tablets: Any Surface RT Owners ... Comments vs iPad?

[jrswizzle]

Originally Posted by Black Magic

Damn, you making me want to run out an buy an iPad.

/sarcasm?

lol I couldn't tell....all I know is the iPad works fantastically for my use case (and so far most consumers' use cases as well). I have very much enjoyed my iPad experience and I've really noticed it this week as I sold my 3 last week to upgrade to the 4 (long story short, planned on switching up my mobile device lineup and was looking at going to a WiFi only iPad - regardless of the announcement - to use at home for most things and on the road for movie watching while my iPad mini will be LTE compatible for on-the-go, everyday use.)

I don't own a laptop and everything I would do on it (or on my iMac for that matter) I can do on my iPad - except play SC2....but that's probably for the best.

[madmaxmedia]

Could they not have made the cheaper Surface with the new Intel Atom instead of ARM? (it's in the new Motorola RAZR i, runs at 2GHz, and seems to benchmark reasonably well compared to the ARM versions of the RAZR.)

Such a tablet would have similar price and form factor as the RT Surface, but actually have desktop application compatibility. Okay maybe not a lot of heavy lifting, but it would have compatibility.

Maybe the Intel CPU is not as good, but at least there's a point to using it here, unlike in a Motorola Android phone.

[Renzatic]

I'd say it's because the decent Atom chips didn't come out until well into the Surfaces development.

[madmaxmedia]

Yeah, possibly the timeline didn't match up. But that would have been a big plus for the Surface- if you're going to have a full Windows 8 OS with desktop, may as well get a CPU that is x86 compatible to go with it.

I found a mention of this-

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6385/m...face-review/10

Apparently Atom-based Surface tablets are coming out. I'm not getting a Surface anyway, but it would have been more intriguing to me if it was x86 compatible. But hey, I use a MBP anyway-

[iTurnip]

I wanted an iPad but I couldn't justify the price tag as it didn't replace the need for a laptop for work purposes when I traveled. It would have been just an expensive toy. The surface allows me to leave my laptop at home as I can access Word and PowerPoint, crucial as a scientist at conferences. So far it has been brilliant. It's intuitive, I can use my portable hard drive via the usb port and the key board is ingenious and very effective. I can type almost as fast as I can on a normal keyboard. I use it as a tablet for playing games and messing around on the net in front of the tv, and as a laptop for editing documents and taking notes at meetings. Only had it 3 days and I love it. Would definitely recommend it if you want to use a tablet for both work and play. The surface would have made my life very easy as a student

[j_maddison]

Originally Posted by iTurnip

I wanted an iPad but I couldn't justify the price tag as it didn't replace the need for a laptop for work purposes when I traveled. It would have been just an expensive toy. The surface allows me to leave my laptop at home as I can access Word and PowerPoint, crucial as a scientist at conferences. So far it has been brilliant. It's intuitive, I can use my portable hard drive via the usb port and the key board is ingenious and very effective. I can type almost as fast as I can on a normal keyboard. I use it as a tablet for playing games and messing around on the net in front of the tv, and as a laptop for editing documents and taking notes at meetings. Only had it 3 days and I love it. Would definitely recommend it if you want to use a tablet for both work and play. The surface would have made my life very easy as a student

While I appreciate you've mentioned a number of reasons over and above what mi about to mention, as why a Surface is a better choice for our over an iPad, there was something you mentioned that I've seen brought up in other reviews as an advantage the Surface has over the iPad. That advantage is the touch cover and type cover.

What I don't understand with the comparison is that the touch and type covers are covers, and the iPad has had these from its inception. While I appreciate Microsoft taking the design to a new level, it doesn't introduce anything new that couldn't be done on the iPad. So I wonder if people simply didn't know you could get similar keyboard covers for the iPad?

I've used my iPad many a time to write notes, write a lengthy word processed document etc on. It's terrible for attempting to input into a spreadsheet with any level of speed or fluidity mind. But as a device to use as a word processor (Ms Word replacement) it's absolutely fine, with options over and above pages. I've also used the iPad to create and deliver presentations from scratch.

[spinedoc77]

Originally Posted by j_maddison

While I appreciate you've mentioned a number of reasons over and above what mi about to mention, as why a Surface is a better choice for our over an iPad, there was something you mentioned that I've seen brought up in other reviews as an advantage the Surface has over the iPad. That advantage is the touch cover and type cover.

What I don't understand with the comparison is that the touch and type covers are covers, and the iPad has had these from its inception. While I appreciate Microsoft taking the design to a new level, it doesn't introduce anything new that couldn't be done on the iPad. So I wonder if people simply didn't know you could get similar keyboard covers for the iPad?

I've used my iPad many a time to write notes, write a lengthy word processed document etc on. It's terrible for attempting to input into a spreadsheet with any level of speed or fluidity mind. But as a device to use as a word processor (Ms Word replacement) it's absolutely fine, with options over and above pages. I've also used the iPad to create and deliver presentations from scratch.

But if you take that line of reasoning then you could say you don't understand the comparison between pre-ipad tablets and the ipad, they are both tablets. The point I'm trying to make is that MS didn't invent the tablet keyboard, but they refined it to be very thin yet very functional. To this day I don't know of a similar keyboard for the ipad, they seem quite bulky to me.

[j_maddison]

Originally Posted by spinedoc77

But if you take that line of reasoning then you could say you don't understand the comparison between pre-ipad tablets and the ipad, they are both tablets. The point I'm trying to make is that MS didn't invent the tablet keyboard, but they refined it to be very thin yet very functional. To this day I don't know of a similar keyboard for the ipad, they seem quite bulky to me.

That's a fair point. The keyboard is a thing of beauty, something you'd expect from Apple usually. I get what you're saying

The third party ones will add bulk and weight.

For touch typists a keyboard is invaluable too. It will be interesting when MS overcome some of the limitations of the touch cover.

[iTurnip]

Originally Posted by j_maddison

I've used my iPad many a time to write notes, write a lengthy word processed document etc on. It's terrible for attempting to input into a spreadsheet with any level of speed or fluidity mind. But as a device to use as a word processor (Ms Word replacement) it's absolutely fine, with options over and above pages. I've also used the iPad to create and deliver presentations from scratch.

Sure you could do these things on the ipad but in reality it would be a hassle and office is seamlessly integrated into the surface in intuitive and easy to use fashion. Isn’t that why we buy apple products because of their ease of use? I use office on my mac (as do my colleagues) and I want to continue using this platform on my tablet for an easy transition between devices. This is what apple does well, take technology that already exists and integrates it into their products in a way that makes them easier to use and nobody would complain about that. Sure you have been able to take panoramic photos on an android device for a long time now, but it wasn't as easy to use as it is on the iphone5. This is essentially what the surface has achieved with its keyboard and office suite.

[j_maddison]

Originally Posted by iTurnip

Sure you could do these things on the ipad but in reality it would be a hassle and office is seamlessly integrated into the surface in intuitive and easy to use fashion. Isn’t that why we buy apple products because of their ease of use? I use office on my mac (as do my colleagues) and I want to continue using this platform on my tablet for an easy transition between devices. This is what apple does well, take technology that already exists and integrates it into their products in a way that makes them easier to use and nobody would complain about that. Sure you have been able to take panoramic photos on an android device for a long time now, but it wasn't as easy to use as it is on the iphone5. This is essentially what the surface has achieved with its keyboard and office suite.

It depends what you're doing with office. If as in my example you're doing some light word processing, it doesn't matter what you're using. If you're using basic formulas on a spreadsheet, again it doesn't matter what you're using. Just save it as a word or excel file and it's seamless anyway.

It depends if you're talking about interoperability between features that are only present in that particular app, or if you're talking about logo matching? If it's the former, valid point, but more often than not when it comes to word processing in the work place, I find it's the latter

Pretty much every Word processor and spreadsheet app will open an MS office file and save to it.

[Black Magic]

So my buddy brought his Surface RT to lunch with us and I got to try it out. It's not bad and it actually seems quite usable for the most part. Things that turned me off:

1. He bought the 32GB version. Windows 8 RT OS takes up almost have of the 32GB.

2. Portrait mode sucks on that device. You see very little content and will be scrolling forever.

3. VPN capability = none.

4. Wall Garden Microsoft style. You are stuck using Internet Explorer and their mail app.

5. Not too many apps.

What I did like:

Windows 8 RT seems to shine on a touch device.

1. Multitasking was cool.
2. Nice bright colorful screen.
3. Not that heavy. Seemed very portable.
4. USB ports.

I could see my self being some what productive on this device. Would I buy one? No. I think its a nice first start by Microsoft.

----------

Originally Posted by jrswizzle

/sarcasm?

lol I couldn't tell....all I know is the iPad works fantastically for my use case (and so far most consumers' use cases as well). I have very much enjoyed my iPad experience and I've really noticed it this week as I sold my 3 last week to upgrade to the 4 (long story short, planned on switching up my mobile device lineup and was looking at going to a WiFi only iPad - regardless of the announcement - to use at home for most things and on the road for movie watching while my iPad mini will be LTE compatible for on-the-go, everyday use.)

I don't own a laptop and everything I would do on it (or on my iMac for that matter) I can do on my iPad - except play SC2....but that's probably for the best.

No sarcasm. I thought you presented strong arguments for the iPad.

[jrswizzle]

Originally Posted by Black Magic

No sarcasm. I thought you presented strong arguments for the iPad.

Well thank you

I do try to present logical arguments based on my personal experiences and research (of which I do a lot). I've never been upset with an Apple purchase - used to complain about my dell laptops all the time. Was the best decision I ever made (and subsequently got my entire family to make) to switch to a Mac, which in turn led to iPhones and iPads. Wonderful experiences both with the devices and with customer service (the few times I've needed them).

IMO - you buy the ecosystem, and there isn't a better one out there than Apple.

[iTurnip]

Originally Posted by Black Magic

So my buddy brought his Surface RT to lunch with us and I got to try it out. It's not bad and it actually seems quite usable for the most part. Things that turned me off:

1. He bought the 32GB version. Windows 8 RT OS takes up almost have of the 32GB.

2. Portrait mode sucks on that device. You see very little content and will be scrolling forever.

3. VPN capability = none.

4. Wall Garden Microsoft style. You are stuck using Internet Explorer and their mail app.

5. Not too many apps.



----------

[/COLOR]

Sorry but as a surface owner I disagree with your negtive points.

1. Storage is not an issue as you can use USB storage or insert a 64gb Micro SD card.

2. I see your point but am willing to sacrifice this for movies in the correct aspect ratio

3. I Live in the USA and use a VPN on the surface to access British content. I had no difficulty in using the VPN so I don't know why your friend is struggling.

4. I agree and don't like to be pigeon holed on any device whether it be Apple or microsoft.

5. With microsoft offering 80% of profit to App developers it's only a matter of time before developers take advantage of the huge windows 8 market.

[zhenya]

Originally Posted by iTurnip

2. I see your point but am willing to sacrifice this for movies in the correct aspect ratio

See, I just don't understand this. Why should movie playback (which takes up only a small fraction of time people spend on their tablets or computers) take precedent over EVERYTHING else that is done? Tablets and monitors are much more useful for reading and work even at 16:10 than at 16:9. I'll take a couple of black bars during a movie (that is displayed at the same size as if the screen were physically cropped) to gain extra working pixels the rest of the time.

Furthermore, 16:9 isn't even the correct aspect ratio for movies; it's the TV standard. How many people watch tv on their tablets?

[iTurnip]

Originally Posted by zhenya

How many people watch tv on their tablets?

I'm not being antagonistic here and I agree with you to some extent, but I watch most of my TV on a laptop or now my surface. I might be a special case though, as this is the only way I can watch my favourite shows from over the pond using my VPN (which I confirmed I could do before buying it). I'm sure the design of the keyboard and flip stand were important in determining the screen size and shape. Personally for me it's not a problem but if you are used to the ipad it might seem slightly odd.

[Night Spring]

Originally Posted by iTurnip

1. Storage is not an issue as you can use USB storage or insert a 64gb Micro SD card.

I suppose that's true enough, but even with the capability of adding more storage, the OS taking up 16 GB seems excessive for a mobile OS.

On the issue of aspect ratio, I agree with zhenya. Watching movies and TV shows is not the main thing I do with my tablet, a majority of my time on the iPad is spent on reading text, either ebooks or the web. Obviously, that is not the preference for *everyone* -- some people will consider watching videos to be the more important activity they do with a tablet.

The question for device manufacturers, of course, is which group is larger, because by targeting the larger group, their device would sell better. Apple went for the text-centric group, most Android tablets for the video-centric one, and Surface is an interesting case, because if I'm understanding Microsoft's intentions properly, the length of the Surface was determined because that was the minimum length they needed to fit in a functional keyboard. Okay, so far so good, but then they picked a width such that it creates a narrow aspect ratio -- but why? If they had made the screen wider, then in turn they would have had room for a larger trackpad on the keyboard cover, which is something people have been saying is too small, not to mention that the Surface is supposed to be a productivity device, and if so, shouldn't you favor a text-centric aspect ratio?

I did drop by a Microsoft popup store on Sunday, and played with the Surface for a few minutes. The Touch Cover was pretty much a no-go, but I could type decently on the Type Cover, and if that had been around in the early days of my iPad usage, I might have been envious of it. But the thing is, in the two and half years I've been using my iPad, I've gotten used to using it without a physical keyboard, and by now, that's my preferred mode of using a tablet. Like right now, I'm sitting on my sofa and typing this with the iPad on my lap, switching between typing with all my fingers or typing with my thumbs as the mood strikes me. In order to use the Surface's keyboard cover, I'd have to find a place to prop it up -- I doubt I could type on the keyboard cover on my lap.

A Surface with a keyboard cover might be a good choice for someone looking for a super light lnotebook, and I'll be giving the Surface Pro a good look when it comes out. But IMO, it isn't a better tablet than the iPad and Android tablets already out there.

[Renzatic]

The reason MS chose a 16:9 aspect ratio is because of the multitasking aspect of the OS. Docking an app to the side of the would be too cramped on a 4:3 screen.

...though it'd be fine on a 16:10, which is what they should've gone with. While it's not terrible for the getting-work-done appeal MS is going for with the RT, 16:9 is a little too skinny.

[aaronvan]

Originally Posted by charlieegan3

I hope the surface will be successful. I have a feeling it may not be.

I hope it is as well. Apple needs good competition to keep innovating.

[TheHateMachine]

Originally Posted by zhenya

See, I just don't understand this. Why should movie playback (which takes up only a small fraction of time people spend on their tablets or computers) take precedent over EVERYTHING else that is done? Tablets and monitors are much more useful for reading and work even at 16:10 than at 16:9. I'll take a couple of black bars during a movie (that is displayed at the same size as if the screen were physically cropped) to gain extra working pixels the rest of the time.

Furthermore, 16:9 isn't even the correct aspect ratio for movies; it's the TV standard. How many people watch tv on their tablets?

It is kind of silly to say that only a small fraction of time is spent watching stuff. You do not know how people use their devices. Maybe that is how you use it but other people use things differently. Not trying to be rude but that is just a silly comment.

Originally Posted by Night Spring

I suppose that's true enough, but even with the capability of adding more storage, the OS taking up 16 GB seems excessive for a mobile OS.

When I right click and select properties on my Windows folder on my Surface it is only 6.80 GB.

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by TheHateMachine

When I right click and select properties on my Windows folder on my Surface it is only 6.80 GB.

Counting it and Office, it's around 12GB.

[TheHateMachine]

Originally Posted by Renzatic

Counting it and Office, it's around 12GB.

Are you sure?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6385/m...rface-review/6



**Thanks for editing that for me maflynn, wasn't sure on how to thumbnail it!**

[zhenya]

Originally Posted by TheHateMachine

It is kind of silly to say that only a small fraction of time is spent watching stuff. You do not know how people use their devices. Maybe that is how you use it but other people use things differently. Not trying to be rude but that is just a silly comment.

You have to take that assumption on a macro level rather than as an individual. I don't know what the actual studies would say, if there have been studies done, but from the way I see people interact with them, I would say that people as a whole don't spend the majority of the time watching video content. There will always be the exception, but the exceptions don't matter so much; you are designing for the bulk in the middle.

My feeling is that widescreen became a fad like 'HD' and most companies just move to the flow of whatever is the easiest. People will buy 'HD' panels and the glass manufacturers give discounts for buying the most common sizes, so we ended up with a flurry of narrow panels. It's taken a while, but consumers are beginning to wake up to the reality that these aren't optimized for consumption.

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by TheHateMachine

Are you sure?

Well hell. Not now. Where did the 12GB install size rumor come from then?

Originally Posted by zhenya

It's taken a while, but consumers are beginning to wake up to the reality that these aren't optimized for consumption.

I still say 16:10 is the happy medium. It's not so wide you feel stupid holding it up in portrait mode, but wide enough to fit in enough interface bling for heavier applications without obscuring what you're working on.

[zhenya]

Originally Posted by Renzatic

I still say 16:10 is the happy medium. It's not so wide you feel stupid holding it up in portrait mode, but wide enough to fit in enough interface bling for heavier applications without obscuring what you're working on.

4:3 still gives you the most pixels in a given resolution range.

It's been years since you could buy quality panels in that format though (unless you are Apple) so I buy 16:10 whenever possible.

[coldmack]

Originally Posted by zhenya

4:3 still gives you the most pixels in a given resolution range.

It's been years since you could buy quality panels in that format though (unless you are Apple) so I buy 16:10 whenever possible.

Except, most pro and business users prefer 16:10 for their tablet, which is why HP Elitebook business tablet still 16:10. Most of the reason going to 16:9 is because it cost less to make/use, and consumers like it better for watching video.