Microsoft Surface Pro to Be Released February 9 with $899 Price Tag

[mytdave]

Originally Posted by asiga

Tablets like this new Surface Pro, or like the Samsung Ativ Pro, which can run a complete OS, are going to be successful. A colleague bought an Ativ Pro last week, and the rest of the office wants one. Well, except me because I consider the MacBook Air a better machine, but, anyway I believe Apple will lose an opportunity if they don't release "touch OSX". I cannot do my work on iOS, I really need OSX for work, and it would be great to have it on a touch screen.

MacOS X has been touch capable for years. Apple just doesn't make OS X tablets (hardware). The feature is typically used with external drawing "tablets" like Wacom. But other folks have done what Apple won't: http://www.modbook.com/modbookpro

[johncrab]

Overpriced and the horror of Win8. No thanks.

By the time the "Pro" is outfitted with the keyboard for another $100, you are looking at the price of a MacBook Air which is a real computer with a real OS. Seems a no-brainer to me.

[everything-i]

Originally Posted by Gator Bob

Disagree! I found Win 8 on my bootcamp partition excellent -- fast, stable and easy to use -- but I used it with a 3rd party Start program (cost $6). I went back to Win7 only because i prefer to wait for a full set of Apple Bootcamp Windows 8 drivers.

Won't disagree that it is stable and fast but the user experience is lacking because of constant switching between desktop and metro interfaces, totally annoying when your using it for any prolonged period, if they can sort out that it will be a lot better.

[Compile 'em all]

How is this Apple or Mac-related news?

[JAT]

Originally Posted by wingsabre

They emphasize hardware for retail sales, but I disagree when it comes to their profit on the apps. They still make money off of free apps. There's plenty of advertisements they get from them. 30% off of 99 cents is not much, or even 30% off of $1.99 is not much. However, we are seeing more in app purchases, and more apps that cost more. Even apps like Pandora who links to iTunes will add to Apple's profits. It's a slow but steady cash flow.

Sorry, man. You are incorrect. Apple does not, in any way, subsidize their hardware for the AppStore. They allow the cellular companies to subsidize the phone, for cell service. That's it, and they didn't do that at first. The fact that Apple makes a small profit on AppStore in no way means it relates to hardware pricing.

Your earlier comment about Kindle was accurate, these are completely different strategies used by Apple and Amazon.

[nsayer]

Originally Posted by AppleScruff1

Why? Steve proclaimed that we were in the post pc era.

Didn't you JUST get done saying that you were absolutely positive there would be a Windows 9 in 3-4 years' time?

[Liquorpuki]

Originally Posted by tbrinkma

And ironically, it's not entirely Microsoft's fault that their primary audience is hooked on cheap. After all, Microsoft-branded hardware has *seldom* been at the cheap end. Its the (abusive) relationships they built with OEMs, and the ensuing 'race to the bottom' in the '80s and '90s that bought them that end result.

On the flip side, Apple has got its audience hooked on cheap software where anything that costs more than a pizza is considered too expensive

[Morshu9001]

Originally Posted by johncrab

Overpriced and the horror of Win8. No thanks.

By the time the "Pro" is outfitted with the keyboard for another $100, you are looking at the price of a MacBook Air which is a real computer with a real OS. Seems a no-brainer to me.

The Pro has touch capabilities and faster components, not that it really matters for that machine. Yeah, I'd go for the MBA without a doubt. High quality Apple product running Mac OS X or Microsoft's Frankenstein monster? I'll bet the MBA even has a longer battery life.

[SockRolid]

Originally Posted by Renzatic

It's almost the exact same hardware in the MBA with a touch and digitizer enabled, higher resolution screen.

...for $100 less.

Tell me again how that's funny.

It's funny because Microsoft is going to lose money on the Surface Pro, even at $899.
The good thing is that they won't sell many, so their overall losses will be "modest."

Sinofsky got out while the getting was good. Enjoy your iPhone, Steven.

[DrumApple]

Originally Posted by Smartass

thats because Windows RT isn't ment to be a substitute for normal "desktop windows", it belongs into the same class as iPad. Yes, it has office on it in a desktop mode but that is more of a bonus, just because they can add it.

Yes I know that, obviously. But even if it had a full win 8 version, I just don't see it being very useful.

Say what you want, but a traditional laptop with keyboard and trackpad will get work done magnitudes quicker than touchscreen devices. If that wasn't true, Apple would have had a touch laptop on the market ages ago

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by nsayer

Didn't you JUST get done saying that you were absolutely positive there would be a Windows 9 in 3-4 years' time?

Sarcasm. It's not just a word, it's a way of life!

[Morshu9001]

Originally Posted by tbrinkma

And ironically, it's not entirely Microsoft's fault that their primary audience is hooked on cheap. After all, Microsoft-branded hardware has *seldom* been at the cheap end. Its the (abusive) relationships they built with OEMs, and the ensuing 'race to the bottom' in the '80s and '90s that bought them that end result.

Microsoft itself is NOT cheap, only somewhat cheap compared to the expensive Apple products. Dell and others are, especially Dell. It's not that Dell's components are bad (much better than HP), but the overall quality is definitely bad. Microsoft at least doesn't cut so many corners.

[iheartiphone4]

Originally Posted by MacRumorUser

Anandtech chart is flawed....

Why the comparison with the iPad only ? Surely a fairer comparison would be between the surface pro and the MacBook Air 11" stock.


MBA
11-inch : 64GB
1.7GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 processor
Turbo Boost up to 2.6GHz
4GB memory
64GB flash storage1
Intel HD Graphics 4000
1376x768 Resolution

$999.00


SurfacePro
10.1"
Dual Core i5 processor
4GB memory
64GB flash storage
Intel HD Graphics 4000
1920x1080

Touch Cover & Surface Pen accessories included.

$899

Too bad Microsoft put it in the tablet category and not PC category. Idiots!

[Eidorian]

Looks fine to me. Now it just needs to find a market.

[SnowLeopard2008]

Originally Posted by Morshu9001

Microsoft itself is NOT cheap, only somewhat cheap compared to the expensive Apple products. Dell and others are, especially Dell. It's not that Dell's components are bad (much better than HP), but the overall quality is definitely bad. Microsoft at least doesn't cut so many corners.

He said Microsoft's audience is hooked on cheap. This is undeniably true. Apple sells the most units for computers over $1000. PCs dominate the sub $1000 price range. He said nothing about Microsoft the company. But people who use Microsoft products, namely Windows, buy more computers that are "cheap". THis is why any computer that costs more than $1000 is predominantly a Mac.

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by DrumApple

Yes I know that, obviously. But even if it had a full win 8 version, I just don't see it being very useful.

Say what you want, but a traditional laptop with keyboard and trackpad will get work done magnitudes quicker than touchscreen devices. If that wasn't true, Apple would have had a touch laptop on the market ages ago

Depends on what you're doing. Like a whole damn crapton of people have mentioned previously in this very thread, art, layout, and CAD programs would shine on a stylus enabled tablet. It's practically THE form factor for that type of work.

Documents work and programming? Not so much. That's not to say it'll absolutely flat out suck at it, but a bog standard laptop would be preferable for people doing tons of typing.

[notjustjay]

Originally Posted by BC2009

You nailed my point exactly.

If Surface could justify itself as "at least as good as MacBook Air" when used as a laptop but still offering a tablet experience (even if that experience is compromised) then it is still a win. The Lenovo models you mentioned are the exact reason why I think Surface Pro is a failure from the start.

Yeah, I think there's some confusion in this thread because some people are ripping on the Surface Tablet specifically, while others are ripping on the entire concept of Windows 8 devices. (Naturally, most of the people making the comments have never used either ) Sorry if I didn't notice the distinction earlier when I made my post.

I agree that if I were to buy a Win8 device, I'd much more likely go with one of the Lenovo devices over the Surface Pro, for the same reasons you've mentioned: it's a real laptop with a real keyboard, and has some tablet-like properties as well.

[AppleScruff1]

Originally Posted by nsayer

Didn't you JUST get done saying that you were absolutely positive there would be a Windows 9 in 3-4 years' time?

I sure did. You mean they couldn't call it Windows 9 and it would work on phones, tablets, desktops, laptops or whatever hybrids might exist at that point in time? You mean that tablets couldn't be dominant and we could still have a user base of laptops along with desktops? Why couldn't that be the post pc era?

----------

Originally Posted by renzatic

sarcasm. It's not just a word, it's a way of life!

[Morshu9001]

Originally Posted by SnowLeopard2008

THis is why any computer that costs more than $1000 is predominantly a Mac.

Well, there are a lot of custom-built PCs. But I wouldn't ever spend >$1K on a computer to run Windows.

[AppleScruff1]

Originally Posted by SockRolid

It's funny because Microsoft is going to lose money on the Surface Pro, even at $899.
The good thing is that they won't sell many, so their overall losses will be "modest."

Sinofsky got out while the getting was good. Enjoy your iPhone, Steven.

And as consumers we shouldn't be concerned with good products, only how much profit a company makes?

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by AppleScruff1

And as consumers we shouldn't be concerned with good products, only how much profit a company makes?

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!

...I mean Apple.

[Eidorian]

Originally Posted by SnowLeopard2008

He said Microsoft's audience is hooked on cheap. This is undeniably true. Apple sells the most units for computers over $1000. PCs dominate the sub $1000 price range. He said nothing about Microsoft the company. But people who use Microsoft products, namely Windows, buy more computers that are "cheap". THis is why any computer that costs more than $1000 is predominantly a Mac.

Cheap computers are still crummy computers and yet people still go to Wal-Mart and buy them. I know some people can not afford anything more than a plastic fantastic Sandy Bridge Pentium Dual-Core notebook for Facebook, Youtube, and full h.264 decode support. Wait, why would you spend more than $399 to get on those pages? Ugh...

Originally Posted by Morshu9001

Well, there are a lot of custom-built PCs. But I wouldn't ever spend >$1K on a computer to run Windows.

The price of the Windows license tends to remain fixed regardless of the hardware. Dual socket and lots of RAM is the first major hurdle that "Professional" lets you jump.

Originally Posted by AppleScruff1

And as consumers we shouldn't be concerned with good products, only how much profit a company makes?

Apparently the company hugbox is more important.

[MacRumorUser]

Originally Posted by pgiguere1

You chart is flawed too.

From the article:



Which is wrong as well anyway since a Touch cover is $119.99 and a Type cover is $129.99.

http://www.microsoft.com/Surface/en-...es/touch-cover
http://www.microsoft.com/Surface/en-...ies/type-cover

You should update your price accordingly and mention other specs such as screen size and the fact that a MBA has better (backlit) keyboard and trackpad, and an actual hinge so you can use it on your lap and adjust the angle of the screen, which is kind of a big deal.

Originally Posted by BC2009

Do you have a source that indicates the Touch Cover is included? Because according to to Microsoft, it does not seem to be included for that price.

To quote the linked press release from Microsoft:



Notice there is no mention of Type Cover. Further down in a caption for a picture we see this text (my emphasis):



This would put the price at $1028 with the Type Cover priced at $129.

Originally Posted by phillipduran

I think the touch cover is another $119.

Originally Posted by ATC

According to Engadget, the $899 64GB unit does not come with the Touch Cover. That's an extra $120 or $130 depending if you choose the Touch or Type cover. Link

Updated my post to reflect this. Thanks guys.

[AppleScruff1]

Originally Posted by Eidorian

Looks fine to me. Now it just needs to find a market.

Perhaps just a niche product for now. Time will tell if it evolves and the concept becomes more mainstream.

[Eidorian]

Originally Posted by AppleScruff1

Perhaps just a niche product for now. Time will tell if it evolves and the concept becomes more mainstream.

Well, I would probably buy a convertible/tablet notebook if I did not already have my Nexus 7 or want to play Mechwarrior Online on the road.