Microsoft Details Surface Pro Pricing Amidst Reports of Poor Sales of RT Version

[damir00]

Originally Posted by xofruitcake

IBM used to have 80-90% market share in mainframe computer too until PC and UNIX based server took over the world.

IBM still has dominant share in mainframes, and they sell more heavy iron today than they did 30 years ago.

[Naimfan]

I just wonder: What is the point of the Surface?

The base one doesn't seem terribly competitive with an iPad; and the so-called "Pro" version just seems . . . like a gimmick. Do either one of them do anything you can't already do with a different tablet or laptop?

The Surface seems to be a Zune redux.

[xofruitcake]

Originally Posted by damir00

IBM still has dominant share in mainframes, and they sell more heavy iron today than they did 30 years ago.

Yes, except that mainframe has no bearing on the future of computer industry now. It is used in the server area and they did well there. They may sell more in dollars term now but back in the 60 and 70s, they ARE the computer industry. And now they are only a small part of the industry and not the growing part. I worked for IBM for 20+ years and went through the early 90 near BK situation (yes, IBM was near BK.. Sales were dropped through the floor and Gerstner cut the price of mainframe and mainframe software price drastically to save the company).

Microsoft is going to be just like IBM. They will never go away as desktop PC will always has a role in our computing need. But the real question for Microsoft future is their new role in the mobile world. They have a lot of IP and vendors will have to pay up for the royalty of using those patents. So Microsoft benefited from the wave of new mobile device. But user will transition out of PC dominated application much like user transitioned out of IBM mainframe application.

If you are running an large corporate IT (or even our own budget) shop, buying the hardware is just one piece of the cost puzzle. Software cost, service cost, and maintenance cost can add up to 3 to 4x as much as the initial cost of the hardware. Service, and maintenance cost are generally inline with different platforms. However, software cost is clearly cheaper in the mobile OS world. And hardware cost using intel based processor are much more expensive (and more powerful..but how many of us need that additional power and willing to pay for it?) since Intel charge pretty hefty margin for their stuff. After you add it all up, there is a lot of incentive for a company to move as many device as possible to the mobile platform.

[damir00]

Originally Posted by xofruitcake

Yes, except that mainframe has no bearing on the future of computer industry now.

That's just nonsense.

Our modern world comes crashing down if the plug is pulled on mainframes.

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by CylonGlitch

Hardware cannot fix crappy software development.

Install XCode, connect your iPhone and go into Organizer. You'll be surprised to find out you just called Mobile Safari crappy.

Infinity Blade and its sequel are also very well represented there.

[JAT]

It's pretty funny (like funny=sad, pathetic, suicidal) that my assumptions, in a joke, are "an insult".

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

You made an assumption and an insult and I just felt like I needed to ask you to tone it down.

But yours are suddenly happy, happy, joy, joy:

There are ways to explain properly why iOS already is a full blown OS, running on a full blown computer without resorting to calling people "Win geeks" when they probably aren't even Windows users or geeks to begin with.

I feel like I'm at some other forum, talking to someone else. You really need to lighten up. I thought people in Canada were happy.

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by JAT

I thought people in Canada were happy.

He's from Quebec. It's all angry Frenchmen and polar bears up there.

[Liquorpuki]

Originally Posted by xofruitcake

The key is the software cost. The component cost for putting together a PC and a laptop is very close now (Intel processor is much more expensive than any of the ARM processor, but the memory price is similiar, the LCD screen is similar, battery is similiar). But you can buy a game in mobile world for $5 where you will spend 30-40 for one that run in PC. It will be interesting to see how much Microsoft will price IOS version of Office. I bet it will be much cheaper than Window version of the product.

I'm of the opinion those $5 apps and $100 software suites aren't interchangeable. If they were, I don't think the Pro would have any leverage over tablets currently on the market. Mobile software is a budget market that's better at producing flashlight apps than productivity software. That low pricepoint is a problem.

iOS Office is subscription based and resides in the cloud. It's a second rate solution for those who need full Office functionality. I think Microsoft planned it this way - kept the best solution for themselves so they could leverage it.

A fair number of users only use their device for surfing the web, reading email etc. Those user already find out that they can do better with tablet in term of cost and availability of new software. And now as more and more new application are written for mobile device running on IOS or Android, Window competitive position become weaker and weaker. You can see the trend in the demand for programmer who know IOS and Android vs programmers who know Window. The software development economic is working against new Window based device (or for that matter RIMM's new OS). If you can only sell a piece of software for $5 to $10, you need to sell 4x to 5x more than the same piece of software priced at $40 a piece to make it attractive to a software house. No large machine base -> no new software -> no additional machines sales.

I don't think Pro is geared toward those people that only need a portable internet device. It's geared toward those who need a mobile device that does more than what the current mobile ecosystem can offer them.

Originally Posted by Naimfan

The base one doesn't seem terribly competitive with an iPad; and the so-called "Pro" version just seems . . . like a gimmick. Do either one of them do anything you can't already do with a different tablet or laptop?

I think the Pro is a brand new product space - tablet and laptop converged into one unit with access to both ecosystems. People compare it to Ultrabooks because of specs and tablets because of form factor but I really think it's something new and different

[KnightWRX]

Originally Posted by damir00

Our modern world comes crashing down if the plug is pulled on mainframes.

Well, for one, our own mainframe is now almost quite irrelevant.

SAP is quickly replacing old IMS custom-built software in about every big business these days. And where it used to take 5-10 mainframe people to manage the CRMs running under IMS, it now takes teams of 200-300 people to to do the same work for SAP.

We've "gained" so much efficiency there!

[MOUNY]

all they are doing is trying to be like apple

[VenusianSky]

Originally Posted by Naimfan

I just wonder: What is the point of the Surface?

The same point as an iPad.

Do either one of them do anything you can't already do with a different tablet or laptop?

Nope. You know that there are people that don't own either a laptop or a tablet that may be looking to purchase one.

[Bheleu]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTKz6HBTzz8

Once people begin to meet after work to have a LAN party on their iPads, begin to play Xbox games on an iPad, or even get contracts to build military systems with Apple iOS or OSX maybe MSFT can get a little concerned. Run MediaCenter on your iPad, ha! Play modded games, good luck. Want to design circuit boards, run cad programs, etc. you are going to need a MSFT OS for that.

Done right with enough hardware and video capabilities, MSFT will have something gamers can use on the go. When it comes to raw performance, to $&@! with battery life, if MSFT is the Yen to the iPads Yang it will be a successful product.

Do not like the touch cover, Surface has ports or BT for real controllers and drivers to run real hardware. I hope MSFT gets it right. I do not want to have a mediocre iPad X being identical to what I have now. Competition is a good thing, and the last thing I want to do is have to turn to Googles model as competition. The last thing I want is giving my data away in exchange for "the bare specs" and a "discounted price" to get access to it, or ignore ad popups.

I like my iPad, but I hope MSFT tears into the market so my kids and I have a real choice in a quality tablet computer.

If MSFT is a game changer, I will upgrade to the smallest mini cellular when a JB exists so I have access to my UL LTE data, and get the bigger Surface Pro for real computer portability. If Surface could broker a deal with AT&T for the same $30/mo UL data, I would jump over outright.

For RT Comparisons, here is a decently unskewed review
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bk41gSm74yw

[throAU]

Originally Posted by Switchback666

Im aware of external GPUs mate question is can you go buy it now ? Plus what makes you think its a no on the surface pro ?

There's a guy on here running one.

As to why it won't work with the surface pro: read up on USB and read up on Thunderbolt.

To drive a GPU over USB, your CPU would be working overtime simply to do the data transfers over the USB bus.

USB, in ANY form (USB1, USB2, USB3) is not intended for high performance peripherals.

Yes, USB3 is theoretically 5 gigabit. In practice it is much slower and consumes CPU to do all the data transfer. This is fine for cheap external hard drives, but if you're going to try and use it for any sort of high performance application where the CPU is otherwise busy, it is not going to work very well at all.

Thunderbolt does not.

The ONLY reason USB is popular is because it is CHEAP to implement (because all the work is done by the host CPU) and good enough for external hard drives, cameras, keyboards, mice, etc.

Anything that requires low latency or want to minimize CPU consumption should avoid USB like the plague.

Don't get me wrong - USB1/2/3 has it's place, however, it is not driving GPUs or similar hardware.

I'm glad it is available as a cheaper option for instances where it is "good enough". .





----------

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

Install XCode, connect your iPhone and go into Organizer. You'll be surprised to find out you just called Mobile Safari crappy.

Infinity Blade and its sequel are also very well represented there.

Most IOS crashes I've seen logged have been due to running out of RAM.

[kalsta]

Originally Posted by PracticalMac

Well, you said MS fumbled by completely combining both touch and pointer, then turn around and blast Apple for not doing like.

What?! When did I blast Apple for not doing like?? Why not take a moment to go back and comprehend what I actually said before misquoting me for a second time now.

Here, I'll make it easy for you by quoting my full comment again:

Originally Posted by kalsta

No, I think the concept itself is flawed. It's the forced marriage of two mostly incompatible partners—touchscreen interface and pointing device interface. The only thing Apple has missed out on by keeping the Mac and the iPad as separate devices is falling on their arse in spectacular fashion. They left it to Microsoft to do that.

I said they 'missed out on … falling on their arse'. To put it a different way, they did not fall on their arse.

No one likes being misquoted, so slow down next time and read what the person has said before you try and poke holes in their argument.

[kalsta]

To clarify my position, I do think it would be possible to add a touchscreen to a Mac if it were nothing but an optional add-on to existing methods of input. For example, a user could do multi-touch gestures on it, just as they can with a trackpad. Or an app like Photoshop could open up possibilities for painting with a finger or stylus. But fundamentally the OS would remain oriented for a pointing device, and apps would be created with this level of precision in mind.

This idea that one OS can work equally well no matter how you choose to interact with (mouse and cursor, or finger) is flawed in my opinion. Apple had the better strategy, of entirely rethinking the interface for iOS and keeping that separate from OS X. I see them continuing this way for the foreseeable future. If I'm wrong, and all the people predicting the imminent merging of OS X and iOS are right, you may quote me and gloat when that time comes.

[xofruitcake]

Originally Posted by damir00

That's just nonsense.

Our modern world comes crashing down if the plug is pulled on mainframes.

heh heh, give me a break. My last job before retirement is a team lead job of designing microcode for part of an high end disk drive that run on IBM main frame and each of the puppy was selling for $600K and above. The key word is the FUTURE. If you think you know more about mainframe business, please tell us how mainframe will change the world in the future? I am pretty sure IBM will have a high paying job waiting for you.. 8-)

[thekev]

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

We've "gained" so much efficiency there!

Hey! That's called growth.

I couldn't resist saying that.

[xofruitcake]

Originally Posted by Liquorpuki

I'm of the opinion those $5 apps and $100 software suites aren't interchangeable. If they were, I don't think the Pro would have any leverage over tablets currently on the market. Mobile software is a budget market that's better at producing flashlight apps than productivity software. That low pricepoint is a problem.

iOS Office is subscription based and resides in the cloud. It's a second rate solution for those who need full Office functionality. I think Microsoft planned it this way - kept the best solution for themselves so they could leverage it.

The software business model has been evolving over the last 30+ years. In the IBM mainframe day, you have monthly rental model when software and maintenance are purchased in a package the cost hundred of thousands a year (no kidding.. IBM software business gross margin is in the 80-90% in the heyday). My first job out of college is working on IBM products that has only 24+ programmers with annual revenue of over $50M and that is 1980's dollars. I like to see any company can make that kind of revenue today. Late on we have the PC and unix model of charging each software by persons and software cost plummeted. Microsoft office (really Excel) has monopoly now and of course Microsoft want to charge as much as they can. But I don't see user will change their demand for cheap software now that they see what is possible.

New software are developed in the mobile platform now. Just look at the demand for Window programmer vs IOS vs Android programmer and you can tell which way software development are heading. Like it or not the infuse of cheap programmer talent from oversea will drive the software price down across the board. As the mobile processor getting more powerful the software that is capable of running on them are going to be more powerful.

I really don't see the advantage of Window 8 Pro tablet over a laptop. You can get a laptop with the left over money and got an IOS or Android tablet. I think Tim Cook is right on the toaster oven analogy. In a few months, we will know how well the Window pro sales do and if Window 8 buzz is any hint, it is not going to be really good.

[Naimfan]

Originally Posted by Liquorpuki

I think the Pro is a brand new product space - tablet and laptop converged into one unit with access to both ecosystems. People compare it to Ultrabooks because of specs and tablets because of form factor but I really think it's something new and different

Thanks. That makes sense, but I don't see it gaining much traction, as it seems that devices are converging anyway. I think the price will hurt it - if it were a couple hundred less, or came with the keyboard, I think it would have a chance to really blaze a trail. As priced, I think most people would opt for an Air or similar, or an iPad or other tablet.

[KdParker]

Originally Posted by thermal

It's unfortunate MS Surface seems to be struggling. Healthy competition is good for all consumers, including Apple fans.

The pro version of this tablet is just too high!

What is this....a mini laptop kinda?

[Technarchy]

The Surface was crippled by design with a piss poor distribution network.

[hiramham]

Originally Posted by KdParker

What is this....a mini laptop kinda?

I am intrigued by the Surface Pro. I think of it as an ipad form factor but more useful.

I own both a 13' macbook air and an ipad. I find the air annoying to use while laying in bed surfing the net (would prefer a tablet touch format for this). And I find the ipad not that useful b/c I can't VPN to work and no flash.

If i can find a device that does both well, I am a buyer. I think its a niche Apple hasn't hit yet.

Oh and i like the commercials btw.

[Liquorpuki]

Originally Posted by xofruitcake

New software are developed in the mobile platform now. Just look at the demand for Window programmer vs IOS vs Android programmer and you can tell which way software development are heading. Like it or not the infuse of cheap programmer talent from oversea will drive the software price down across the board. As the mobile processor getting more powerful the software that is capable of running on them are going to be more powerful.

Cheap labor doesn't drive down prices. The market sets the price and the mobile software market is defined by Apple's app store distribution model. The model = tons of developers competing with each other on one storefront only. Mobile software has a low pricepoint not because it's the evolution of software, but because dropping prices to almost nothing is the only way developers can compete on a crowded market and get you to download their app. This is intentional by Apple because it helps them maximize hardware sales but software quality suffers in return. You get what you paid for and this is why the mobile ecosystem can create a million flashlight apps but not one word processor with a built in equation editor. Mobile is now a budget market, with both budget pricing and budget quality.

Notice how Apple's been taking steps to commoditize software on OS X as well. Dropping the pricepoint of first party software (Aperture, Logic, etc), creating the MAC app store, marginalizing pro users - that's all meant to commoditize desktop software and make it less valuable. They're unable to go all the way because of logistical issues (if you don't like the App Store, you can still get OS X software from brick and mortars, STEAM, Amazon, etc) but they went all the way on iOS and had no problem letting it become a race to the bottom. I don't think people want to see desktop software become a budget market, but that seems to be Apple's vision for the future.

The Fire, the Nexus, the RT, they all copied Apple's app store model and are chained to the same distribution model that produces cheap crappy software. The Pro isn't and that's why it has value.

Far as mobile processing getting more powerful, it doesn't matter. Most apps can't afford to milk it anyway because of the lower price points.

I really don't see the advantage of Window 8 Pro tablet over a laptop. You can get a laptop with the left over money and got an IOS or Android tablet. I think Tim Cook is right on the toaster oven analogy. In a few months, we will know how well the Window pro sales do and if Window 8 buzz is any hint, it is not going to be really good.

It's a converged device. Back in the days, you could have bought a cheap phone and used the leftover money to get a PDA, but smartphones took off anyway.

Originally Posted by Naimfan

Thanks. That makes sense, but I don't see it gaining much traction, as it seems that devices are converging anyway. I think the price will hurt it - if it were a couple hundred less, or came with the keyboard, I think it would have a chance to really blaze a trail. As priced, I think most people would opt for an Air or similar, or an iPad or other tablet.

I'm buying one but I have no clue what's gonna happen either. They have something good here but a lot of whether or not it makes an impact depends on marketing.

[KdParker]

Originally Posted by hiramham

I am intrigued by the Surface Pro. I think of it as an ipad form factor but more useful.

I own both a 13' macbook air and an ipad. I find the air annoying to use while laying in bed surfing the net (would prefer a tablet touch format for this). And I find the ipad not that useful b/c I can't VPN to work and no flash.

If i can find a device that does both well, I am a buyer. I think its a niche Apple hasn't hit yet.

Oh and i like the commercials btw.

Lets hope they didn't price themselves out of the niche.

[KdParker]

Originally Posted by KnightWRX

Well, for one, our own mainframe is now almost quite irrelevant.

SAP is quickly replacing old IMS custom-built software in about every big business these days. And where it used to take 5-10 mainframe people to manage the CRMs running under IMS, it now takes teams of 200-300 people to to do the same work for SAP.

We've "gained" so much efficiency there!

Sounds like issues with SAP. When applications are moved correctly not only do we gain efficiency, but flexibility also.