 8, even if most of it is on x86, but if the software can run on both, RT will pick up the software support.[/quote]
I believe companies will have to release two versions of the software. Obviously an ARM version and x64 version.

Why should anyone buy an iphone? Everyone has Android phones (at least, far more so than Iphones or Ipads).[/quote]
Because it's a market leader. It's on every phone network but T-Mobile. No phone has more apps than iPhone.

How about: look at what each one offers, and decide what you like, rather than arguing based on what you claim is "cool" or not.
If we're looking at market success, it doesn't have to beat Apple - I mean, it's okay for Apple to be a runner-up player in phones and desktops, so it's hardly a failing if there's one niche area where MS aren't number one. But of more interest I think will be how it compares to Android. I much prefer Android to anything Apple, but the success on non-phone tablets so far has been disappointing, especially at the 10" level. Nonetheless, I don't see people saying that 10" Android tablets are too expensive, or saying that they've flopped.[/quote]
How about we remember that normal users do not work in the IT department. If given a choice between Android, Kindle, iPad, and Surface, what would convince a normal buyer to buy a Surface? The $100 keyboard?

Can Windows do better than Android here? Just as Apple have settled for distance second place behind Android in the phone market (now that Nokia have ditched Symbian for WP), MS could still do well to rival Android in the larger 10" tablets, even if Apple still end up leading.
[/quote]
For the record, I want Surface to succeed. And it is impressive as far as hardware goes. But at this point, I can't look at it from a hardware/IT POV. I have to look at it from the user's point of view. And right now, I'm not seeing enough "WOW" or solid reason to make me go buy a Surface as opposed to a 9" Kindle or iPad.

The ipad doesn't come with a keyboard at that price either.

The iPad isn't claiming to be a laptop replacement, either.

Whilst there were plenty of problems with Vista, I've never seen evidence that its adoption was bad... Many people don't upgrade until the service packs come out, which for Vista was basically Windows 7.[/quote]
My last company was so badly burned by their attempts to adopt Vista, that they also refused to adopt Windows 7 (and likely, will refuse to adopt Windows 8, as well). Unless you are in a market segment that required DX10 support (read: gaming), Vista was a disaster.

How about: look at what each one offers, and decide what you like, rather than arguing based on what you claim is "cool" or not.[/quote]
We are all domain experts in computer-centric fields. Our decision-making process little resembles that of the average consumer (and I would submit, that 'cool' features heavily).

But even if we set aside competition from the iPad for the moment, what reason does the average consumer have to buy a $500 ARM Surface over a $300 laptop? The laptop is significantly faster, runs x86 applications right off the bat, and doesn't have a confusing new interface. The iPad answers this question almost exclusively via the 'cool factor' - it's not clear to me that Surface can do the same...

Also, what is with no Windows 8 version of Office? If I wanted desktop office on my iPad, I'd VNC.